Vacancy: FC Deer Officer roles - South West & North East England

NickJ

Well-Known Member
I gather these are two new roles to augment the one Deer Advisor and three Deer Officers who moved over from the DI when it packed up.
 

Highfield

Well-Known Member
well the last time it was just a shamless jobs for the boys trip with every post going to the ex di crew despite the usual forestry claims of fair and open apointments. waste of everyones time advertising it. i wonder if it will be any different this time. are their any boys left that need jobs.
 

Alastair Boston

Well-Known Member
well the last time it was just a shamless jobs for the boys trip with every post going to the ex di crew despite the usual forestry claims of fair and open apointments. waste of everyones time advertising it. i wonder if it will be any different this time. are their any boys left that need jobs.
I am sorry but just why wouldn't it be totally, fair and open ??. Statements like the above just make me shake my head in disbelief. Have you got any evidence to support your claim that its 'jobs for the boys' if so please can you share it or pm me with you supporting evidence.
 

Highfield

Well-Known Member
i apologize if i was speaking my mind to freely no offence intended. just seemed strange that the forestry roles never even existed before the di wrapped up then a straigt away bunch of posts appear that read word for word like the old di jobs and every one goes to the old post holder. i dont doubt that they are good guys individually and as i said no offence intended
 

Siggy

Well-Known Member
i apologize if i was speaking my mind to freely no offence intended. just seemed strange that the forestry roles never even existed before the di wrapped up then a straigt away bunch of posts appear that read word for word like the old di jobs and every one goes to the old post holder. i dont doubt that they are good guys individually and as i said no offence intended
My understanding was that the DI was run on money from the FC. So effectively, they have just brought the previous service in house.
 

slider

Well-Known Member
i apologize if i was speaking my mind to freely no offence intended. just seemed strange that the forestry roles never even existed before the di wrapped up then a straigt away bunch of posts appear that read word for word like the old di jobs and every one goes to the old post holder. i dont doubt that they are good guys individually and as i said no offence intended
all public recruitment as about as open as you can get. I am involved in it and ii can be pain in the @rse.

Once a role is created (and this is were ther recruiter can specify the role in detail) the job is handed over to HR.
The application are annoymised by HR before being pasted to a panel of 3 who sift them down to interview candidates. It is only after interview invitation have been accepted that the panel get names.

So, yes the recruiter can influence the job role and so narrow the field, but has no influence on the final award beyond that
 

Shabz

Well-Known Member
Also, it stands to reason that someone (in this case the employees from DI) who has been doing a very similar role for some time will usually fair much better at interview than someone from outside of the role. If you work at a Lexus dealership and go for a job at the Toyota dealership next door which is basically the same company, you’re going to have an advantage over someone who worked for the tractor dealership down the road. Tractor man can be just as good but Lexus man has all the same contacts and all the same customers that Toyota have.

I do personally agree that it can be a waste of your time and effort to apply for these jobs though. It usually takes me a couple of hours a day for a good week/ ten days to put an application together which is completely wasted if I’m up against someone who has been part of an established team and is looking to take their line managers role. Them’s the breaks though. I’m sure private sector jobs can have the same problems where company policy dictates. It isn’t anything to do with ‘jobs for the boys’, It’s the rules of the procurement system trying to make it fair when there’s only actually one logical outcome. That’s what wastes your time.

If you’re interested in a role, phone them up and have a chat. They won’t tell you that there’s an applicant that’s been doing the job for two years already but you can find out if it’s a new role or an established one, is it due to a retirement or backfilling a promotion, is there a team to be line managed and is it an established team? If you can find out these answers, it’s easier to decide if you want to make the effort of putting the application together.

I have heard of a few occasions where folk who are a ‘shoe in’ for a role because it’s exactly their area of expertise have not passed interview and someone else with less (different) experience has got the job, just because they’re better at interviews. It’s always worth a punt if you don’t mind putting the time in to the application.
 

Alastair Boston

Well-Known Member
Also, it stands to reason that someone (in this case the employees from DI) who has been doing a very similar role for some time will usually fair much better at interview than someone from outside of the role. If you work at a Lexus dealership and go for a job at the Toyota dealership next door which is basically the same company, you’re going to have an advantage over someone who worked for the tractor dealership down the road. Tractor man can be just as good but Lexus man has all the same contacts and all the same customers that Toyota have.

I do personally agree that it can be a waste of your time and effort to apply for these jobs though. It usually takes me a couple of hours a day for a good week/ ten days to put an application together which is completely wasted if I’m up against someone who has been part of an established team and is looking to take their line managers role. Them’s the breaks though. I’m sure private sector jobs can have the same problems where company policy dictates. It isn’t anything to do with ‘jobs for the boys’, It’s the rules of the procurement system trying to make it fair when there’s only actually one logical outcome. That’s what wastes your time.

If you’re interested in a role, phone them up and have a chat. They won’t tell you that there’s an applicant that’s been doing the job for two years already but you can find out if it’s a new role or an established one, is it due to a retirement or backfilling a promotion, is there a team to be line managed and is it an established team? If you can find out these answers, it’s easier to decide if you want to make the effort of putting the application together.

I have heard of a few occasions where folk who are a ‘shoe in’ for a role because it’s exactly their area of expertise have not passed interview and someone else with less (different) experience has got the job, just because they’re better at interviews. It’s always worth a punt if you don’t mind putting the time in to the application.
Well said and spot on.
 

NickJ

Well-Known Member
well the last time it was just a shamless jobs for the boys trip with every post going to the ex di crew despite the usual forestry claims of fair and open apointments. waste of everyones time advertising it. i wonder if it will be any different this time. are their any boys left that need jobs.
1. They might well have just been the best qualified people for the job, three of the four (inc the Head David Jam) were ex FC prior to joining the DI.
2. These are new positions so won't be filled by ex DI guys as they are already in post
 

cjm1066

Well-Known Member
The earlier jobs required ability to pass DMQ1 after 6 months - that was their criteria.

The first question, what are the requirements for a night shooting license.
 

Shabz

Well-Known Member
The earlier jobs required ability to pass DMQ1 after 6 months - that was their criteria.

The first question, what are the requirements for a night shooting license.

I think they had to have DSC1 and the ability to get DSC2 within six months. There wasn’t any deer stalking involved in the job by the looks of it though, so I imagine DSC2 would just be to show an understanding of what they’re promoting.

You need to be on naturescot’s fit and competent list to get a night licence.
 

caberslash

Well-Known Member
I was quite enthused about the role when I read the spec. Looks like they want to integrate the wildlife management with the forest management more. Get out of the silo and talk to each other. Looks an interesting job.

Too many chiefs and not enough minions...

When cost cuts and sub contracting are the order of the day, I can't see how this position would improve anything.

More oversight, paperwork and talking = less work being done where it matters.
 

Shabz

Well-Known Member
Too many chiefs and not enough minions...

When cost cuts and sub contracting are the order of the day, I can't see how this position would improve anything.

More oversight, paperwork and talking = less work being done where it matters.

I’m not entirely sure but I think there’s only two pay band 4 deer people in Scotland in FLS. One in the North and one in the South. There’s quite a few PB6 and PB5s working on delivery. Not to mention the dozens of Contractors meeting impossible targets. In my limited experience, it doesn’t seem to be a top heavy structure at all.
I think, as an organisation, FLS gets a lot of unwarranted criticism from inside and outside of the industry which could be managed better. Just my thoughts, like I say, I have limited experience of them.
 

slider

Well-Known Member
Too many chiefs and not enough minions...

When cost cuts and sub contracting are the order of the day, I can't see how this position would improve anything.

More oversight, paperwork and talking = less work being done where it matters.
actually the problem at the moment is that when FLS restructure 2 years ago they culled the Chiefs and the Indians were left with little leadership.
 
Top