teaching job advert - PO BOX

roe_cat

Why would a school advertising for teachers not give their name and direct cvs to a PO BOX no?
The job's in my subjects - and I've nothing to lose by applying - but I can't see any reason for a legit job to be advertised this way?

Toto Wolfcastle

Whether the ad has the full name or a PO Box it could still be earmarked for someone else.

I got a permanent job out of applying for a job that had a PO Box number.

Crazyteacher

Is it that the school does not want to be recognised for some reason ?

looksee

I have always felt that asking people to send personal and often private information to a box number is a very undesirable practise.

I did on one occasion go into the newspaper and ask them was it a reputable firm that was advertising and they told me that they only do job box numbers for firms that they recognise. In the end you have to take a chance on it being a scam or a legit job.

sitstill

I applied for a job advertised in Thursday's paper that had a PO Box. Felt sort of dodgy sending my CV to it though!

birdlake

My understanding of the use of a PO box was that the school could shortlist without loads of applicants phoning for more details and annoying the secretary/ principal. Bit sneaky I think!

seavill

birdlake wrote: »

My understanding of the use of a PO box was that the school could shortlist without loads of applicants phoning for more details and annoying the secretary/ principal. Bit sneaky I think!

In fairness if that is the case you can see their point.

There are cases of up to 500 people applying for 1 job so you can see it from their point of view also.

Toto Wolfcastle

Yeah schools are already inundated with calls about various things without having to field calls about job ads too.

whiteandlight

But surely if they put all the info in the ad accurately and then requested no phone calls related to the position? Like if the ad specifically stated the number of hours, the type of contract, interview dates and the subject/subjects which are required (and how many hours of each if necessary) then there wouldn't be a need to be ringing the school

Toto Wolfcastle

People tend to ring to follow up on their application.

rainbowtrout

Musicmental85 wrote: »

But surely if they put all the info in the ad accurately and then requested no phone calls related to the position? Like if the ad specifically stated the number of hours, the type of contract, interview dates and the subject/subjects which are required (and how many hours of each if necessary) then there wouldn't be a need to be ringing the school

People still ring to see if they can get hold of a friendly secretary and suss out if the job is gone, if a teacher has retired, how the job came about etc, etc.

Even if the job said Music and Maths to HL Leaving Cert, people will still ring saying things like 'I did maths in the first year of my degree, will I be considered' or 'how many hours are music and how many are maths' or 'will the position include any other hours for any other subjects'. People will ring for all sorts of reasons, but mainly to see if there really is a job and if they can better their chances of getting it.

E.g. job was advertised for almost full hours in a school not too far away from me last summer. Friend of mine working in Dublin saw it. It would suit her and she could move home. Decided to ring the school and suss it out. Looked like a job arising from a retirement. It said 1 year contract. She was permanent in her job. She actually ended up speaking to the principal who told her that it was a retirement but the school was over quota so the job would only exist for the year as those classes needed to be taught, so if she had a permanent job she should stay in it. Pretty decent of him to be up front about it. Some schools don't want to field those kind of calls or give out that kind of information, hence P.O. Box numbers.

whiteandlight

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Musicmental85 wrote: »

But surely if they put all the info in the ad accurately and then requested no phone calls related to the position? Like if the ad specifically stated the number of hours, the type of contract, interview dates and the subject/subjects which are required (and how many hours of each if necessary) then there wouldn't be a need to be ringing the school

People still ring to see if they can get hold of a friendly secretary and suss out if the job is gone, if a teacher has retired, how the job came about etc, etc.

Even if the job said Music and Maths to HL Leaving Cert, people will still ring saying things like 'I did maths in the first year of my degree, will I be considered' or 'how many hours are music and how many are maths' or 'will the position include any other hours for any other subjects'. People will ring for all sorts of reasons, but mainly to see if there really is a job and if they can better their chances of getting it.

E.g. job was advertised for almost full hours in a school not too far away from me last summer. Friend of mine working in Dublin saw it. It would suit her and she could move home. Decided to ring the school and suss it out. Looked like a job arising from a retirement. It said 1 year contract. She was permanent in her job. She actually ended up speaking to the principal who told her that it was a retirement but the school was over quota so the job would only exist for the year as those classes needed to be taught, so if she had a permanent job she should stay in it. Pretty decent of him to be up front about it. Some schools don't want to field those kind of calls or give out that kind of information, hence P.O. Box numbers.

Oh I know, i still feel though that of they just made this information available on the website or something then you could eliminate much of this.

From my own situation I have hours for next year (similar situation to last year) but not full hours and I'm finding I need to ring almost every job to see if it is worth my while applying and I can't help feeling its wasting both mine and their time!

Anyways it's just a minor irritation in the scheme of things I suppose

birdlake

[QUOTE=

From my own situation I have hours for next year (similar situation to last year) but not full hours and I'm finding I need to ring almost every job to see if it is worth my while applying and I can't help feeling its wasting both mine and their time!

Anyways it's just a minor irritation in the scheme of things I suppose [/QUOTE]

I'm in the same situation as you Musicmental. As much as I can see how annoying fielding the calls must be, the annual job hunt is tiresome enough without trying to read between the lines of vague advertisements without any details.

carolzoo

These are state funded positions. There should be transparency. The school name should be given.

In my opinion principals have far too much power in relation to appointments and some can abuse the system to get their relations or friends in the door - a few hours becomes a full time position once in.

Princiapls are able to change around who teaches what to leave the vacancy open to whatever subjects they desire to be filled. This does not always happen but does happen in some schools.

Why not a central application process such as the gardai have?

Also part time teachers should be given priority to be given full hours if qualified in the relevant subject before another teacher taken on.

clartharlear

Think about the students and their parents. They may see the ad and wonder who is leaving. It could cause disgruntlement etc.
I know I'll be in a different school come September, but I wouldn't want my current students to know in advance...

carolzoo

Teachers go on maternity leave etc etc all the time. Students and parents adjust. They will not be left without a teacher if the position is being advertised. That argument does not stand up. The process should be transparent. They are state funded positions.

carolzoo

Often times these positions (but not all of them) and indeed other positions (which do advertise the name of the school) are already gone. Schools just advertise them to cover themselves.

Very unfair on candidates who are called to the interview for the sake of the school to be able to tick the box that they carried out the correct recruitement procedure. Extra time and unnecessary expense on candidates in addition to the government funding unnecessary interview panels.

(Teachers have to still reply to any add they see because it could be a real job - but why create false hope for them in additon to unnecessary time and expense when the job is already gone?)

seavill

carolzoo wrote: »

Often times these positions (but not all of them) and indeed other positions (which do advertise the name of the school) are already gone. Schools just advertise them to cover themselves.

Very unfair on candidates who are called to the interview for the sake of the school to be able to tick the box that they carried out the correct recruitement procedure. Extra time and unnecessary expense on candidates in addition to the government funding unnecessary interview panels.

(Teachers have to still reply to any add they see because it could be a real job - but why create false hope for them in additon to unnecessary time and expense when the job is already gone?)

Because as far as I am aware legally they have to. Open to correction.

Unfair and wrong yes, but if they legally have to what else are they to do'

carolzoo

The job shouldn't be "gone" in the first place. If it needs to be advertised it should be a fair and open competition for the job - via interview (by an unbiased panel) - If a huge amount of applicants the top 7 or 10 or whatever the usual figure to be interviewed to be picked out from an unbiased interview panel. If the person to whom the job is supposed to be "gone" to is picked out for interview by this (unbiased) panel then fair play and fair play again if they get the job. But this might not necessarily happen.

seavill

carolzoo wrote: »

The job shouldn't be "gone" in the first place. If it needs to be advertised it should be a fair and open competition for the job - via interview (by an unbiased panel)

True but you would struggle to find any company that would outsource the hiring of staff. If I were running a company I know what I want in my staff. I would not trust anyone else to pick the person I want. (in this case all people being unknown and equal)

Again there are 2 different situations here.
The first being where there is the possibility that someone replaced a retiree on a one year contract and legally during or at the end of that year the job has to be advertised. If you are the principal and you got someone in that has done a fantastic job in that position for a month or a year and you want to keep them surely you should be able to.

The second being where a job is given to a Friend, this is a different scenario altogether. You must differentiate between the two. This case has caught me out of a job in the past so I know how wrong it is but take the first case if I were the principal I know what I would do.

RH149

I don't see the problem using a PO Box. I got a permanent job myself from a PO Box ad and had no idea where I was applying, just the general region of the country. I do think the ad should clearly state how many hours though and the type of contract on offer.

whiteandlight

seavill wrote: »

True but you would struggle to find any company that would outsource the hiring of staff. If I were running a company I know what I want in my staff. I would not trust anyone else to pick the person I want. (in this case all people being unknown and equal)

Again there are 2 different situations here.
The first being where there is the possibility that someone replaced a retiree on a one year contract and legally during or at the end of that year the job has to be advertised. If you are the principal and you got someone in that has done a fantastic job in that position for a month or a year and you want to keep them surely you should be able to.

The second being where a job is given to a Friend, this is a different scenario altogether. You must differentiate between the two. This case has caught me out of a job in the past so I know how wrong it is but take the first case if I were the principal I know what I would do.

There is a big problem in the implementation of situation one however when the job has to be advertised. I have been in the situation of being hired during the summer and sitting an official interview midyear and feeling dreadfully sorry for the people brought into interview. I mean I did the interview between teaching the classes the job was for?! Short of me having been diabolically bad they didn't have a chance

seavill

Musicmental85 wrote: »

There is a big problem in the implementation of situation one however when the job has to be advertised. I have been in the situation of being hired during the summer and sitting an official interview midyear and feeling dreadfully sorry for the people brought into interview. I mean I did the interview between teaching the classes the job was for?! Short of me having been diabolically bad they didn't have a chance

Same here in my first teaching job. I knew 2 people going after me both ahead of me in college that had both travelled from Dublin for this interview of the job I already had.
Felt horrible for them, but what is the school to do if they are legally forced into doing so

whiteandlight

I assume the forced interview was to try and prevent situation 2 occurring? If thats the case it really doesn't have any impact tbh. Having an independent assessor on the panel of every job interview might work but then the whole country runs on a 'who you know' basis so maybe not

carolzoo

Again there are 2 different situations here.
The first being where there is the possibility that someone replaced a retiree on a one year contract and legally during or at the end of that year the job has to be advertised. If you are the principal and you got someone in that has done a fantastic job in that position for a month or a year and you want to keep them surely you should be able to.

The above was posted by Seaville. I do not know how to shade in posts I want to comment on.



Anyhow - In relation to the above post

1. some one could have been in the posiiton and done a fantastic job for a month or a year - but someone else could have proved themselves elsewhere in another school, be better qualified etc etc. They should still be given a fair and equitable chance to be picked for interview by an (unbiased interviewer)

2. That someone who might have done a fantastic job for a month or a year might well be a friend or relative of the principal (who got a foot intothe school handy enough).

Public sector appointments should be fair and unbiased. The principal is just a public sector employee also.

seavill

carolzoo wrote: »

Again there are 2 different situations here.
The first being where there is the possibility that someone replaced a retiree on a one year contract and legally during or at the end of that year the job has to be advertised. If you are the principal and you got someone in that has done a fantastic job in that position for a month or a year and you want to keep them surely you should be able to.

The above was posted by Seaville. I do not know how to shade in posts I want to comment on.



Anyhow - In relation to the above post

1. some one could have been in the posiiton and done a fantastic job for a month or a year - but someone else could have proved themselves elsewhere in another school, be better qualified etc etc. They should still be given a fair and equitable chance to be picked for interview by an (unbiased interviewer)

2. That someone who might have done a fantastic job for a month or a year might well be a friend or relative of the principal (who got a foot intothe school handy enough).

Public sector appointments should be fair and unbiased. The principal is just a public sector employee also.

If you have employed someone (through the correct methods or otherwise, otherwise being the wrong option) and they have done a fantastic job, why would anyone want to risk replacing them with, possibly as fantastic a person, but someone who may not get along with the staff, the students etc.

As I said I have been screwed out of a job, properly screwed, in the past so I would be the first person to be against this but surely the case I am discussing above the principal should have the right to keep someone they trust, belive in, and has been proven to do a fantastic job.

everyone is just another employee. The principal is the manager put in the position of being responsible for the running of the entire school and its community.
A teacher is just another employee, a principal is much different.
In any job there are the managers and the staff.

In my opinion the thing of who you know is still common, but becoming less common as the years pass. This is based on my experience teaching so far.
Of course we can all tell a story of the friend of the principal getting the job, but we can all also tell the story of the person from Kerry getting the job in Dublin based on nothing but merit.
There are two sides to it.

clartharlear

carolzoo wrote: »

Teachers go on maternity leave etc etc all the time. Students and parents adjust. They will not be left without a teacher if the position is being advertised. That argument does not stand up. The process should be transparent. They are state funded positions.

"a teacher" is not an interchangeable part. Students and parents adjust, but do get upset in the adjustment period.

rainbowtrout

carolzoo wrote: »

Teachers go on maternity leave etc etc all the time. Students and parents adjust. They will not be left without a teacher if the position is being advertised. That argument does not stand up. The process should be transparent. They are state funded positions.

Not all the time. We have a teacher on long term sick leave this year and her classes have had 7 teachers so far this year. The leaving certs are going a little nuts at this stage.

Aside from that, students get used to a teacher's method of teaching or are able to work with them because they get on personality wise. It can take students a good while to adjust to a sub.

lestat21

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Not all the time. We have a teacher on long term sick leave this year and her classes have had 7 teachers so far this year. The leaving certs are going a little nuts at this stage.

Aside from that, students get used to a teacher's method of teaching or are able to work with them because they get on personality wise. It can take students a good while to adjust to a sub.

7 teachers?? How did that happen??! I have heard of situation where a teacher can only be hired for four days a week and they have a LC class on the fifth day that is left witout a teacher... I taut that was fairly ridiculous but the students act ended up teaching each other in class. know cos it was an unusual language subject I hadnt a word of and if the usual sub wasnt available I would sit in with them.

With respect to dodgy interviews, I have been called to so many that I knew I should never have gotten. For example my subject is maths but I have no resource exp and I was called to interview for a post that was 2 hours maths and 15 hours resource. I hate that situation cos they only brought me in to make the person theyd chosen look like the best candidate!! and wot bout everyone else who applied..

I have been up and down this country for interviews, as Im sure many of you have, but I still dont begrudge prinicpals their decision to hire someone they have worked with before. When a teacher has gotten to know staff, students, school policies and theyre not only working well in the school but theyre contributing to school planning, why would you hire someone you've never met who has better results in college.

Are you gona give out bout principals hiring staff who can take part in coaching school sports?? They want someone who fits in with their ethos..

rainbowtrout

lestat21 wrote: »

7 teachers?? How did that happen??! I have heard of situation where a teacher can only be hired for four days a week and they have a LC class on the fifth day that is left witout a teacher... I taut that was fairly ridiculous but the students act ended up teaching each other in class. know cos it was an unusual language subject I hadnt a word of and if the usual sub wasnt available I would sit in with them.

With respect to dodgy interviews, I have been called to so many that I knew I should never have gotten. For example my subject is maths but I have no resource exp and I was called to interview for a post that was 2 hours maths and 15 hours resource. I hate that situation cos they only brought me in to make the person theyd chosen look like the best candidate!! and wot bout everyone else who applied..

I have been up and down this country for interviews, as Im sure many of you have, but I still dont begrudge prinicpals their decision to hire someone they have worked with before. When a teacher has gotten to know staff, students, school policies and theyre not only working well in the school but theyre contributing to school planning, why would you hire someone you've never met who has better results in college.

Are you gona give out bout principals hiring staff who can take part in coaching school sports?? They want someone who fits in with their ethos..

Well I wouldn't mind but it was English and History, not exactly an unusual combination. Combination of factors, subs left for better hours/something more long term/closer to home/ elsewhere, were only told they had hours on a week to week basis, one sub was pregnant and had to give up working due to complications...

lestat21

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Well I wouldn't mind but it was English and History, not exactly an unusual combination. Combination of factors, subs left for better hours/something more long term/closer to home/ elsewhere, were only told they had hours on a week to week basis, one sub was pregnant and had to give up working due to complications...

Now I dont have a lot of hours, its over an hour drive to work and my contract ends in June.. BUT I would never consider looking for a different school and running out on a regular job. Never mind that it would mean letting down a leaving cert class but I'd imagine that an attitude like that would see a teacher blacklisted for any future positions in that school. So this would be a situation where knowing a principal could actually backfire and result in you not getting the job.

seavill

lestat21 wrote: »

Now I dont have a lot of hours, its over an hour drive to work and my contract ends in June.. BUT I would never consider looking for a different school and running out on a regular job. Never mind that it would mean letting down a leaving cert class but I'd imagine that an attitude like that would see a teacher blacklisted for any future positions in that school. So this would be a situation where knowing a principal could actually backfire and result in you not getting the job.

In the end of the day its not ideal to leave a class mid year but the way teachign jobs are at the moment you have to look after yourself.

I left my last school out of choice at the end of the last school year, I was going to be given hours but the hours in my new school seemed to be more stable. This could backfire yet who knows, but I have since found out that the person who replaced me has been told they are out of a job come next September.

Had I been loyal and stayed in the school I would now be out of a job come next year. I was sad to leave my classes I had for 2 years, had made a lot of friends on staff but I had to look after myself as I knew when it comes down to it if the principal has to cut my hours they cut my hours and I'm gone out the door. That leaving cert class isn't going to pay my mortgage next year.

lestat21

I dont think you were been disloyal or selfish seavill. Theres a big difference between leaving mid year and informing the principal that you wont be returning in september.

rainbowtrout

lestat21 wrote: »

Now I dont have a lot of hours, its over an hour drive to work and my contract ends in June.. BUT I would never consider looking for a different school and running out on a regular job. Never mind that it would mean letting down a leaving cert class but I'd imagine that an attitude like that would see a teacher blacklisted for any future positions in that school. So this would be a situation where knowing a principal could actually backfire and result in you not getting the job.

lestat21 wrote: »

I dont think you were been disloyal or selfish seavill. Theres a big difference between leaving mid year and informing the principal that you wont be returning in september.

Very true on both counts, but there's also a difference between being told, 'well yes we have hours for you next week but don't know the week after' and being told by another school 'we can give you work for the next 6 months'. I would imagine that's a no brainer for a sub in many cases.

lestat21

rainbowtrout wrote: »

Very true on both counts, but there's also a difference between being told, 'well yes we have hours for you next week but don't know the week after' and being told by another school 'we can give you work for the next 6 months'. I would imagine that's a no brainer for a sub in many cases.

Oh.. I misread a comment awhile back. Sorry seavill and rainbowtrout I taut we were on bout people who had a short term contract rather than week to week subs.

rainbowtrout

lestat21 wrote: »

Oh.. I misread a comment awhile back. Sorry seavill and rainbowtrout I taut we were on bout people who had a short term contract rather than week to week subs.

no, but you are right in that case. It was known in my school that the teacher would not be back in the long term. Maybe not known exactly how long they would be out, but if certs are coming in to cover a month, it's not fair to only tell a sub there are hours there on a week to week basis. I can see why they upped and left for a better offer.

keithmiketom

This is gonna sound ridiculous I know but im not sure... if a job is advertsied as box number 4567 for example and its in the herald, where do you post your application to, is it just box 4567 or do you do box 4567, independent house..?

Toto Wolfcastle

Yes, the PO Box number followed by the address of the paper.

keithmiketom

cheers, id never seen that before myself!