Skip to main content

Job searching

After watching the news where they discussed the plight of the unemployed over-50's who are trying to get back into work and reading something similar in the Law Society Gazette about prospective trainees who have trouble finding work I thought I'd mention my recent search for staff.

There are a two jobs on offer, first for duty solicitors.  There's no upper limit to how many we'll employ at the moment.  We have adverts in all the local court robing/advocate rooms and are putting an ad in the Gazette.  So far we have had zero applications. 

The second job is for a 3-day a week receptionist/office junior.  We ran a single small ad in the Evening Standard for one day only.  At the last count we had received approximately 1,200 applications.  The vast majority of the applicants have been wildly inappropriate (e.g. people massively over-qualified, those living in inappropriate places by which I mean it would cost them more to get to work than we would pay them such as Brighton and Pakistan, we've also had quite a few applying to be waiters, cleaners, chefs etc. but not receptionists).  Of the remainder, I am told that a large number have said that they are not willing to work in Hackney, which is unfortunate as that's where we are based.  Very few people have bothered to add a covering letter and those with covering letters are usually non-specific general non-sense that clearly hasn't been thought through properly.

The problem with having so many applicants is that we just haven't been able to properly consider even half of the applicants.  Will all the applicants get a reply?  Definitely not, we would have to employ somebody else just to respond.  Will we miss some excellent applicants?  Probably.

Comments

  1. I'd like to apply for this job. I am a trained chef at NVQ level 1. Can I work two and a half days though? I won't work in Hackney either, but I am happy to work from home.

    ;-)

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Ched Evans

Before I begin, I will say that at around 4,500 words this is probably the longest blog I’ve ever posted but I think it’s all necessary to set the scene for this case and explain the background that has been largely ignored or airbrushed in the press. Despite its length, I have not attempted to include every little detail of either fact or law but have done my best to provide a balanced picture of the Ched Evans case, what happened and why the courts reached the decisions they did. There has been so much written about the Ched Evans case over the past weekend, much of it based on a very shaky grasp of the facts and law, that I decided I would read up about the case and weigh in (hopefully on a slightly firmer footing than most of the articles I’ve read so far).

Broadly speaking there seem to be three groups who have opinions on the case:
1.Sexual violence groups (including people describing themselves as “radical feminists”) who appear to take the view that the case is awful, the Court o…

How do the police decide whether to charge a suspect?

A question I’m often asked by clients (and in a roundabout way by people arriving at this blog using searches that ask the question in a variety of ways), is “how do the police decide whether to charge or take no further action (NFA)?”
What are the options?
Let’s have a quick think about what options are available to the police at the end of an investigation.
First, they can charge or report you for summons to attend court.  Charging means that you are given police bail and are required to attend court in person.  A summons is an order from the court for you to attend or for you to send a solicitor on your behalf.  In many cases where a person is summonsed, the court will allow you the option of entering a plea by post.
Second, you may be given a caution.  These can be a simple caution, which on the face of it is a warning not to be naughty in future, or it can be a conditional caution.  Conditions could include a requirement to pay for the cost of damage or compensation, etc.  Either…

Bid to prevent defendants knowing who accuses them of a crime

When I read The Trial by Kafka and Nineteen Eighty-Four by Orwell, I took them as warnings of how a bad justice system wrecks lives of those caught up in it. Sadly, some Members of Parliament and the House of Lords seem to view the books more as a guide to how they would like our Criminal Justice System to run. Today, I read of plans to hide the names of accusers and witnesses from defendants in a large number of cases. Victims of sexual offences, such as rape, have had the right to lifelong anonymity for many years now. This means that it is a criminal offence to publish information that will lead to a complainant being identified. A Bill currently being considered by Parliament would extend that anonymity to bar defendants and their lawyers knowing the name of the person accusing them. This would apply not only in sexual offences, as has been reported in the press, but also in violent offences.
The anonymity currently offered to victims of sexual offences is not total, the complainant…