Ship of Fools: When An Auto-Reply Email is Too Much -- Pathetic Church Hiring Policies/Processes

Thread: When An Auto-Reply Email is Too Much -- Pathetic Church Hiring Policies/Processes Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=023785

Posted by The Riv (# 3553) on :

Probably too mild a rant for Hell, but it's SO aggravating and disheartening to be completely ignored by prospective Church employers. In this Day & Age of absolutely sterile, responsibility-free communication I struggle mightily to appreciate how Churches, of all entities, can treat people who apply for staff positions with the same regard as the priest to the man traveing down from Jerusalem to Jericho.

For Christ's sake, people -- you can't let me know you've received my application and accompanying materials, and God forbid -- thank me for my interest? You can't even set up a canned, unhelpful auto-reply email that leads me to believe I've connected to someone, something, anything on the other side? Your process directs me to/through a dedicated email address or contact person, but not a single reply by it/her/him is returned? After too long a silence you can't let me know I'm not a candidate under consideration (which is fine) and wish me well, or that you've hired someone when all is said and done? Why do you prefer to function like an abyss into which we toss our Christian vocational hopes, only to have them fall silently and unendingly? Some job seekers are beat-up enough to be in their situation at all, but you make it worse, because you're supposed to be better than the rest of the H.R. world, but you're not. We can count on the Godless, secular corporate culture to ignore, or even capitalize on our transitional vulnerabilities, but to go completely unacknowledged -- by you of all institutions -- is truly deplorable.

If this was an isolated incident, I wouldn't be writing here, but it's been endemic, and while I'm keeping the faith, you seem hell-bent on fueling my employer agnosticism, and that's an outrageous shame.

[ 14. September 2012, 20:29: Message edited by: The Riv ]

Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :

Sorry, you expect churches to have a clue when it comes to dealing with people? Clearly you haven't been in many churches.

Add it to the list of ways in which churches seem to know fuck all about showing Christian virtues in real world situations.

Apparently, in some cases, their God is a Fuckwit too.

Posted by Choirboy (# 9659) on :

The behavior described is standard practice for the commercial sector and Academia, at least. It is disheartening to see it in churches. I was once treasurer for a medium sized parish and was disgusted to see that a number of the people who were most in favor of social justice became the worst miserly Scrooges when considering their own employees. Something about motes and logs, I guess.

Posted by Lamb Chopped (# 5528) on :

quote:
Originally posted by The Riv:
Why do you prefer to function like an abyss into which we toss our Christian vocational hopes, only to have them fall silently and unendingly?

Consider it good preparation for the ministry. ANY ministry. [Two face]

People are jerks. And this same thing happens pretty much everywhere, to the point that there are whole career board topics dedicated to the delicate question of how the hell you get them to answer you (as if).

Still haven't heard from the university I applied to a year ago. But I'm not bitter, oh no...

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

It is a sign of the devolution of modern human resources practices. I consider myself lucky if I get an auto-reply, something composed is just plain delightful.

We have so devalued labour that we have come to this.

Posted by Dark Knight (# 9415) on :

You have my sympathy, Riv. Very disheartening process, not helped at all by the lack of courtesy so many institutions, not just churches.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by The Riv:
Probably too mild a rant for Hell, but it's SO aggravating and disheartening to be completely ignored by prospective Church employers. In this Day & Age of absolutely sterile, responsibility-free communication I struggle mightily to appreciate how Churches, of all entities, can treat people who apply for staff positions with the same regard as the priest to the man traveing down from Jerusalem to Jericho.

For Christ's sake, people -- you can't let me know you've received my application and accompanying materials, and God forbid -- thank me for my interest? You can't even set up a canned, unhelpful auto-reply email that leads me to believe I've connected to someone, something, anything on the other side? Your process directs me to/through a dedicated email address or contact person, but not a single reply by it/her/him is returned? After too long a silence you can't let me know I'm not a candidate under consideration (which is fine) and wish me well, or that you've hired someone when all is said and done? Why do you prefer to function like an abyss into which we toss our Christian vocational hopes, only to have them fall silently and unendingly? Some job seekers are beat-up enough to be in their situation at all, but you make it worse, because you're supposed to be better than the rest of the H.R. world, but you're not. We can count on the Godless, secular corporate culture to ignore, or even capitalize on our transitional vulnerabilities, but to go completely unacknowledged -- by you of all institutions -- is truly deplorable.

If this was an isolated incident, I wouldn't be writing here, but it's been endemic, and while I'm keeping the faith, you seem hell-bent on fueling my employer agnosticism, and that's an outrageous shame.

Yes.
This.
Yes.
And again,
Yes.

Best, most deserved hell-call ever.

Yes.

[Votive]

Posted by The Riv (# 3553) on :

The pattern is:

-- Churches invite applications/communication.

-- People respond by applying and communicating.

-- Churches completely ignore an overwhelmingly large percentage of those who have applied and communicated.

[Help]

Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :

I'm happy to say that when we hired a staff person a year ago, the person handling applications acknowledged all applicants (just a "Thanks for sending your application -- we'll be in touch" at first), and also let all the ones who didn't get the job know.

The only ones she didn't bother with were the really strange ones from the far corners of the earth who seemed to use some sort of bot to send resumes to every job in the world. Why would a Muslim from Pakistan, who didn't speak English, want a very part-time job at an Episcopal church in the U.S.? We got quite a few like that!

Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :

When Rev T was applying for his first pastorate, we had to keep reminding ourselves that the selection committee was made up of people who’d probably only gone through this a few times before – if ever. It’s a stressful process whatever end you’re at. Replies to applications consisted of:

Silence – Most of them. As you can’t follow up applications, you had no way of knowing whether the silence was because they hadn’t received it or just weren’t interested. A less charitable person could read other things into the silence as well. The larger churches were worse at writing back than the smaller / mid sized ones.

Responses – A tiny few. Some were really encouraging – explaining why they weren’t following up – but wishing you all the best in your search. Some of these amazing as they gave you real glimpse into the life of that congregation. These were also nice to get as at least it meant that you knew everything had arrived safely and it put the no into context.

And what I described as the “fuck off in Christian Love” – we’ve got your application and we really don’t think so. Okay, so Rev T might not have been quite what you were looking for, but would it have killed you to thank him for his interest and wish him all the best … It doesn’t cost you anything to be nice. OTH, you wrote back and all credit to you for that.

The Riv - all the best for the job hunt btw.

Tubbs

[ 18. September 2012, 09:09: Message edited by: Tubbs ]

Posted by The Silent Acolyte (# 1158) on :

These folk weren't so good at writing thank you notes for Christmas and birthday gifts either.

Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :

I spoke to someone last week who is on insurance post medical leave and now has to document applying for jobs to retain benefits. 10 applications per week ×8 weeks. Two acknowledgements, and nothing further from them nor anyone else. Yes, we used to see church as different and somehow set apart. The glass is clear and the darkness is blinding.

I'd probably telephone a few, or at least provide feedback that they are messed up and messing up. Maybe tell them you'll pray for them or something. That God may save them from insensitive louts like themselves.

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

Yeah. I had the delight of driving three hours to an interview, being told to my face "we like you, we want to hire you, but our largest customer just cancelled his order so we can't." They gave me $20 in gas money for my troubles, and to assuage their guilt.

They couldn't be bothered to call me that morning and say that it wasn't going to happen? [Mad]

That was October 2008. I was on EI at the time and really wanted a job.

I have seen prospective employers behave atrociously. Decency is hard to come by nowadays.

Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
When Rev T was applying for his first pastorate, we had to keep reminding ourselves that the selection committee was made up of people who’d probably only gone through this a few times before – if ever. It’s a stressful process whatever end you’re at. Replies to applications consisted of:

Silence – Most of them. As you can’t follow up applications, you had no way of knowing whether the silence was because they hadn’t received it or just weren’t interested. A less charitable person could read other things into the silence as well. The larger churches were worse at writing back than the smaller / mid sized ones.

Responses – A tiny few. Some were really encouraging – explaining why they weren’t following up – but wishing you all the best in your search. Some of these amazing as they gave you real glimpse into the life of that congregation. These were also nice to get as at least it meant that you knew everything had arrived safely and it put the no into context.

And what I described as the “fuck off in Christian Love” – we’ve got your application and we really don’t think so. Okay, so Rev T might not have been quite what you were looking for, but would it have killed you to thank him for his interest and wish him all the best … It doesn’t cost you anything to be nice. OTH, you wrote back and all credit to you for that.

The Riv - all the best for the job hunt btw.

Tubbs

Pretty much par for the course IME. If it helps, it happens to those who are seeking a second pastorate too!

Back in the 1990's when I was a church secretray I always made sure that I wrote to and contacted ecery single person (not names - they're people), who were referred to us. It was a "thank you" and wish you well.

What's changed in the intervening years? It isn't beyond people to phone (preferably) or to send an e mail. After all, you're asked to provide them on the form.

These days selection committees are much more clued up - although it depends on who is on it of course. Occasionally you'll get the HR professional and that can be fun trying to extract the spiritual out of the standard "job interview." Where do you see things in 5 years time? Hang on, my prophetic gifting doesn't quite work like that ...

Posted by The Scrumpmeister (# 5638) on :

This is terrible. However, it may not be entirely due to wilful maltreatment.

Many churches demonstrate an alarming degree of ineptitude where electronic communication is concerned. How many church websites are filled with all sorts of rubbish but fail to give basic information such as how to get there or have "upcoming events" pages bearing details of something planned for two years ago? I have turned up before now to non-existent services whose cancellation was not mentioned on the website where the service was advertised. Many bear links to parish pages on social networking websites that are restricted to members of those websites, even though public options are available.

Many get new websites at a different address but for one our other legitimate reason leave the old one active, only with no indication that it is no longer current. So advertised e-mail addresses go nowhere and you are left with no reply.

E-mail isn't generally much better in many places. Replies are often much delayed if they are forthcoming at all. Some are much better than others but it generally makes for people feeling ignored and messed about in ways that are really are not becoming.

Posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe (# 5521) on :

I would imagine that all too often, church websites are created by talented web programmers in the parish who subsequently move on or lose interest, or by professional web programmers in the days when funds exist to pay them -- but now that those funds are no longer there, or those programmer parishioners no longer come to church, the website falls victim to neglect.

Even if someone in the parish does express an interest in updating the website or monitoring e-mail, it's also possible that the administrator password disappeared along with the original designer. So the church is stuck with an obsolete website and e-mail that can't be accessed for want of the password.

Posted by John D. Ward (# 1378) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Pigwidgeon:
Why would a Muslim from Pakistan, who didn't speak English, want a very part-time job at an Episcopal church in the U.S.?

Immigration is the first thing that comes to mind.
Terrorism is the second.

Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
I would imagine that all too often, church websites are created by talented web programmers in the parish who subsequently move on or lose interest, or by professional web programmers in the days when funds exist to pay them -- but now that those funds are no longer there, or those programmer parishioners no longer come to church, the website falls victim to neglect.

Even if someone in the parish does express an interest in updating the website or monitoring e-mail, it's also possible that the administrator password disappeared along with the original designer. So the church is stuck with an obsolete website and e-mail that can't be accessed for want of the password.

On one of the previous Heaven threads about designing a church website, someone posted about the need to ensure that several people in the church knew the password for the website, even if they didn’t actually do anything on it. Citing, as their example, a church they knew where the web designer had died unexpectedly.

We’ve got two websites – the active one that’s updated regularly and looks okay. And a really old one that no one knows anything about – including the previous pastor! Of course, that’s the one that often displays first when you Google … [Roll Eyes]

Tubbs

Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on :

One of our old churchwardens insisted we recorded all the passwords (e-mail, website, access to computers, charity information) and kept them in the church safe. Well, he wanted them somewhere where they could be found and accessed when any of the key people went under a bus. We, he, me and the treasurer, decided a little book locked in the safe would do it.

He had had to pick up the pieces and sort out the mess for the summer exams at the school where he worked when the guy who was supposed to be running them dropped dead of a heart attack the week before, and all the passwords and key information died with him.

You've reminded me, I must make sure all the new ones are now in the safe too.

Posted by Tubbs (# 440) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Curiosity killed ...:
One of our old churchwardens insisted we recorded all the passwords (e-mail, website, access to computers, charity information) and kept them in the church safe. Well, he wanted them somewhere where they could be found and accessed when any of the key people went under a bus. We, he, me and the treasurer, decided a little book locked in the safe would do it.

He had had to pick up the pieces and sort out the mess for the summer exams at the school where he worked when the guy who was supposed to be running them dropped dead of a heart attack the week before, and all the passwords and key information died with him.

You've reminded me, I must make sure all the new ones are now in the safe too.

What happens if none of the people left knows the combination to the safe ... [Two face]

Tubbs

Posted by Curiosity killed ... (# 11770) on :

keys!

Posted by Moo (# 107) on :

A few years ago our parish secretary died unexpectedly, and no one knew the password for her computer, which was full of vital data.

Fortunately, we located an expert to deal with the situation, but I don't know how much it cost.

Moo

Posted by Ricardus (# 8757) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Tubbs:
We’ve got two websites – the active one that’s updated regularly and looks okay. And a really old one that no one knows anything about – including the previous pastor! Of course, that’s the one that often displays first when you Google …

Have you tried contacting Google? They can de-list things in certain circumstances.

Posted by Reuben (# 11361) on :

From the responses above, is there no one on this ship that has ever ignored a job application? Not returned an email? Never responded to a voice mail message?

Confession time. I say 'yes' to all three. And I am sorry, but when I get overloaded, some stuff falls off the back of the truck.

Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Reuben:
From the responses above, is there no one on this ship that has ever ignored a job application? Not returned an email? Never responded to a voice mail message?

Confession time. I say 'yes' to all three. And I am sorry, but when I get overloaded, some stuff falls off the back of the truck.

Probably but can't remember doing it. It's usually my stuff that falls off the back of the truck that has an indirect affect on others.

No I'm not being smug nor arrogant. It's just that I worked in what was called a "customer facing role" for so long that responding to any communication from someone else (note this) was hot wired into response mode and I would feel very guilty if I didn't. After all that was pretty much 100% of that persons dealing with me and not to respond was 100% failure. With my own stuff there was a lot more going on so a failure here might only be 1%.

For a while we were the only department of a major UK financial institution who turned round all day to day correspondence within 24 hours. No, we didn't reallocate "day to day" to "problem" to sort it either. In fact for 2 weeks we turned round 100% in the same day provided it came in by 12. Yep it needed high staffing but what we lost on wages, we can on credibility and financially by getting very very few complaints. The bottom line and staff morale (very low absenteeism and minimal turnover - we had a queue of people waiting for vacancies) proved the benefits.

It's left its legacy - I try to clear all emails by the end of every day and return all phone calls. It just has become part of how I work and I must say not replying to a normal contact of any kind (exclude obvious nutters), is rudeness IMHO.

Posted by cliffdweller (# 13338) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Reuben:
From the responses above, is there no one on this ship that has ever ignored a job application? Not returned an email? Never responded to a voice mail message?

Confession time. I say 'yes' to all three. And I am sorry, but when I get overloaded, some stuff falls off the back of the truck.

Not with a job application. I remember all to well how, yes, hell-ish, it is to be on the other end. And really, it's not that hard.

When I was heading the committee to hire a new youth pastor, we rec'd over 100 applications-- for a part-time, lowly paid position-- including folks with decades of experience. I know churches where it's gotten to 400 apps. But it's really not that hard. I had a standard cut-and-paste response that simply told them we'd received their application, where we were in the process, and when they could expect to hear more. Since most people applied via email, it took less than a minute to respond, and add their email to a group email. Once the initial culling was done, again, mere minutes to send out a "sorry, not you" group email. After we made our final selection and he had accepted, I called each of the people we had interviewed face-to-face to let them know our decision.

That seems the bare minimum to me, and didn't take a whole lot of time. With more time I could perhaps have been a bit more personal. But at least this minimal response meant that those people weren't sitting around twisting in the wind. Because, when you're out of work and wondering how to feed your family, that's what it is. And it's just not that hard to do the kind, thoughtful thing here. It's not rocket science, it doesn't take a whole lot of time, and it's kind. At the very least, we should be that.

[ 22. September 2012, 17:13: Message edited by: cliffdweller ]

Posted by Belle Ringer (# 13379) on :

Some churches are so habitually focused on their own internal needs, or so overwhelmed with in-group needs, they can't see beyond their walls. Or feel too short-staffed to deal with anything more than the essentials for their own survival. So, an unwanted applicant is immediately forgotten. Or if someone did suggest contacting the rejected applicants, the answer would be "that won't help us; we have to focus our efforts on the needs of this congregation."

I always followed up with job applications, "did you receive my application, what's your time frame?" but these days many businesses say "don't contact us, if we want you we'll let you know." If this is becoming normal in the culture, churches may be following the local culture and genuinely not "seeing" the issue?

Posted by Sober Preacher's Kid (# 12699) on :

What cliffdweller said.

When I apply to your job process, a form e-mail from mail-merge is the decent thing to do if my resume is going nowhere after review.

If you have requested that I attend an interview, and I come, and I still don't get in, a personal e-mail or a phone call is warranted. I understand if you don't want to listen to the rantings of disappointed candidates, but that is what e-mail and the delete button are for.

Posted by L'organist (# 17338) on :

IME the more august the institution the worse the manners. Small parish = application acknowledged, then told promptly if you are being considered or not. Large parish = application acknowledged, told if you are shortlisted, otherwise silence.
National church institution = no acknowledgement of application, told if shortlisted, otherwise silence.

My "best" experience: being texted on the morning of interviews to ask why I hadn't turned-up: mystified since they hadn't asked me to appear. Turned out no one else had been told either ....

Posted by orfeo (# 13878) on :

About a decade ago, I read a book about the move of businesses onto the internet.

The market share of businesses that responded to e-mails would soar. One of the case studies was a business that had an explicit policy of answering all e-mail enquiries within 24 hours. Even if it was to say "we don't know the answer yet, but we're looking into it, and we expect to get back to you in X days".

Churches aren't businesses in one sense, but the same basic principle applies. NO-ONE likes their material to disappear into some kind of vacuum. If people can't get any kind of response from your church they will move on to some other church that gives a response. That goes for prospective employees and prospective parishioners.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0