It's nearly nine months since I worked (apart from some minor consultancy, for which I have yet to be paid, for the National Library of Health, which ceased abruptly; compassionate leave is not a familiar concept in that organisation). I've been doing an analysis of the jobs I've applied for, a total of thirty over that period. Perhaps I should have applied for more, but bear in mind my mother's illness and death ate into the time available.
So here's the data:
Interview strike rate (interviews/applications submitted): 33.3%
Of individual employers, the prize must go to that prestigious national institution, the British Library, who have failed to shortlist me for anything although I have applied for four jobs with them since the summer, all jobs for which I thought I fitted the person specification rather well.
Sectors:
Civil service: 6.6%
Higher education: 33.3%
National organisations: 40%
Private sector: 16.6%
Subjects; not all posts can easily be described as subject specific, but of these:
Health: 35.7%
Law: 14.2%
Art: 7.1%
Development studies: 7.1%
Economics; 7.1%
Literature; 7.1%
Music: 7.1%
Science: 7.1%
46% were conventional library-based jobs. Only four (13%) came through the agencies I'm using, and of these three came from Sue Hill, but only one from InfoMatch.
I am not asking for anything outrageous as a salary. Most of the posts would have paid less than my last one, and the average salary is well below. I do not require any unusual perquisites, such as having my pay cheque delivered in an ocelot-lined envelope by beautiful veiled princesses.
I have more to say, particularly on the parasitic nature of employment agencies and I have some alarming examples of employers' bad practice to offer; they must wait for another post.
Addendum: I haven't mentioned the location of these posts. 63% were in London, 23% in Brighton or other parts of East Sussex and the remainder in the home counties.
Technorati Tags: britishlibrary, employment, jobsearch