Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 ... 10
21
SAMFS / Re: Recruitment 2019
« Last post by Surf78 on October 11, 2019, 02:03:57 PM »
Yep its interesting

I had a mate that didn’t get through it jokingly say to me we’ll have to do the test together next time! Maybe he wasn’t joking!

Oh well, just keep plugging away and try again next time, although the email did say unlikely to progress so they haven’t burnt our bridges fully! You never know!
22
SAMFS / Re: Recruitment 2019
« Last post by Applicant on October 10, 2019, 04:16:30 PM »
@Canine I agree, we can't begin to speculate the reasoning behind it but I think our applications should've taken precedent seeing as the testing was different and that we were deemed good enough to pass the first gateway. Either we passed and we are able to progress or we didn't and our applications should of ceased, we shouldn't be stuck in limbo like we are and then be stepped over because there's an abundance of new applicants. We all worked very hard to get through this process like everyone else, its definitely a bad position that we've found ourselves in.
23
SAMFS / Re: Recruitment 2019
« Last post by canine on October 09, 2019, 03:58:03 PM »
First line of the MFS recruitment policy: All recruitment processes will be conducted in a fair and equitable manner.

Doesn't appear that is the case......

Stop being a sook. If you want to know why you haven’t processed perhaps try some self reflection. A self entitled whinger who has no self awareness and blames other people and/or the process rather than taking responsibility for the outcomes of their own responses and actions is not what the MFS is looking for.

Where did I sook or say I havnt progressed??
I and others on this forum don't think it's fair and equitable for applicants merging in to the same process to complete testing under different conditions. Not sure how U can argue with that.
24
SAMFS / Re: Recruitment 2019
« Last post by Scoot on October 09, 2019, 02:07:16 PM »
Left foot snap, I personally don’t have a problem with what has happened although I can understand how some people can feel a bit jibbed going through one process to then have to compete with people that went through a completely different process.

I don’t think calling anyone a sook will help either.
25
SAMFS / Re: Recruitment 2019
« Last post by Left foot snap on October 09, 2019, 12:38:15 PM »
First line of the MFS recruitment policy: All recruitment processes will be conducted in a fair and equitable manner.

Doesn't appear that is the case......

Stop being a sook. If you want to know why you haven’t processed perhaps try some self reflection. A self entitled whinger who has no self awareness and blames other people and/or the process rather than taking responsibility for the outcomes of their own responses and actions is not what the MFS is looking for. 
26
SAMFS / Re: Recruitment 2019
« Last post by canine on October 08, 2019, 08:20:05 PM »
First line of the MFS recruitment policy: All recruitment processes will be conducted in a fair and equitable manner.

Doesn't appear that is the case......
27
SAMFS / Re: Recruitment 2019
« Last post by Scoot on October 08, 2019, 04:44:30 PM »
I also received this “unlikely” email. I’ll cop it on the chin even though I don’t really understand how you can compare a supervised test to one undertaken around home. But best of luck to everyone in with a chance.
28
SAMFS / Re: SAMFS Recruitment 2018
« Last post by Crow on October 05, 2019, 07:23:20 PM »
I already replied to the 2019 chat that I got that email too.
I was in the keep fit pool from last year.
I wander if anyone from this year's applicants got that email
29
SAMFS / Re: SAMFS Recruitment 2018
« Last post by canine on October 05, 2019, 01:03:08 PM »
Correct. They did it at home or where ever and with whom ever they liked......
30
SAMFS / Re: Recruitment 2019
« Last post by Applicant on October 05, 2019, 09:42:47 AM »
From the sounds of things all of us from 2018 recruitment have received the same email. It's a bit vague whether it's an outright dismissal the way it was worded "unlikely". It's a shame no more information can be provided on future progression.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 ... 10