scylla said:
No - that wasn't the scenario at all. The position I was hiring for was a more senior role (not a starting /entry position with the bank). It required specific capabilities and experience since it is a more senior role that is going to be responsible for managing projects immediately (i.e. as soon as the person arrives). Someone with zero experience in the field could not handle the job (i.e. will fail) and had no chance of being hired. To be honest, I have no idea why many of the candidates who applied submitted their resumes. It's like they didn't even bother to read the job description. The role was for a senior analyst in a non-technical field and yet I had many many very technical individuals apply who were clearly looking for a technical role based on their covering letters. Many of these candidates had applied for a large number of jobs at the bank (I can see this information when I access their resumes on our system). So I can only assume their were being very lazy and applying to everything with the word "analyst" in it without bothering to see what kind of job it actually was. I had the same problem with financial analysts. I had a lot of financial analysts apply who were looking for a financial analyst role (again, based on their covering letters) - even though my role wasn't a financial analyst role. So sadly the only answer I can give you is laziness. I would warn those who go this lazy route that we can see how many jobs you've applied for within our company. And if you're one of those people who applies for dozens of jobs in one company, even ones you don't qualify for, you're much less likely to get an interview for the job you do actually qualify for.
Were all the positions you hired for in the past few years the same as one you describe, or were there some which were entry level positions? Or positions where requirements were imposed to qualify which wouldn't be there in absence of over saturation of the market with labor force ?
I can't speak for job market in Toronto, but in parts of US with statistically low unemployment rate and resulting influx of job applicants we have this new phenomena where HR's impose very strict requirements for jobs, in direct response to over supply of labor force.
We have front desk positions advertised where the applicant must have a bachelor's degree and 5-7 years of experience answering phone calls and taking down notes.
We have large number of very simple jobs where , if someone quits the position, employers want to hire a replacement that can continue doing all the tasks immediately without spending a day on training. These are also, by large, entry level positions (someone may have been hired in past with no experience, but today, with over abundance of job applicants, HR's demand someone who can get in drivers' seat from day one).
The mid level positions are even worse and harder to qualify here. Many HR's will not even consider an applicant unless he or she has Master's or higher degree, even if candidate is bright, has bachelor's degree in the field and solid experience doing the tasks applied for. With great abundance of qualified candidates, employers can always choose the better ones. While many final decisions are made by a panel of three or more individuals making the hiring decision, the pre-selection and filtering of resumes is mechanized and popular algorithmic formula based software used to throw out large number of candidates who may be very well qualified for positions but out of luck due to one or another variable not meeting the pre-set (and often arbitrary) requirements for candidate selection.
The blame, of course , is not solely with HR or hiring companies (though, they have their share of contributing to irrational handling of situation, as they are not pressured to be more efficient under current, very favorable to employer, market conditions) .
The real problem here is job market and the current economy. But, the resulting outcome is that if you are a job applicant you get frustrated at some point, it feels like your resumes never get anywhere and it no longer makes difference how thorough you are and how carefully you read ads. You don't get any traction anyway.
The last two jobs I landed in US by literally spamming out my resumes to hundreds upon hundreds of jobs, after a quick search by a key word. I no longer had a time to waste going through each ad, after I had done that for a considerable length of time and got nowhere. It became a matter of statistical hit or miss. And, as odd as it may sound, I found and landed two of my last jobs in US doing just that.
Not because I am lazy, but because I wanted to land a job and going conventional way landed me nowhere. Job market has changed.
In our Canadian searches we have tried both conventional (going through job description, writing a cover letter specifying my qualifications and reasons for applying for a job), and unconventional method (just searching for certain jobs by a key word and submitting a resume right away).
Particularly my spouse tried conventional (what you would describe as "not lazy") method of identifying and applying for opportunities in Canada.
And unlike in US, neither of us got any response at all. So, I am wondering if job market (at least in Ontario, where we were applying heavily) is just the worse version of what we have in the North East US.
What I find encouraging is the fact that major banks in Toronto, Canada accept candidates applying online.
But, overall, not sure we can land a job in Canada under current economic conditions.