Dublin Fire service recruitment? Anyone know??

if DFB does do something about those who failed is it likely to hold up the campaign until they get to resit the supervised exams?

That will never happen

Do we know how many have been called for interview so far? Any insight on the numbers? By the tike they discount people with endorsed licenses ect..it makes sense to bring a large number forward

Right okay, so they are making up the numbers with people who scored (for want of a better term) below par. There's no recognition about the marking scheme issue then? If you scored 99 in round one but didnt do the same or above in round 2 your discounted. 99 is bloody tough to get twice in a row..if you score 89 in round 2 (still an amazing score) your not entertained coz you dropped below your original marker of 99 or 96, whatever it may be. If anything it shows you can grasp information, follow command, communicate information back ect..why would they opt to take ppl who score lower than acknowledge the issue that the marking scheme is biased against the high scorers

I totally disagree with this , in previous campaigns you were ranked in order of merit so essentially you were scored on the exam you weren’t simply just verifying it.

So your two scores from the unsupervised test and supervised test would be averaged out and the top scores would proceed to the next stage.

In this campaign we were told that this supervised exam was simply a like for like exam to quote we were told it was just a shortened version of the unsupervised exam

However this was not the case as there was many differences between the two. They weren’t similar and of much more difficulty.

So how could you verify an exam score when the two exams were not alike.

Either the exams should have been like for like to verify them or they should have simply just been scored like was seen in the previous recruitment

Your missing the point. If somebody scored 96 unsupervised then 85 supervised your deemed as unverified but if you scored 52 unsupervised and 47 supervised your deemed verified and brought forward. That's completely ridiculous if you are looking for the best candidates.

I should clarify my earlier comment. Unions want anybody who passed the supervised exam regardless of their previous score to get an interview. If you straight out failed your supervised exam you gone.

You had to be within 10% of your unverified exam to your verified (pass/fail)

You had to score over 40% to pass

(Pass/fail)

So unions are saying, anybody who scored below 40% in the verified, they can be cut, no issues there. We all know they more than likely had home assistant.

Be anybody who passed, but was outside their 10% tolerance should be brought forward to interview due to discrepancies

As I said before, you are loosing people who scored in the 90s then 80s but interviewing people who scored in the 50s then 40s.

Is the figure of 160 accurate? This is mote than a few people feeling hard done by tbh, all worded well above regarding the marking scheme and percentage error. You not getting the best candidates for the role. In a high pressure and fast environment you need to be able to understand and follow a command, communicate information back ect on any situation.

I'm glad so many have complained. The qnd round was not a shorter version of the 1st as was supposed to be. It was a different format of exam, it's simple!! Therfore it cannot be used for comparison purposes or to verify the 1st exam. Staffline aren't accepting any responsibility or acknowledgement of this which is infuriating!! I'm delighted the union are pushing for top marking candidates to be brought forward to at least be offered an interview. You just want a fair hearing

That's not at all what I said. The format was different , cannot be used for comparative or verification purposes. Listen it's all been said before by others too. We'll just have to await an outcome, no point going into semantics here I guess

What application do you mean ?

I'm not sure if that date on the your account actually means much, you can't reapply but thanks for sharing

Thanks for the update , who has requested the comparison?

I am requesting my exam mark for the in person for comparison

What I will say to you be prepared to be stone walled the first time it's common thing for them to do but if they are standing by staffline on this matter there should be no issues with showing a comparison of the verified tests

Don't go near staffline go directly to DCC. Staffline want this buried so they can get payed and move on but DCC need to be shown that the test was ran correctly and fairly and a comparison of the tests in December and in January to the test taking online will clearly show this. But if there is a refusal to do this then there's an obvious why

I hear what your saying, obviously the purpose of the 2nd round was to verify that you can pass the test of your own accord I understand the requirement for that but unfortunately some genuine people have been shafted in this. Which is why I think a few of us find it hard to just accept the 'not verified' result. I know my strengths and weaknesses, I'm far from perfect nobody is but I can't fathom how I could have dropped from 99th percentile so badly to not get through. My grasp of the language is sound and my ability to understand it, interpret it , follow command and communicate. I sat the 1st round exam at my kitchen table in the house on my own with no help or assistance from anyone but unfortunately there is nothing I can do. No doubt they caught out some dishonest people, but I didn't play that game. I went into this honestly, there is no other approach as far as I'm concerned. Anyway it's done now but they have potentially lost some seriously dedicated and committed candidates off the back of this. They could easily call those effected for a new 2nd round test which is actually formatted like the 1st round as was supposed to be the case and put this to bed but still no proper acceptance or admittance of the issue. They just want to bury the issue and move forward, Staffline want their payday

It's a shame but good luck to all as you's progress👍🏻

Female candidate here, effected the very same. Did the 1st round on my own, no cheating, scored top marks round 1 and eliminated for verbal reasoning round 2 as 'not verified'

Have been onto Staffline, they say they are exempt from FOI requests when I asked for copies of my round 1&2 test and sought a mark for round 2. I asked them to show me where on their website it sates they are expemt from FOI requests and guess what...they didn't respond. Tge fact they aren't engaging and being transparent must raise eyebrows surley!

DCC have clearly been given assurances by Staffline that all was in proper order so DCC have based a decision on that but you'd have to argue it isn't an informed decision. I highly doubt Staffline have been transparent with them either. DCC seem to be sticking to their guns on this unfortunately but as stated above a few genuinely individuals have been screwed over ny Staflfines c*ck up. Round 2 exam was a different format altogether, not like for like, but here we are. Missed opportunity and no answers

For a public jobs campaign transparency must be paramount! How they are getting away with this is beyond me and it certainly does not reflect well for Staffline at all!

Sorry to hear that @Rob_1990

Agree, from what I've been reading here the past week or so it's a specific group that were effected only. All verbal reasoning, all those who scored relatively high in round 1 too. The lack of transparency is shocking to be honest, the exam was different, different difficulty level and format. I think some people will read this and think you's need to get over the fact you didn't get through but I don't think it's as black and white. I'll keep going till I get my test scripts and result score. Staffline won't give DCC a copy of our 2nd round score either, how DCC aren'tlooking into this furthergiven the obviousamount ofcomplaints is asstounding for a public jobs campaign

Staffline messed up on a grand scale here, it's obvious! Mistakes happen, but what about the likes of us who have to bear the consequences? It's not on

Thanks for the insight there @5500, informative 👍🏻

As you said those that did cheat wouldn't be drawing attention to themselves by complaining.

Nobody is looking for the campaign to be halted, that's not going to help anyone, least of all the service itself and the lads and ladies currently in the job. We just want a fair inclusion in the process. There's a number of us that have put a lot of preparation into this in anticipation of when the opportunity to apply opened with preparation courses and other things

If I was a hiring manager I'd be delighted to have such interested and passionate people who know their strenghts and what we can offer to the role and are clearly passionate about it to the extend of trying to push past an error not of our own doing.

If they have run a 2nd round/ intake of tests this week as you say, seems like that's game over for the likes of us, our concenrs and appels wont be heard.

4000 or so applied so the likes of us can be just put to the side, they have many more to pick from but it doesn't change the fact it has been unfair to some of us. I hope the right eyes are on this thread and are taking note, we can't all be wrong. The chances of us all underperforming to the extent Staffline claim on the 1 exam also..its not realistic, the lack of transparency should be raising eyebrows within DCC also. I'd love for that to be acknowledged or to be given our opportunity to proceed to next stage. A gesture of acknowledgement, put it to bed and move forward. If we fail at interview or fitness that's on us and we accept that but to be out of the competition not of our own doing it extremely harsh.

You can see by how people express themselves even on this thread. Ive been watching the past 2 weeks, the language they use to convey their opinions and concerns, how they articulate their message, there is no question regarding our level of verbal ability and comprehension of the language and communication which should make for an easy and smooth training programme as we'd be on the ball from the get go, easing the pressure for trainers ect

I'll await a response from Staffline still I guess. Its a terrible waste of time for the team behind the scene at DCC as well. Not their issue or fault and they have to navigate around all of this, spending their time dealing with all the additional complaints.

Good luck to all that progressed to the next stage. I still have hope🤞🏻

They've an obligation to ensure the process is fair and just

The situation is that if we went back and scored lower originally then we would be moving forward. That is not a fair process and it essentially suggests that we overachieved which has prevented us moving forward in the campaign. On that basis the process has been unfairly run.

The lack of an official appeals process is negligible too!

As a gesture of goodwill as mentioned above for the blunder we should be brought forward to the next stage which would appease both sides and give a mutual solution on both sides. It needs to be addressed, the approach of doing nothing so far has not been satisfactory and isn't giving either side a resolution.

Has any one heard how the candidates that sat the exam last Saturday found the tests structure and how many were verified ?

I think we will hear something this week! As far as I know they schedule interviews by the order in which applications are received. Not 100% sure how many they are interviewing in this batch given that so many unverified in the last round, we'll see though!

Best of luck :)