Been told to withdraw application
Discussion
Seeking some preliminary advice here.
I've worked at an entry level role in a major bank for six months. I have applied for another more senior role within the bank and been offered an interview. Upon telling my line management, they have told me to withdraw my application and cancel the interview as I have less than twelve months in my current role.
Apparently this used to be a policy but was revoked and now the twelve month thing is just a recommendation. My area of business insists its still policy. I'm going to discuss with my manager today but does anyone have experience of this kind of thing? It doesn't sound right to me.
I've worked at an entry level role in a major bank for six months. I have applied for another more senior role within the bank and been offered an interview. Upon telling my line management, they have told me to withdraw my application and cancel the interview as I have less than twelve months in my current role.
Apparently this used to be a policy but was revoked and now the twelve month thing is just a recommendation. My area of business insists its still policy. I'm going to discuss with my manager today but does anyone have experience of this kind of thing? It doesn't sound right to me.
Check the policy with HR and they should be able to advise which would put the whole thing to bed either way.
You can put it to your manager as a development opportunity and doing the interview is good experience.
I’d suggest flagging it to the recruiting manager as well purely in order to be open and honest with them. At the very least it will show them you are honest, appreciate the policies and have a bit of integrity.
Hopefully they won’t care one bit, be happy to take the flack on any required exceptions to the policy and then move forward
You can put it to your manager as a development opportunity and doing the interview is good experience.
I’d suggest flagging it to the recruiting manager as well purely in order to be open and honest with them. At the very least it will show them you are honest, appreciate the policies and have a bit of integrity.
Hopefully they won’t care one bit, be happy to take the flack on any required exceptions to the policy and then move forward
I have heard of this where I work also. My understanding is that it is there to protect the investment in recruitment/training time and cost of your department.
Ultimately you would think if you had a strong desire to change role internally, they would have a professional conversation with you to support your development and retain you within the company.
Ultimately you would think if you had a strong desire to change role internally, they would have a professional conversation with you to support your development and retain you within the company.
Rushjob said:
If it is current policy then your manager will have exactly zero problems showing the relevant policy to you on your company systems.
When I adopted this line of question the answer was pretty much, "I can't show you on paper as normally when [her manager] says this people just accept it".So that'll be one of those made up policies then!
Trendsetter said:
When I adopted this line of question the answer was pretty much, "I can't show you on paper as normally when [her manager] says this people just accept it".
So that'll be one of those made up policies then!
That would be an immediate email to HR cc'd to the recruiting manager for me.So that'll be one of those made up policies then!
You are being disadvantaged in comparison to other workers.
I'd be really interested to see how well this unofficial stance by a second line manager stood up when compared to the company's policies on professional development, mentoring and promotion for employees.
Similar system at my employer - a bank that had some argy bargy with a certain brexiteer and life boat fan.
Weirdly enough checked this last week and yes it is 12 months, although the wording is that you can’t start a new role within 12 months so if you apply after 9 months but have to serve 3 months notice, then you would be ok.
Not sure if stopping you applying for roles is ‘legal’ but my guess is by the time you have challenged it, the 12 months will be up anyway.
Weirdly enough checked this last week and yes it is 12 months, although the wording is that you can’t start a new role within 12 months so if you apply after 9 months but have to serve 3 months notice, then you would be ok.
Not sure if stopping you applying for roles is ‘legal’ but my guess is by the time you have challenged it, the 12 months will be up anyway.
conanius said:
So maybe I'm being touchy.
For me, this is alarm bells. Your employer doesn't want you to progress and just wants a bum on a seat.
If you do withdraw, I'd have half an eye on external adverts.
Sounds more like the current manager wants to enforce an old cancelled policy to ensure his area isn't disrupted than the employer as a whole withholding progress. For me, this is alarm bells. Your employer doesn't want you to progress and just wants a bum on a seat.
If you do withdraw, I'd have half an eye on external adverts.
I wouldn't withdraw the application.
If they refuse to accept it, they are setting themselves up for all sorts of difficulties.
They will have to explain why this is legal, fair and proportionate. Which I think will take some doing.
More likely that you will have the interview, and be rejected for the role, but that remains to be seen.
If they refuse to accept it, they are setting themselves up for all sorts of difficulties.
They will have to explain why this is legal, fair and proportionate. Which I think will take some doing.
More likely that you will have the interview, and be rejected for the role, but that remains to be seen.
Scabutz said:
Sounds more like the current manager wants to enforce an old cancelled policy to ensure his area isn't disrupted than the employer as a whole withholding progress.
oh no doubt. But any 'manager' who doesn't realise that they should get people in the team to achieve their best... I don't see him suddenly becoming manager of the year after this incident. Back in the day I worked for a division of RBS, when you took a role it was 18 months minimum before you were allowed to apply for something new and upto 5 years for management. You could get around this if your existing and new manager agreed to release you early but they rarely released you for a job you wanted and you ended up being horse traded up the ladder for a replacement.
I had a secondment to another department after it had issues and 10 of the 12 staff quit, after a couple of months I was offered the opportunity to manage it after it was straightened out but was not allowed to apply for the role as it was in another area, I left shortly after.
Now thankfully out of that world but it was tough when you were traded into a job you didn't really want for 12-18 months on the promise of better prospects.
I had a secondment to another department after it had issues and 10 of the 12 staff quit, after a couple of months I was offered the opportunity to manage it after it was straightened out but was not allowed to apply for the role as it was in another area, I left shortly after.
Now thankfully out of that world but it was tough when you were traded into a job you didn't really want for 12-18 months on the promise of better prospects.
bearman68 said:
I wouldn't withdraw the application.
If they refuse to accept it, they are setting themselves up for all sorts of difficulties.
They will have to explain why this is legal, fair and proportionate. Which I think will take some doing.
More likely that you will have the interview, and be rejected for the role, but that remains to be seen.
I don't think there is anything 'legal' about this unless it is for discriminatory reasons (Race, disability etc..) I don't think internal 'rules' would fall under anything that a lawyer would get involved with. If they refuse to accept it, they are setting themselves up for all sorts of difficulties.
They will have to explain why this is legal, fair and proportionate. Which I think will take some doing.
More likely that you will have the interview, and be rejected for the role, but that remains to be seen.
I have seen this a few times and frankly it makes sense. The current manager / team hasn't gotten their return on the investment in hiring you into your current role before you want to move on to another team.
I think it's fairly reasonable to expect someone to perform well within their current role for 12 months before being eligible for a transfer of some kind.
In my opinion of course... not legal advice.
I did similar once when on a fixed term role. I had pretty much guaranteed myself an internal role in a sister team. Was told by the existing manager not to go anywhere, that there was lots of potential and big things were going to happen for me as the other person in the existing team who I was supporting was going on maternity
A month later at the end of my fixed term, I was not renewed or employed. Turned out I was keeping the lights on as, unknown to me, he had already recruited someone perm to do what I was doing.
Fool me once….
A month later at the end of my fixed term, I was not renewed or employed. Turned out I was keeping the lights on as, unknown to me, he had already recruited someone perm to do what I was doing.
Fool me once….
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff