In an ideal world, sure. But unless your skills are in short supply, few can afford to be so idealistic.
The question was though whether the OP had been treated poorly, and I think he had.
I've turned down interviews, second interviews and even a job offer based on how the company came across during those initial communications. Obviously it depends on how desperate you are for a job and how in demand your skills are, but people shouldn't accept being treated poorly by companies - if they can't be bothered to make a good first impression it doesn't bode well for how they treat their staff in general.
The question was though whether the OP had been treated poorly, and I think he had.
I've turned down interviews, second interviews and even a job offer based on how the company came across during those initial communications. Obviously it depends on how desperate you are for a job and how in demand your skills are, but people shouldn't accept being treated poorly by companies - if a company can't be bothered to make a good first impression it doesn't bode well for how they treat their staff in general.
Thanks for your input. I really just wanted to have a moan and know that they were at fault a bit!
Bizarre... When I was briefly on JSA they had a "Travel to Interview" scheme that reimbursed travel expenses, either train/bus ticket or petrol receipts. It had nothing to do with "poverty zones" and what area you lived in. Maybe it's a different tale in different offices but it seems a bit strange if it is.
I do have more skills than the average candidate of my level, and experience. I am not just a fresh graduate.
That's really another thing I would have liked to have known about why they chose someone else.
Well, you and the other hundreds like you... What line of work, anyway?
Bizarre... When I was briefly on JSA they had a "Travel to Interview" scheme that reimbursed travel expenses, either train/bus ticket or petrol receipts. It had nothing to do with "poverty zones" and what area you lived in. Maybe it's a different tale in different offices but it seems a bit strange if it is.
Welcome to the real world, unfortunately.
That scheme closed and there are only limited funds available at some centres, not mine though.
OK, let's split the question down into two, then...
1) Is it unreasonable not to get offered travel expenses ? As has been said, a lot of this depends on how much the company needs 'you', rather than just someone to fill that role, and unfortunately the answer in this situation is 'not that much'.
To be honest, I would consider reasonable travel expenses to get reimbursed, especially for the second interview, but your expenses weren't ever going to be considered reasonable. Anyone, at any company, signing off a 600 pound (or even 460 pound) expenses cheque for a graduate to come to an interview would have a very short career.
2) Should you expect feedback ? Again, it depends how detailed you want. Someone else was better ? In what way ? Their inter-personal skills were better ? In what way ? etc. Ad Infinitum. In a lot of interview situations, at the end of the day, it is going to come down to 'feel'. How well you think someone will fit into the role, and isn't going to be easily written down in a document that you will be happy with.
Whilst it would be nice for interviewers to give detailed feedback to help interviewees secure a role in the future, the reality is that there's nothing in it for them and, in this day and age, companies aren't going to do much when there isn't anything in it for them.
It's been that way for at least twenty-five years. Probably always been like that, to be honest. It's not just a big corporate thing, either. Almost all companies will give you nothing more than a quick sorry, it's not you....
It'd be nice to think you'll change it when you're in charge, but you won't.
If all this turns Capita from a company you were willing to invest a lot of money in Interview expenses and time with, to 'Crapita', the worst company in the world, then so be it.
One final word of advice - Don't write a complaint letter. Well, you can if it makes you feel better, but you'll be a joke at the company for ever....
why should a company reimburse you for travelling to an interview? -- i have never seen that in my life.
To be fair, I've always had my expenses paid (including to the USA), but then again, I've always been approached to interview for a job for the last 20 years or so, rather than applying...
It's 2012 - companies rarely offer to cover travel costs to interviews for most roles. Companies rarely bother to contact you if you're unsuccessful either - if it's a big company, then that's down to the HR department to deal with - if it's a small company, they probably can't be assed. Recruitment agencies might, depending on how professional and sincere they are, and how 'real' the vacancy actually was that you went for....
The amount you spent on travel was ridiculous - I take it you were planning on relocating if you got the job? In all fairness, you made a choice to apply for that job - either with, or without taking into consideration the distance, and how much it would cost you to get there....We're in a recession - not many companies want to shell out on paying travel expenses for all vacancies, and it would probably be one of the very first things on a budget cut 'list' of things to save on.
I don't feel you were treated badly. This is the real world mate - you were treated 'normally' within this current climate, and the way things are. It sucks, but there you go.
Only comment I could add is that, at 230 pounds a train trip and 140 pounds for a night in a hotel, you've not been acting in a particularly budget-conscious way either, and you may have to start cutting your cloth a bit.
When was the last time you booked train travel at short notice? Obviously you don't know much about it. If the company only gave him short notice of when he was wanted for interview he would have had to have paid a premium rail fare. Ditto a hotel room at short notice - particularly in high holiday season, and also bear in mind this may have been in London during the Olympic season.
Any decent company would pay reasonable travel expenses for an interviewee or at least have adapted the interview time so that an overnight stay would not be required. This company are just clearly trying it on because they know graduates are so desperate for jobs they will turn up anyway.
And not bothering to get back to him to confirm whether or not he had the job is dreadful, though unfortunately more and more common these days.
But you've probably had a lucky escape, any company who is used to treating prospective employees like that is not going to make a good employer. It's unprofessional and downright rude.
It's 2012 - companies rarely offer to cover travel costs to interviews for most roles. Companies rarely bother to contact you if you're unsuccessful either - if it's a big company, then that's down to the HR department to deal with - if it's a small company, they probably can't be assed...
Rubbish, if you get to interview the standard professional procedure that you will get from a decent company is that you are called by the leader of the interviewing panel to tell you if you have or haven't got the job and to give you feedback on how you did at interview.
And the bare minimum you should receive a timely email informing you that you've not got the job giving you a number to call for feedback if you want it. To not let someone who came for interview know if they have it or not is highly unprofessional but does sometimes happen.
Rubbish, if you get to interview the standard professional procedure that you will get from a decent company is that you are called by the leader of the interviewing panel to tell you if you have or haven't got the job and to give you feedback on how you did at interview.
And the bare minimum you should receive a timely email informing you that you've not got the job giving you a number to call for feedback if you want it. To not let someone who came for interview know if they have it or not is highly unprofessional but does sometimes happen.
In an ideal world.....I work in recruitment, and can safely say this is no longer common procedure....
Oh no, it wasn't £140 for the night! I had to get buses and taxis when I was down there both times as it was hard to get to the place and the other one was so late in the day I had to stay over then also but I chose to do that.
It's £230 simply because that's how far I had to travel. I can't really change the price of train travel! I had looked at a bus trip but it would have taken a day to get there.
It's not really about the money anyway (I would not have asked for the full refund! I had quite a nice trip out all in all...) I am just questioning the professional courtesy. I had to wait a month to hear by an email that contained several grammatical errors and no feedback which I had asked several times for.
Some people have no courtesy etc
Some always treat people applying for jobs terribly
No actually I have obligations here as I care for my grandfather and also I had meetings in order to set up a new business. Otherwise I would have agreed with you.
Like I say, I chose to go by train as it was only 8 hours and I have a back problem and buses hurt me more. It's not convenient for me to get an overnight sleeper and I wanted to be fresh for my 9am interview! I was aware there were cheaper (yet less convenient) options, but respectfully, they wouldn't have paid for those either would they?!
I said it wasn't about the money, simply about the lack of courtesy asking me to attend two identical interviews at my own cost and no feedback.
So if you have obligations that mean you have to care for your grandfather, how were you going to balance these with a job so far away? You mention relocation - would that not affect your obligations.
As an aside I would say that companies are on the whole terrible for giving feedback. After a period of unemployment I am looking to get back in to work and I know the pain of not hearing. But thats something you just accept and get on with - as any residual annoyance could harm susbsequent interviews.
They aren't my problems, I did bend over backwards in order to get there and have those interviews. With all due respect all I ask for is to be treated professionally in a timely and appreciative manor.
I think others have said that as a business looking for prospective workers you have a responsibility to treat candidates fairly and not exploit them.
A large company that can afford a HR department can afford to take the time to check correspondence for grammatical errors, heck even print me out a letter. I spent a lot of money and time jumping through their hoops, the least the could pay for would be a stamp addressed envelope thanking me for my time and a few words of feedback.
It is a dog eat dog world, but politeness only takes a second and as a business your reputation is everything. That's why capita Symons are a pile of crap and have the reputation to match it.
Also the spelled my name wrong the one time the remembered to use my surname.
Two nights for 120 isn't that bad actually, the rest was taxis. I didn't actually ask them to reimburse my overnight stay or give a figure for what I spent, I was just telling you that.
Why should they? Not many have the time these days to be printing out letters and posting them, it's old fashioned and a waste of financial and human resource. An email notification is more than sufficient, but I agree that companies should at least notify interviewed candidates of the decision.
Thanks I just wanted an idea. I do feel very messed around by them to be honest though.
I certainly wouldn't treat someone the way I had been, it seems so unprofessional. How do I get a job if I can't afford to get to an interview, I am just a student. I live in a high poverty area and the JS won't help either.
Well yeah you've been messed around. Why would you want to work for a company who messed you around and won't help you to interview. Shows what kind of company they are - you have been chasing them - imagine what working for them would be like!
Not saying go for interviews with companies who pay your transportation fees, but the ones who will try to accommodate you are the better ones to look at. Interviews aren't just for the employer to find an ideal employee, the candidate is there to see how they'd fit in.
I feel for you OP and know it's frustrating but I don't think you was treated badly, it's shit though.
I went for an interview at a hospital in Kent and there was one lad who travelled down from Wales to be there, I myself had took a gamble on the interview which coincided with a course I was due to teach and which I cancelled and lost out on just under £300, but had I got the job I would have done alright in the long run.
For people saying that it was the OP's choice to apply for a job so far away - that's not necessarily the case.
I applied for several jobs where the company held a central recruitment day nowhere near the location I was applying for. E.g. I had to travel to Warwick for a job which would have been based in Edinburgh, and London for a job based in Aberdeen. I found that to be quite common for big companies that prefer to do their recruitment centrally. In that scenario, I think it's fair enough to expect expenses. Also big graduate assessment centres like this normally last a full working day, so require overnight accomodation too.
Every graduate schema job I applied for gave me back travel and overnight expenses.
(And for the job I actually accepted, my employer booked my hotel, and paid for it in advance)
I've had travel expenses paid for so its not mightily uncommon.
£600 is far too much to spend on a job application. You should've negotiated or known when to walk away from the job process.
When they offered you an interview and asked if you could confirm the day you should have looked for the cheapest fares before confirming once you knew they weren't paying expenses.
On feedback. I wouldn't employ someone who pays £600 expenses for a job they are not guaranteed. It's not reasonable.
In summary, yes they've treated you badly but you've also let them. If you're going to shell out on expenses then at least do it for a company with a better rep and better pay.
P.S. if you are more than a graduate then why don't you apply as experienced hire?
...if they can't be bothered to make a good first impression it doesn't bode well for how they treat their staff in general.
Without reading back upthread, I don't think the OP complained about his treatment when at the company which is surely what mainly matters.
There was no reimbursement of expenses - in the current economic climate, I'm not surprised. And it's not as though it was promised.
There was no speedy notification of the result of the interview or feedback. For reasons I stated earlier, decisions on short lists and job offers often take far longer - days or even weeks longer - than interviewees would like. Business life is like that. When a number of people are involved in the interview process, simply getting them together to discuss candidates can often be an exercise in logistics.
What really matters is the type of company, the type of interview, the type of people and the general style of the company that can be sensed while in the building and yes, the salary and benefits. That - and the interviewee's skilful questioning of the interviewers - is what tells you whether you want to work for a company. Not whether they contact you in a timely manner afterwards with feedback. That, frankly, is the exception rather than the rule and has been for some time - regrettably. Especially if the honest feedback is simply: your qualifications were fine, your experience is fine but on the day, someone else hit the spot better than you did.
If you really want to work at Capita - or anywhere else where you interview - rather than waste time writing a letter of complaint about your perceived "treatment", write a letter to whoever was your main contact outlining what you like about the company and what (post interview) you think you bring to the party, where you think you fit and what the job would give you - and state that you would like to be considered for other posts.
And I disliked the original implication that somehow graduates deserved better than that. No, all interviewees deserve better... being a graduate does not make you more - or less! - deserving of courtesies. I get a sense of "entitlement" from the OP which, if it comes across in interviews, is not going to be helpful.
nonsense!
you expect every company advertising a job to to reimburse travel costs for people attending interview?
Every job I've applied for they have and when my company recruits we do. I wouldn't expect every company to but I would expect every decent company to.
Without reading back upthread, I don't think the OP complained about his treatment when at the company which is surely what mainly matters.
There was no reimbursement of expenses - in the current economic climate, I'm not surprised. And it's not as though it was promised.
There was no speedy notification of the result of the interview or feedback. For reasons I stated earlier, decisions on short lists and job offers often take far longer - days or even weeks longer - than interviewees would like. Business life is like that. When a number of people are involved in the interview process, simply getting them together to discuss candidates can often be an exercise in logistics.
The way a company handles the whole recruitment process is part of the first impression. and not just the interview. Even in todays 'economic climate', I would expect a decent company to cover reasonable travel and relocation expenses. That's how you get skilled, happy staff, and not just staff who happen to live nearby.
I've been involved with recruiting staff myself, and I'm well aware that it can be a logistical nightmare. However, taking over a month to provide a simple yay or nay which requires the applicant to nudge the company to get it is simply not acceptable. If you can't do your recruitment in a timely manner, pay a recruitment company (one of the very few good ones at least) to do it for you.
And I disliked the original implication that somehow graduates deserved better than that. No, all interviewees deserve better... being a graduate does not make you more - or less! - deserving of courtesies. I get a sense of "entitlement" from the OP which, if it comes across in interviews, is not going to be helpful.
no that wasn't my implication at all! Everyone deserves the same professional respect as an applicant.
I meant that they should expect a fresh graduate would have no money and a vast university overdraft, others may too but a graduate of 7 years certainly will.
As such expecting me and the others to absorb the costs of a second interview because one of them was on his holidays was really a bit unfair.
As a comparison my friend had an interview at sainsburies the week after my second interview. They gave him one interview and let him know by letter and a phone a week after. A big company, yet professional.
Comments
The question was though whether the OP had been treated poorly, and I think he had.
I've turned down interviews, second interviews and even a job offer based on how the company came across during those initial communications. Obviously it depends on how desperate you are for a job and how in demand your skills are, but people shouldn't accept being treated poorly by companies - if they can't be bothered to make a good first impression it doesn't bode well for how they treat their staff in general.
Well, you and the other hundreds like you... What line of work, anyway?
Welcome to the real world, unfortunately.
That scheme closed and there are only limited funds available at some centres, not mine though.
1) Is it unreasonable not to get offered travel expenses ? As has been said, a lot of this depends on how much the company needs 'you', rather than just someone to fill that role, and unfortunately the answer in this situation is 'not that much'.
To be honest, I would consider reasonable travel expenses to get reimbursed, especially for the second interview, but your expenses weren't ever going to be considered reasonable. Anyone, at any company, signing off a 600 pound (or even 460 pound) expenses cheque for a graduate to come to an interview would have a very short career.
2) Should you expect feedback ? Again, it depends how detailed you want. Someone else was better ? In what way ? Their inter-personal skills were better ? In what way ? etc. Ad Infinitum. In a lot of interview situations, at the end of the day, it is going to come down to 'feel'. How well you think someone will fit into the role, and isn't going to be easily written down in a document that you will be happy with.
Whilst it would be nice for interviewers to give detailed feedback to help interviewees secure a role in the future, the reality is that there's nothing in it for them and, in this day and age, companies aren't going to do much when there isn't anything in it for them.
It's been that way for at least twenty-five years. Probably always been like that, to be honest. It's not just a big corporate thing, either. Almost all companies will give you nothing more than a quick sorry, it's not you....
It'd be nice to think you'll change it when you're in charge, but you won't.
If all this turns Capita from a company you were willing to invest a lot of money in Interview expenses and time with, to 'Crapita', the worst company in the world, then so be it.
One final word of advice - Don't write a complaint letter. Well, you can if it makes you feel better, but you'll be a joke at the company for ever....
To be fair, I've always had my expenses paid (including to the USA), but then again, I've always been approached to interview for a job for the last 20 years or so, rather than applying...
Not uncommon if it's a "professional" role, or you've been head-hunted, but not usual for a MW job at Asda.
The amount you spent on travel was ridiculous - I take it you were planning on relocating if you got the job? In all fairness, you made a choice to apply for that job - either with, or without taking into consideration the distance, and how much it would cost you to get there....We're in a recession - not many companies want to shell out on paying travel expenses for all vacancies, and it would probably be one of the very first things on a budget cut 'list' of things to save on.
I don't feel you were treated badly. This is the real world mate - you were treated 'normally' within this current climate, and the way things are. It sucks, but there you go.
When was the last time you booked train travel at short notice? Obviously you don't know much about it. If the company only gave him short notice of when he was wanted for interview he would have had to have paid a premium rail fare. Ditto a hotel room at short notice - particularly in high holiday season, and also bear in mind this may have been in London during the Olympic season.
Any decent company would pay reasonable travel expenses for an interviewee or at least have adapted the interview time so that an overnight stay would not be required. This company are just clearly trying it on because they know graduates are so desperate for jobs they will turn up anyway.
And not bothering to get back to him to confirm whether or not he had the job is dreadful, though unfortunately more and more common these days.
But you've probably had a lucky escape, any company who is used to treating prospective employees like that is not going to make a good employer. It's unprofessional and downright rude.
Rubbish, if you get to interview the standard professional procedure that you will get from a decent company is that you are called by the leader of the interviewing panel to tell you if you have or haven't got the job and to give you feedback on how you did at interview.
And the bare minimum you should receive a timely email informing you that you've not got the job giving you a number to call for feedback if you want it. To not let someone who came for interview know if they have it or not is highly unprofessional but does sometimes happen.
In an ideal world.....I work in recruitment, and can safely say this is no longer common procedure....
Some always treat people applying for jobs terribly
So if you have obligations that mean you have to care for your grandfather, how were you going to balance these with a job so far away? You mention relocation - would that not affect your obligations.
As an aside I would say that companies are on the whole terrible for giving feedback. After a period of unemployment I am looking to get back in to work and I know the pain of not hearing. But thats something you just accept and get on with - as any residual annoyance could harm susbsequent interviews.
Can I ask where you are and where the interview was?
If it took 8 hours then i can only assume you it is at opposite ends of the country.
Why should they? Not many have the time these days to be printing out letters and posting them, it's old fashioned and a waste of financial and human resource. An email notification is more than sufficient, but I agree that companies should at least notify interviewed candidates of the decision.
Times have moved on...
Well yeah you've been messed around. Why would you want to work for a company who messed you around and won't help you to interview. Shows what kind of company they are - you have been chasing them - imagine what working for them would be like!
Not saying go for interviews with companies who pay your transportation fees, but the ones who will try to accommodate you are the better ones to look at. Interviews aren't just for the employer to find an ideal employee, the candidate is there to see how they'd fit in.
I went for an interview at a hospital in Kent and there was one lad who travelled down from Wales to be there, I myself had took a gamble on the interview which coincided with a course I was due to teach and which I cancelled and lost out on just under £300, but had I got the job I would have done alright in the long run.
I applied for several jobs where the company held a central recruitment day nowhere near the location I was applying for. E.g. I had to travel to Warwick for a job which would have been based in Edinburgh, and London for a job based in Aberdeen. I found that to be quite common for big companies that prefer to do their recruitment centrally. In that scenario, I think it's fair enough to expect expenses. Also big graduate assessment centres like this normally last a full working day, so require overnight accomodation too.
Every graduate schema job I applied for gave me back travel and overnight expenses.
(And for the job I actually accepted, my employer booked my hotel, and paid for it in advance)
£600 is far too much to spend on a job application. You should've negotiated or known when to walk away from the job process.
When they offered you an interview and asked if you could confirm the day you should have looked for the cheapest fares before confirming once you knew they weren't paying expenses.
On feedback. I wouldn't employ someone who pays £600 expenses for a job they are not guaranteed. It's not reasonable.
In summary, yes they've treated you badly but you've also let them. If you're going to shell out on expenses then at least do it for a company with a better rep and better pay.
P.S. if you are more than a graduate then why don't you apply as experienced hire?
There was no reimbursement of expenses - in the current economic climate, I'm not surprised. And it's not as though it was promised.
There was no speedy notification of the result of the interview or feedback. For reasons I stated earlier, decisions on short lists and job offers often take far longer - days or even weeks longer - than interviewees would like. Business life is like that. When a number of people are involved in the interview process, simply getting them together to discuss candidates can often be an exercise in logistics.
What really matters is the type of company, the type of interview, the type of people and the general style of the company that can be sensed while in the building and yes, the salary and benefits. That - and the interviewee's skilful questioning of the interviewers - is what tells you whether you want to work for a company. Not whether they contact you in a timely manner afterwards with feedback. That, frankly, is the exception rather than the rule and has been for some time - regrettably. Especially if the honest feedback is simply: your qualifications were fine, your experience is fine but on the day, someone else hit the spot better than you did.
If you really want to work at Capita - or anywhere else where you interview - rather than waste time writing a letter of complaint about your perceived "treatment", write a letter to whoever was your main contact outlining what you like about the company and what (post interview) you think you bring to the party, where you think you fit and what the job would give you - and state that you would like to be considered for other posts.
And I disliked the original implication that somehow graduates deserved better than that. No, all interviewees deserve better... being a graduate does not make you more - or less! - deserving of courtesies. I get a sense of "entitlement" from the OP which, if it comes across in interviews, is not going to be helpful.
Every job I've applied for they have and when my company recruits we do. I wouldn't expect every company to but I would expect every decent company to.
The way a company handles the whole recruitment process is part of the first impression. and not just the interview. Even in todays 'economic climate', I would expect a decent company to cover reasonable travel and relocation expenses. That's how you get skilled, happy staff, and not just staff who happen to live nearby.
I've been involved with recruiting staff myself, and I'm well aware that it can be a logistical nightmare. However, taking over a month to provide a simple yay or nay which requires the applicant to nudge the company to get it is simply not acceptable. If you can't do your recruitment in a timely manner, pay a recruitment company (one of the very few good ones at least) to do it for you.
no that wasn't my implication at all! Everyone deserves the same professional respect as an applicant.
I meant that they should expect a fresh graduate would have no money and a vast university overdraft, others may too but a graduate of 7 years certainly will.
As such expecting me and the others to absorb the costs of a second interview because one of them was on his holidays was really a bit unfair.
As a comparison my friend had an interview at sainsburies the week after my second interview. They gave him one interview and let him know by letter and a phone a week after. A big company, yet professional.