Clerical Positions in the Civil and Public Service

dooey_01

So a bad reference could stop all chances? After successful tests and interview? Tis a strange process....I'm in the 20s so was kinda banking on a job soon

Meathlass

dooey_01 wrote: »

So a bad reference could stop all chances? After successful tests and interview? Tis a strange process....I'm in the 20s so was kinda banking on a job soon

Well I'm presuming you didn't put down the name of someone who's going to give you a bad reference!

If you're that high on the panel I'd contact your references and tell them you passed the interview and they may be contacted soon for a reference. That way they won't answer the phone and say "Dooey .... em, never heard of him ... oh yes, wait I minute, I remember him now!"

dooey_01

Meathlass wrote: »

Well I'm presuming you didn't put down the name of someone who's going to give you a bad reference!

If you're that high on the panel I'd contact your references and tell them you passed the interview and they may be contacted soon for a reference. That way they won't answer the phone and say "Dooey .... em, never heard of him ... oh yes, wait I minute, I remember him now!"

Lord I assumed all that would be done before telling people they were successful! Seems kinda odd!

Meathlass

dooey_01 wrote: »

Lord I assumed all that would be done before telling people they were successful! Seems kinda odd!

Not really. We've only been placed on a panel not offered a job; it would be a waste of time checking references for people if there's no job waiting for them.

The media seem to think there's about 450 jobs going for Clerical and Administration level so I'd say most people on the panel won't get positions unfortunately but a high number of people will drop off the panel over its lifetime as always happens with these competitions.

Starry12

My referees know me as my maiden name, I've been married (and seperated) since my last position so my name has changed. Must get on to them on Tuesday in case they do ring and ask about me under my new name. Only thought about this since Friday. D'oh!

jimba

So when's our first work night out, colleagues?

3fullback

Hey I'm in CO comp for other counties and was just wondering / and would be really grateful if some of ye would let me know what kind of qualifications those who were successful at interview have ?

ie. leaving cert/ 3rd level/ fetac/ etc.

Meathlass

3fullback wrote: »

Hey I'm in CO comp for other counties and was just wondering / and would be really grateful if some of ye would let me know what kind of qualifications those who were successful at interview have ?

ie. leaving cert/ 3rd level/ fetac/ etc.

I've a Masters and I'm almost finished a second one.

I don't think it's relevant though to be honest; the interview was all about the competencies.

3fullback

Meathlass wrote: »

I've a Masters and I'm almost finished a second one.

I don't think it's relevant though to be honest; the interview was all about the competencies.

Jesus 2 masters !!! Is everybody that qualified ? I think it's mad especially for the salary !

Meathlass

3fullback wrote: »

Jesus 2 masters !!! Is everybody that qualified ? I think it's mad especially for the salary !

Yep, it's mad alright but these are permanent positions.

As I said, the qualifications mean nothing. I got asked a lot of questions about how would I cope with mundane work like photocopying for weeks on end etc. They also wanted to know if I'd availed of any further training opportunities.

Basically they're looking for dependable people who will turn up every day, work well with their colleagues, won't need a lot of hand holding and will be eager and enthusiastic to learn.

jimba

3fullback wrote: »

Hey I'm in CO comp for other counties and was just wondering / and would be really grateful if some of ye would let me know what kind of qualifications those who were successful at interview have ?

ie. leaving cert/ 3rd level/ fetac/ etc.

1.1 Degree and a lot of experience of working in a roundabout way for the public service.

Meathlass

jimba wrote: »

a lot of experience of working in a roundabout way for the public service.

That certainly describes some of the bureaucracy in the civil service to a tee! :pac:

Vag

Is anyone else having difficulty opening/downloading the pdf application form? Even with the update installed? I keep getting this message:

Please wait...

If this message is not eventually replaced by the proper contents of the document, your PDF
viewer may not be able to display this type of document.

You can upgrade to the latest version of Adobe Reader for Windows®, Mac, or Linux® by
visiting http://www.adobe.com/go/reader_download.

For more assistance with Adobe Reader visit http://www.adobe.com/go/acrreader.

Catuohy89

3fullback wrote: »

Hey I'm in CO comp for other counties and was just wondering / and would be really grateful if some of ye would let me know what kind of qualifications those who were successful at interview have ?

ie. leaving cert/ 3rd level/ fetac/ etc.

I've no qualification. Just leaving cert. And working since. Like they said its about competency not qualification. I'm really hard working and love to learn new things college wasn't for me.

sillysocks

Vag wrote: »

Is anyone else having difficulty opening/downloading the pdf application form? Even with the update installed? I keep getting this message:

Please wait...

Guessing this is in the AO competition you mean? I had problems with mine using Google Chrome but tried it on Firefox and it worked fine then.

Vag

Ah. I'll give that a go.

Meathlass

Vag wrote: »

Is anyone else having difficulty opening/downloading the pdf application form? Even with the update installed? I keep getting this message:

Please wait...

If this message is not eventually replaced by the proper contents of the document, your PDF
viewer may not be able to display this type of document.

You can upgrade to the latest version of Adobe Reader for Windows®, Mac, or Linux® by
visiting http://www.adobe.com/go/reader_download.

For more assistance with Adobe Reader visit http://www.adobe.com/go/acrreader.

This happened to a friend of mine. She couldn't get it to work on her laptop even after upgrading Adobe so she'd to use someone else's to fill it in.

gerbilgranny

cocaholic wrote: »

Not necessarily, I was a TCO in Revenue and worked constantly with mailmerge everyday (probably depends with the section you're in). On a side point, things like mailmerge are very easy to use and for any office environment, people should be proficient with Microsoft Office suite, databases and applications.

Most at CO level don't have college or university degrees, so your daughter could have be seen to be over-qualified/educated in that sense.

Well, yes, it does depend on what section you're in - I've been a CO in Revenue for 16 years* and have never gone near mailmerge - but my job does consist of tasks which I feel are more complicated than general clerical/secretarial type tasks. And I'm not looking down on 'Secretarial-type work' - I worked for many years in a role like that - but that was back in God's time! But what we do in our area of Revenue is quite complicated for a job that's described as 'clerical'.

However, I do want to say that many of my younger CO colleagues (people in their 30s for example) DO have degrees.

* In case any of you are appalled at my being a CO for 16 years - I only applied for promotion on one occasion (not that the opportunities were that numerous). I got as far as interview after aptitude test, but wasn't successful. Partly because I didn't have enough examples of competency-based achievements, and no doubt partly because I wasn't good enough. No sour grapes over it, but I wasn't bothered to try again now that I'm in my 50s. I'm dedicated and I do the best I can, and glad to have a job.

BUT I work with some amazingly talented and hard-working younger people, some of whom, if justice was to be done, would have been promoted twice-over by now. But in a recent internal competition, despite these people having a string of competency-based achievements, many didn't get to the interview stage. I think it's quite scandalous. Hopefully some change will occur in the system that will enable them to get rewarded for their efforts.

gerbilgranny

cee_jay wrote: »

gerbilgranny, if your daughter was asked about mailmerge and just answered she had never done it, it may be one area where she fell down.
Penguin100 was also asked about functionality in an Office program, and even though she also hadn't used it, she expanded her answer further to say she would figure it out. This would show an eagerness to learn/self improvement.

For civil service interviews, you must demonstrate you have the competencies required for the role - merely having a degree or having worked in the role previously cannot demonstrate this by itself.

The competency framework is available here: https://www.publicjobs.ie/publicjobs/client/toolkit/docs/a4_foldout.pdf
If you look at the Clerical Officer role, the Cluster area "Personal", the competencies are "Self Awareness, Development & Confidence", "Flexibility & Change Orientation" & "Initiative" which Penguin100 would have demonstrated with her answer. Answering "I have never used it" would not demonstrate these competencies.
Hope that helps.

Thanks, and I understand what you're saying - and she told me that she said, no, she hadn't used mailmerge but she felt that if she had a short time to get accustomed to it she'd be okay, as she had used other applications.

But it's indeed possible that there could have been a better way of answering the questions - and I had mentioned 'competencies' more than once to her in recent times!

Anyway, thanks for your comments, and again, well done to all who were successful.

jimba

gerbilgranny wrote: »

Well, yes, it does depend on what section you're in - I've been a CO in Revenue for 16 years* and have never gone near mailmerge - but my job does consist of tasks which I feel are more complicated than general clerical/secretarial type tasks. And I'm not looking down on 'Secretarial-type work' - I worked for many years in a role like that - but that was back in God's time! But what we do in our area of Revenue is quite complicated for a job that's described as 'clerical'.

However, I do want to say that many of my younger CO colleagues (people in their 30s for example) DO have degrees.

* In case any of you are appalled at my being a CO for 16 years - I only applied for promotion on one occasion (not that the opportunities were that numerous). I got as far as interview after aptitude test, but wasn't successful. Partly because I didn't have enough examples of competency-based achievements, and no doubt partly because I wasn't good enough. No sour grapes over it, but I wasn't bothered to try again now that I'm in my 50s. I'm dedicated and I do the best I can, and glad to have a job.

BUT I work with some amazingly talented and hard-working younger people, some of whom, if justice was to be done, would have been promoted twice-over by now. But in a recent internal competition, despite these people having a string of competency-based achievements, many didn't get to the interview stage. I think it's quite scandalous. Hopefully some change will occur in the system that will enable them to get rewarded for their efforts.

Do Clerical Officers ever get pushed by management for promotion or is it a case of just apply and impress at interview?

gerbilgranny

In my experience, (some) management do their best to encourage staff to apply for promotion - but the only routes to promotion have been via either an internal (departmental) competition, an interdepartmental competition, or a public competition.

So it's really a matter of applying for posts when they are advertised.

There obviously haven't been many of any of those in the past number of years due to the moratorium, but hopefully things are set to improve.

A number of years ago a friend of mine who had been in an acting-EO role (due to maternity leave), and was really an excellent worker. She was successful in the public competition, but unfortunately the panel 'ran out' before they got to her.

But another friend has recently been promoted through an interdepartmental competition - no aptitude test was involved, and she was successful based on her interview - and the fact that she had an outstanding CV (from before she joined the Civil Service).

And finally, there have been internal competitions (in the good old days) which were based again on aptitude tests and competency-based interviews, and in many cases....well, I won't say the 'wrong' people got promoted....but let's say that the 'right' ones didn't, because although Candidate A was known to be an excellent worker, and had been given a great deal of responsibility in their current role, Candidate B managed to say all the right things at interview, despite not being a great performer in real life. But again, hopefully future promotion campaigns will somehow result in a more fairer procedure.

But if you did well in the CO competition on this occasion - you'll probably do well in future ones. Hopefully.

The_Conductor

jimba wrote: »

Do Clerical Officers ever get pushed by management for promotion or is it a case of just apply and impress at interview?

What do you mean by- 'get pushed for promotion'?
I'm curious........
Unfortunately- the ultimate accolade a manager can offer a brilliant staff member is a 5 on the PMDS performance rating (and the ultimate sanction is a 1 on their PMDS).

Once upon a time- a manager could put forward staff for a merit award- which started out at a value of perhaps 50 Euro- and went all the way up to a thousand Euro. Awards of less than 200 Euro were normally presented tax free as giftcards/vouchers- anything higher went through salaries. A few more inventive Departments organised tours of European institutions for exceptional staff at CO and EO level- you'd get to visit the parliament buildings, talk to the Irish MEPs, attend a Commission meeting as an observer etc (not sure if this still happens- post the enlargement- when its interesting trying to even get into your own countries designated seats at meetings).

Promotions- are not in the giving of managers (or indeed politicians or anyone else). Once upon a time- seniority played a significant part in determining promotional prospects (which is how some completely unsuitable candidates got promoted- they kept their asses on the chairs for long enough, and their noses clean- and a promotion was seen as an entitlement).

Not anymore- as mentioned above- you have your 3 routes to a promotion- internal promotion panels (recent internal promotion panels have seen in the region of 2.5% of applicants succeed- looking at the stats from the recent panels in 2013-2014). Interdepartmental panels- where staff from a group of Departments can toss their applications in the ring, and put their best feet forward- in this case you're perhaps looking at 1.8-2% of applicants succeeding recently)- or by open competition- where less than 1.5% of applicants succeed.........

In all 3 cases- its the same format (recently)- aka- you have to do the online testing, you have to get a minimum score in each of the sections, the top 5% get called back for supervised testing- where there are further eliminations- and then the creme-de-la-creme actually get through to interview- where yet more candidates are nuked.

As a manner of determining eligibility- or indeed suitability- it is a process with serious shortcomings.

As there is a state policy to increase female participation at higher levels- many men aren't going for promotion- why bother when a similarly qualified female will automatically get the post by default.

The only criterion outside of the testing and interview process that are looked at- is PMDS scores, and sick leave records. So- someone with 5 bullying complaints made against them- is as likely to get through, all other things being equal, as would be a competent manager who is well liked by their staff. Similarly- someone who was seriously ill 3 years ago, and used up over 90 days of sick leave (car accident- both legs broken, alongside spinal injuries)- gets excluded from the process- on the basis of sick leave they took 3 years ago.........

Managers have no say whatsoever in any of this. They can coach their staff for interviews, give them time off to attend interviews (at their discretion- its not an entitlement for staff), encourage them as best they can- but they are *not* asked by Management whether Candidate X is suitable for promotion from EO to HEO- indeed with the automation of PMDS and Absence leave records on Peoplepoint- they may not even be questioned whether a candidate is suitable on these grounds.........

Do you get the picture?

Its a battle to get promoted- as a serving civil servant your odds aren't a hell of a lot different going for a promotion in an open panel, as they are as an internal candidate- and if you're male- other than at recruitment grades (CO, EO, AO), you will be actively discrimated against (entirely legally), if you go for promotion- in order to attempt to bring representation of both sexes to a minimum 40% at upper management levels.

That is what you're looking at- if you want to go for promotion in the civil service.

nukie1978

jimba wrote: »

Do Clerical Officers ever get pushed by management for promotion or is it a case of just apply and impress at interview?

Until recently there were seniority panels, where people were promoted on a combination of length of service and "suitability". "Suitability" meant primarily suitability as a drinking partner and/or taking the same break as the superior making the assessment. This has supposedly been done away with.

Recently in PeoplePoint 16 people were given acting up positions without any sort of a competition. Applications weren't even invited, just an email one day saying "Congratulations to all these people we just promoted!" Despite being part of DPER, which apparently has a policy of merit based competition for all promotions, including acting promotions. As far as I can figure out, the most senior people in each team picked their favourite friend and gave them a nice promotion and pay raise. They didn't even invite people to apply! In at least one other case, applications for permanent promotion weren't invited, so only two or three people in the know even got to apply (despite there being at least 100 people who were eligible to apply).

The union is not pleased, and neither is anyone else.

nukie1978

The_Conductor wrote: »

Unfortunately- the ultimate accolade a manager can offer a brilliant staff member is a 5 on the PMDS performance rating (and the ultimate sanction is a 1 on their PMDS).

PMDS is meaningless, and more so in promotion competitions. 99% of people get a 3 or above, and all you need to do is get a 3. After that, PMDS is disregarded.

The_Conductor wrote: »

In all 3 cases- its the same format (recently)- aka- you have to do the online testing, you have to get a minimum score in each of the sections, the top 5% get called back for supervised testing- where there are further eliminations- and then the creme-de-la-creme actually get through to interview- where yet more candidates are nuked.

As a manner of determining eligibility- or indeed suitability- it is a process with serious shortcomings.

Research over the last 50 years, funded by companies who have a vested interest in finding the best selection processes, strongly suggests that it is nonetheless the best process. There is no process which does not have serious shortcomings.

Asking managers for recommendations is far, far worse. The same research suggests that selection processes which are based on references are only slightly better than rolling the dice.

The_Conductor wrote: »

As there is a state policy to increase female participation at higher levels- many men aren't going for promotion- why bother when a similarly qualified female will automatically get the post by default.

Just plain rubbish. As you've pointed out above, the large majority of candidates will be unsuccessful. This is a myth beloved of those who want an explanation for their lack of success which will soothe their fragile ego.

Many people equate REDUCING discrimination AGAINST females with discriminating against males. Even with the very fair processes in the civil service for selection, it is still very top heavy with men, despite women making up the majority of the lower grades. Suggesting that men continue to get valued positions ahead of similarly qualified women, as they always done in this country and almost all others. As reflected in gaps in earnings and representation at senior grades which exists between the genders in almost all sectors in almost all countries.

The_Conductor wrote: »

Similarly- someone who was seriously ill 3 years ago, and used up over 90 days of sick leave (car accident- both legs broken, alongside spinal injuries)- gets excluded from the process- on the basis of sick leave they took 3 years ago.........

Referrals are made to the Chief Medical Officer in these cases (in all cases I believe) to see if an exception should be made. There's a difference between someone who was out for 180 days and has a perfect record for three years, and someone who has been getting a week certified a month for the last three years, and this is recognised.

The_Conductor

Talk to some of the retired HEOs and APs- who conduct the interviews- they will tell it as it is.........

Phantasos

The_Conductor wrote: »

As there is a state policy to increase female participation at higher levels- many men aren't going for promotion- why bother when a similarly qualified female will automatically get the post by default.

Having worked as a TCO in a 90%-female office, I'd be well pi$$ed if gender was a determining factor in promotion.

While there are policies and procedures in place I can't help feeling that, when it comes down to it, promotion is intrinsically tied to seniority and who you know. Again, going back to my last TCO role, I honestly couldn't see myself being promoted ahead of most of the people in the office, despite my experience or qualifications or work ethic. I simply couldn't see how a long-term worker in that office would be overlooked in favour of a relative newbie.

Case in point, the person that got an EO uplift when I arrived was probably the least capable worker in that section - but had the right 'friends' and the length of service to seal the deal. Uplifts over the summer definitely weren't given out on the basis on competence - the best workers were under-utilised and overlooked.

The One Doctor

3fullback wrote: »

Jesus 2 masters !!! Is everybody that qualified ? I think it's mad especially for the salary !

I have no degrees and still got a place.

The_Conductor

Phantasos wrote: »

Having worked as a TCO in a 90%-female office, I'd be well pi$$ed if gender was a determining factor in promotion.

While there are policies and procedures in place I can't help feeling that, when it comes down to it, promotion is intrinsically tied to seniority and who you know. Again, going back to my last TCO role, I honestly couldn't see myself being promoted ahead of most of the people in the office, despite my experience or qualifications or work ethic. I simply couldn't see how a long-term worker in that office would be overlooked in favour of a relative newbie.

Case in point, the person that got an EO uplift when I arrived was probably the least capable worker in that section - but had the right 'friends' and the length of service to seal the deal. Uplifts over the summer definitely weren't given out on the basis on competence - the best workers were under-utilised and overlooked.

It is stated government policy- google it. Its not restricted to the civil service- its the public sector in general, its State bodies and state funded organisations too.

If you see shenanigans happening- report it to the union rep- there are set processes and procedures in place- it is not the case that some fool who happens to be the second cousin twice removed to one of the managers should get the acting up allowance over and above better qualified colleagues. It is not supposed to happen. Where it does happen, and is reported, there is normally hell to pay (COs have walked out in Welfare and Agriculture- over these type happenings).

If you see it happening- report it. If you don't- it perpetuates the notion that it is allowable, and that there are no consequences to it happening.

The_Conductor

The One Doctor wrote: »

I have no degrees and still got a place.

Degrees, masters etc- may work against candidates- as an interview panel may make a working assumption that if the person is offered a job in their field of study (whatever that might be) that they will simply hand in their notice and walk. Recruitment for the civil service is not supposed to be for temporary positions for 2-3 years- they are supposed to be permanent positions.

As an aside- most Departments will pay fees for courses which have a direct relevance to the line of work of the Department- and allow time off for study leave coming up to exams etc.

So- its swings and roundabouts- but not having a degree or other qualifications- is no impediment to getting an entry level job in the civil service- it could actually be helpful..........

nukie1978

I have qualifications more or less coming out my ears at this point. The only difference it made at interview (which I passed) was one of the interviewers making sure I knew there was an AO competition. Being overqualified is not a disability in these competitions. Nor is it an advantage; once you have whatever the minimum educational standard, it comes down to aptitude tests and then interview.

As for the alleged "positive discrimination" in favour of women, anyone who has done an interview for any level above CO knows there are points for each competency, which are weighted and totalled, and candidates who passed each competency ranked from highest total to the lowest. The total could be out of 200 (or 500), so it would be relatively rare that people get an equal number of points. There are no extra points (or any penalties) at interview based on genitalia. Rumours to the contrary can be presumed originate with a bunch of sour grapes from an unsuccessful candidate.

I can't post links, but googling "There is a massive gender divide in the civil service", the top result is an article from thejournal (dot) ie showing the gender split at various grades, which is enlightening for male civil servants who think they're being screwed in promotion competitions. Women are in the large majority at entry levels, but don't get promoted as much as men.

In an organisation where about 66% of employees are female, over 88% of top jobs going to men is not suggestive men being discriminated against in terms of promotion.