Archived TL's can't interview worth a f*ck

[Digi_E]

to put it in perspective alot of horrible hires are necessarily the TL's fault. believe it or not there are alot of people that interview extremely well and can fake it. the way we interview makes it easy. we have to take a risk with a good interviewee and alot of times they can flop, or they overestimated their ability to work retail. to be honest its better that you lose bad ones quick than have them stay and take 50 coachings before they are termed, THAT to me is a leader that does not know how to staff.

Edit: to add also, you have to follow HR guidelines so you sometimes come off as sugar coating positions and some think they can handle it till they face real work. you can be honest to them about the positions, that is what we do at my store and it helps alot especially if they dont perform they will see the term coming. Interviewing is a lot more than people think, team members think its personal ( and sometimes rarely it can be) but that is because all they see is the drop outs.

 

[Digi_E]

to add also, you have to follow HR guidelines so you sometimes come off as sugar coating positions and some think they can handle it till they face real work. you can be honest to them about the positions, that is what we do at my store and it helps alot especially if they dont perform they will see the term coming. Interviewing is a lot more than people think, team members think its personal ( and sometimes rarely it can be) but that is because all they see is the drop p

From what I have seen, a TL usually will do the first interview and then HR will do the second interview regardless of the feedback.

that is against HR guidelines, the HR is superseding a managers decision to make decisions for their department and that comes off as a conflict of interest. the only way an ETL HR can force a hire is if they talk to the TL and ETL and work it out. If someone ever sues that they were unfairly turned down and they pull up a hired TM who had a "not ready" guide 1 and a "ready" guide 2 from HR it will flag.

 

[HRZone]

For a while our Leaders and ETL's didn't turn anyone down and I had to hire all these awful people who quit after a week. I finally spoke up and told them if they had any doubt about the applicant to turn them down please. They listened and we finally stopped losing people.

Amen to that. My ETL GE would sit with the packet and contemplate out loud in front of me. I told her if they are a maybe they are a no. You should only hire people you are immediately excited about

 

[HRZone]

@LUR99 did you get the redwire about saving interview guides? Due to pending legal matters

To people really sue when they flunk their target interview? Amazing...

 

[boobooduck]

@LUR99 did you get the redwire about saving interview guides? Due to pending legal matters

To people really sue when they flunk their target interview? Amazing...

The interviews are being saved for something bigger than just an upset applicant. It has actually been on-going forever (5+ yrs) in some districts.

 

[Formina Sage]

"Can you endure considerable exertion for 45 plus minutes in what amounts to a hot car?"

Sounds like a good time

 

[Redzee]

^ Sakes.

 

[Formina Sage]

Interviewing is a fickle skill that is not always easy to get your head around. I interviewed a handful of candidates while I was a 20 year old TL and I'm sure my first few were not great hires. I took what I was doing too literally, the candidate's responses to Situation - Behavior - Outcome questions were difficult to translate into honest feedback, and I wasn't bold enough to just give a thumbs up/thumbs down based on a gut feel even though that would have been perfectly acceptable.

At my current job I've given probably 40-50 interviews both one-on-one and as part of a panel, including for a position that would be my direct supervisor. It does get more intuitive with experience and when you meet a wider palette of interviewees.

 

[Castagnier]

To be fair, isn't losing half of new hires supposed to be normal? I looked at some store reports for various ones in my district and my store has the least turnover at ~45% with all others between 50-60%. This is entry-level retail after all, which tends to attract younger hires with no resume. For many of them, it's their first job. The combination of a physically/mentally demanding job, lack of working experience, and so-so pay tends to drive them away. It's a bit unfortunate since working retail gives you a lot of experience in different areas that can be used later, like dealing with aforementioned favoritism.

 

[HRZone]

The interviews are being saved for something bigger than just an upset applicant. It has actually been on-going forever (5+ yrs) in some districts.

Not true at all. We were required to destroy them after one year (two in california).

Every now and then we would mail them out to a central location.

We were told this week due to legal concerns to hold them for now until further notice

 

[WestLoggy]

I recall something about Spot paying on a hiring discrimination lawsuit a while back. Large companies, retail or otherwise, have these come up from time to time. Some are seemingly frivolous, some may have merit. Seems there must be something occurring so temporarily keeping the paperwork in the original locations could possibly assist in any papertrail audits, discovery requests, etc.

 

[boobooduck]

Not true at all. We were required to destroy them after one year (two in california).

Every now and then we would mail them out to a central location.

We were told this week due to legal concerns to hold them for now until further notice

My 2nd sentence referred to the specfic districts that had to hold applications starting 2010/2011. Yeah, I am aware of the 1/2 year retention rule.

 

[LUR99]

@LUR99 did you get the redwire about saving interview guides? Due to pending legal matters

To people really sue when they flunk their target interview? Amazing...

We have always saved the interview guides! We have had angry applicants demanding an answer why we did not hire them after the interview.

 

[Yetive]

Or their mothers .

 

[HRZone]

We have always saved the interview guides! We have had angry applicants demanding an answer why we did not hire them after the interview.

Yeah after a year I always shredded them but now I know

 

[SFSFun]

We have always saved the interview guides! We have had angry applicants demanding an answer why we did not hire them after the interview.

Probably due to their attitude...

 

[SilentCrow]

Just recently had to do interviews. I interviewed 8 people and only put one through. I continue to be the rebel, but I'm sorry I can't put energy into people I know won't be effective.

 

[callmetaylor]

I don't know how it is in other stores but our leaders just keep hiring people willy nilly and losing them almost as quickly.

We lose 50% of new hires. Seriously. We sink major $$$ into training then two weeks later *poof* no more new guy. We have a three step process as far as I know. Three TL's talk to an applicant yet somehow they still keep hiring incompetent losers.

I was just talking to some of my coworkers about this the other day! Like...why waste time on interviews? The interviews clearly aren't accomplishing much, and they just seem to hurt our day-to-day process! During the high hiring times of the year our TL is pulled away for a large portion of the day to interview people, so now he's not able to get any real work done. We've had so many people start and show a lot of promise, and then they quit. We've also had people start, seem to totally suck at the job, and quit. And then we've had people who seem to be terrible and end up sticking around and they slowly pick up on things and become pretty decent.

This is a freaking retail job. A baboon could do 95% of what we do. Just hire anyone who passes the online screening and let them weed themselves out after they start the job. It would save a lot of time/money, imo.

My store probably loses about 70% of our new hires within 3 months. That's a TON of time wasted on interviews. Something definitely needs to change.

They either need to drastically overhaul the interview process to better determine who will be good/who is going to bail.
and/or they need to actually start training people as opposed to giving people a loose explanation of their tasks and leaving them on their own after 20min
and/or they need to just give up and simply hire everyone who comes through the door and stop wasting so much time on interviews.

 

[sprinklesontop]

We have always saved the interview guides! We have had angry applicants demanding an answer why we did not hire them after the interview.

Yep ! Just happened to me this week ! Had an applicant I passed on....they had plenty of experience; but no personality. They were self-centered and crabby. They had very, VERY limited availability. I conducted the interview w/ a positive attitude and a smile (representing Target, as always)..... and at the end, I indicated we had multiple interviews in the next few days, and we'd be contacting those that best fit our hiring needs for 2nd interviews. I thanked them, and walked them out. Well.......... apparently that wasn't acceptable to the candidate. They called back the next day and yelled at the HR TM about not getting a 2nd interview ! "YOU SHOULD HAVE HIRED ME !" The "candidate" then contacted DHR to complain ! That's where saving the interview guide comes into play !!!! The Store Team/ HR Team/ and DHR is supporting my viewpoint. Now, the "candidate" asked for their application to be forwarded to a nearby store. Oh, sure..... we'll send that RIGHT over; after we call them first. wink, wink.

 

[HRZone]

Now, the "candidate" asked for their application to be forwarded to a nearby store

Yeah, I would explain that once someone is turned down by interview they cant interview at another store until they reapply after 90 days.

 

[LUR99]

Yep ! Just happened to me this week ! Had an applicant I passed on....they had plenty of experience; but no personality. They were self-centered and crabby. They had very, VERY limited availability. I conducted the interview w/ a positive attitude and a smile (representing Target, as always)..... and at the end, I indicated we had multiple interviews in the next few days, and we'd be contacting those that best fit our hiring needs for 2nd interviews. I thanked them, and walked them out. Well.......... apparently that wasn't acceptable to the candidate. They called back the next day and yelled at the HR TM about not getting a 2nd interview ! "YOU SHOULD HAVE HIRED ME !" The "candidate" then contacted DHR to complain ! That's where saving the interview guide comes into play !!!! The Store Team/ HR Team/ and DHR is supporting my viewpoint. Now, the "candidate" asked for their application to be forwarded to a nearby store. Oh, sure..... we'll send that RIGHT over; after we call them first. wink, wink.

We had an applicant who called the hotline to complain that we did not hire her. That was "fun". Apparently the applicant had a friend/family member who works for Target and they gave the applicant the hotline number. Do people really think that will get them a job?

 

[LUR99]

I was just talking to some of my coworkers about this the other day! Like...why waste time on interviews? The interviews clearly aren't accomplishing much, and they just seem to hurt our day-to-day process! During the high hiring times of the year our TL is pulled away for a large portion of the day to interview people, so now he's not able to get any real work done. We've had so many people start and show a lot of promise, and then they quit. We've also had people start, seem to totally suck at the job, and quit. And then we've had people who seem to be terrible and end up sticking around and they slowly pick up on things and become pretty decent.

This is a freaking retail job. A baboon could do 95% of what we do. Just hire anyone who passes the online screening and let them weed themselves out after they start the job. It would save a lot of time/money, imo.

My store probably loses about 70% of our new hires within 3 months. That's a TON of time wasted on interviews. Something definitely needs to change.

They either need to drastically overhaul the interview process to better determine who will be good/who is going to bail.
and/or they need to actually start training people as opposed to giving people a loose explanation of their tasks and leaving them on their own after 20min
and/or they need to just give up and simply hire everyone who comes through the door and stop wasting so much time on interviews.

The online screenings were discontinued a few months ago. I think interviews are an important part of the hiring process but maybe they should be less lengthy. Some TL spend 30+ minutes on one interview.

 

[HRZone]

During the high hiring times of the year our TL is pulled away for a large portion of the day to interview people, so now he's not able to get any real work done.

A team leads first priority is to manage talent. If he can't step off stage for an interview his team is too dependent on him and that's a problem.

Just hire anyone who passes the online screening and let them weed themselves out after they start the job. It would save a lot of time/money, imo.

No it wouldn't, if the people we hire suck so much as you imply if we didn't screen them imagine them being even worse. Trust me we screen out a lot of people who couldn't even handle the most basic of jobs.

My store probably loses about 70% of our new hires

Exaggeration

They either need to drastically overhaul the interview process to better determine who will be good/who is going to bail.

It's retail, you never know a person can swim until you see them in the water.

 

[SFSFun]

A team leads first priority is to manage talent. If he can't step off stage for an interview his team is too dependent on him and that's a problem.

So when my STL schedules the BRTL as the only person in the backroom (because that's all the hours that we have), it's the BRTLs fault for not getting any work done if they have to stop and do interviews?

That goes for other workcenters too. Our TLs are expected to accomplish as much as TMs in the same amount of time, and they're scheduled that way. So if a salesfloor TL is scheduled in electronics, they'll have to work their freight, help guests, and do everything that's expected of an electronics TM.

 

[HRZone]

So when my STL schedules the BRTL as the only person in the backroom (because that's all the hours that we have), it's the BRTLs fault for not getting any work done if they have to stop and do interviews?

That goes for other workcenters too. Our TLs are expected to accomplish as much as TMs in the same amount of time, and they're scheduled that way. So if a salesfloor TL is scheduled in electronics, they'll have to work their freight, help guests, and do everything that's expected of an electronics TM.

That's different, for me as an HR I wouldn't dare schedule a lead for an interview if no one else is working in their workcenter. I always shoot for Friday and Monday mornings because generally all the etls are in the building and the grid is usually stacked with team members.

If you have 3 people in apparel in the morning they should be able to work given direction while the team lead steps off stage for an interview.