2 March 2015
Bogan's Rant - With Michael McShane - March 2015
Transparency - Expectations - R.e.s.p.e.c.t - Double
Ok, I've been on my horse lately and have given HR/Recruitment
(internal & agency) an absolute bollocking in recent
newsletters. Why? Because in general and overall, I think the
system is broken, or in the least, dysfunctional. No? Too many are
precious about protecting their own jobs (fair enough) and the old
fashioned respect shown in the mining industry I know and love is
slowly diminishing. It's a transactional environment out there.
Maybe it's just a sign of the times and reflection of the global
market? Nah, some people are just prats. Sit in my chair for a
I've been asked why I write so passionately about these things
(other words were used also) and whether what I write about
concerns me? Seriously?! These final articles are heavily screened,
filtered and censored from what the original draft looked like!
After all, it is written by a Bogan! Again, I want to make a
positive difference. Too many sit back, say nothing & collect
their monthly pay. Like the bear carpet Chuck Norris has in his
house. It's actually a real bear, but is too afraid to move! It
also reminded me of a few quotes. One by Churchill and the other by
some Lama dude who I might meet soon up a mountain in Nepal! I
might use some poetic license here:
"There are only two days in the year that nothing
can be done. One is called yesterdayand the other is called
tomorrow, so today is the day to hold muppets
"You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood for
something sometime in your life" Winston
The feedback has been nothing short of monumentous on recent
Bogan Rants! However, it has been indicated that "you're off the
rails Bogan" and I should rant about something else. Ok, I will,
but not yet! Got another monkey on my back and need the shake it
It's a multi-pronged rant that involves clients hiring people
(in a candidate strong market) that are nothing like the ideals
brief given to us or portrayed in their advertisements. The other
is candidates applying for roles that don't remotely fit their
Whilst I am a massive advocate of assessing candidates on their
skills & cultural fit, we are getting a lot of requests for
commodity specific candidates for roles that don't really require
them to be a specialist in that commodity - you know, skills can be
transferred from one commodity to another! All depends on the role.
But, try telling that to some people. Same with software - they all
do a similar thing and more often than not, someone proficient in
one would pick up the other quickly.
So, do you screen them "out" because they don't have it?
Is it that critical?
I'll give an example, "Hi Bogan, we need an U/G Mining Engineer
with no more than 5-8 yrs experience, must have gold, Surpac,
planning whiz, feasibility experience, u/g essential". We won't
need your help with this one as our Seek ad is getting a great
response." Weeks later we see Billy Flybown has secured the role -
he has 14 years' experience, no gold at all, no Surpac, has short
term planning & D&B experience and limited u/g experience
at the start of his career. They're also on the Stealth "Muppet
List" and you wouldn't shout if a shark bit 'em! Nek minnut - did I
Would you be annoyed if you went through a McDonalds drive thru
and asked for a Big Mac meal, but got given a strawberry sundae?
Hang on! That happens! Bizarre…………
Clients often give us a huge checklist of ideals / tick boxes
that we must adhere to when submitting prospective candidates - if
we don't, they won't accept them. We love a challenge! However, who
they hire half of the time is someone that doesn't remotely tick
the boxes - yet I am told on a daily basis that clients can afford
to be picky in this "buyers market". They might have a pulse, so
maybe one of the criteria has been met! Can anyone shed some light?
Where in the process has the ball been dropped and the ideals
shifted? Mate of a mate? Screening process failure? Ideals
constrained too heavily for the agency, but client willing to
accept lesser? What's the go? The last thing that blew my mind was
the wind! But, this is up there!
Another thing that gets me flustered under my flanny is
candidates applying for roles they're not remotely experienced for.
Again, I'm a huge advocate of "having a go", I understand what the
market is like at present and strongly believe skills are
transferrable across commodities and cultural fit is often
massively omitted in the selection criteria. Geez, do I have many
examples of that lately! I'm not talking about the bulk
applications I get from McDonald's Managers for my General Manager
roles - because "they've had good management experience &
training" or the Gardener who applies to my Geologist role because
he likes the outdoors and has always had a fascination for rocks.
Seriously, some people must stop to think and forget to start
again! What's worse is they call me and argue the point. Now, we
all need that, like a submarine needs a screen door! Apply for
roles that are within the realms of reality.
What are your experiences with the screening process?
HR - I am keen to hear your angle on this………..
As always, I'm keen on your feedback! Am I on track? Am I off
What do you want the Bogan to rant about?
Do you want to write an anonymous "guest" Bogan Rant? Go on
Note: Job board advertising gets a huge
response lately - no argument there. However, did you know it only
attracts about 20% of the market - the "active" candidates? Chances
are the ideal candidate for your business sits in the 80% category
who are either employed and/or not looking on Seek - the
"passive/inactive" market! That's where we add value to our
clients. We know where they hide. Make sense? Are you happy
promoting your roles to 20% of the market?
Hooroo. See you on the flip side.
Bogan's Pet Hate: Hypocrites! They get offended
by the truth………….but can't be honest themselves.