Canterbury job stats

January 14th, 2013 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

The Press reports:

The number of advertised in Canterbury this week would cater for only half of those on the dole.

Even if this stat is correct, that’s a very high proportion. That suggests that if a job stays listed for say a month, then over two months there would be more jobs listed than people on the dole in Canterbury.

About 28,000 Cantabrians are out of work, with 3424 being paid an unemployment benefit, but there are only about 1700 jobs advertised on employment listings website Seek.

The Sep 2012 HLFS says there are 317,000 people working in Canterbury, 17,000 unemployed (5.2%) and 147,000 not in the labour force but of working age.

On top of 17,000 unemployed, there are 9,000 available for work but not seeking it and 3,000 seeking it but not available.

But the rather dodgy stat is using Seek as the indicator of jobs available in Canterbury. It is just one website. Trade Me by comparison has 1,577 jobs. Not all of them will be duplicates.

So how many jobs are there available in Canterbury? ANZ tracks both print and online ads and found in October 2012 there were around 33,000 jobs ads nationwide. If you assume they are proportional to population, then that would indicate over 3,000 jobs advertised in Canterbury.

Overall it is a good story, but the stats used are a bit loose.

Security One managing director Graham Larson, who has been hiring people for more than 20 years, said about a third of all applications he received would be thrown away, especially if they came with a generic CV.

“If I bother to put my name and number on an ad, I would expect to be addressed as more than ‘Dear Sir’ or ‘Dear Manager’,” he said.

“People need to say this is who I am, this is what I can do and this is what I can do for your company – and for goodness sake, clear up your Facebook page.”

Blake Surfacings owner Peter Scott said he had been trying to find someone to take on a $16.50-an-hour “unofficial apprenticeship” with his industrial flooring firm for about six months.

Two people had expressed interest, but after asking them to send copies of their CV, neither replied. The job was “semi-skilled”, but all training would be provided on the job as Scott said he would prefer to hire someone “fresh” to the industry.

No surprise more and more people from overseas are being hired.

Tags: ,

12 Responses to “Canterbury job stats”

  1. MT_Tinman (2,790 comments) says:

    A quick drive around the industrial areas of Christchurch reveals that many firms are using noticeboards to advertise jobs available.

    My guess is because of the low standard of applicants from other sources.

    Genuine statistics may require research, ruling the slime out immediately.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. wreck1080 (3,522 comments) says:

    Why work when you don’t need to?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. scrubone (2,971 comments) says:

    I’ll say it again: WINZ have got to test people for unemployability. People who refuse to work are not eligible for the dole, yet we continue to fork out millions each week. Telling the difference is pretty simple, and it’s one of those things – you measure it, the numbers will quickly improve.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    Winz is useless at job search and placement..They have two purposes and some would say , they do neither well.
    I may have missed it David but have you pubished an article on all the illegals working in CHCH? There are concerns about work quality..dare say there is another Shirtcliffe out there.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Rex Widerstrom (5,124 comments) says:

    Security One managing director Graham Larson, who has been hiring people for more than 20 years, said about a third of all applications he received would be thrown away, especially if they came with a generic CV.

    This gentleman may well be one of the good ones, who acknowledges receipt of your application, gives it genuine consideration, and then has the courtesy to tell you of the outcome, all within a reasonable time frame (say, a month from the date of the advertisement).

    However he’d be the exception to the rule if he does. It’s all very well to ask job seekers to spend perhaps two hours crafting a tailored application letter explaining why they’d suit the particular position and changing their CV round to make sure experience relevant to the position is highlighted, then send it off in hope and get nothing back – not even acknowledgement of receipt let alone notification of the outcome. Check with genuine job seekers, the ones who treat getting a job as a job and put in the time and effort, and you’ll find that soul-destroying contempt is all too often the response to their enquiries. Clearly the employer has gone trhough the pile, picked the person he wants, and then thrown the rest in the trash.

    Then multiply that disappointment by several dozen and you’ll have some idea how many job-seekers feel. Not the useless ones, because they’re not applying in the first place, but the ones making the effort that indicates they’d potentially be an asset.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. scrubone (2,971 comments) says:

    It’s all very well to ask job seekers to spend perhaps two hours crafting a tailored application letter explaining why they’d suit the particular position and changing their CV round to make sure experience relevant to the position is highlighted, then send it off in hope and get nothing back – not even acknowledgement of receipt let alone notification of the outcome.

    My favourite is the ones who then hand you a custom appliction form to fill out, which usually involves giving exactly the same information as you gave in your CV and cover letter.

    I have a theory that the longer the form, the more bureaucratic the employer. The most go-getting companies seem to be happy with just a cv and cover letter.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. MikeMan (171 comments) says:

    Rex: How about the employer who places a job ad with a fairly specific skill set required and gets 100 applications of which maybe 10-20 meet the requirements clearly stated in the ad. Should they send 100 letters/e-mails/phone calls to people saying we got your broken ass CV and you do not even come close.

    There is a reason that employers have stopped sending responses, job seekers shot gunning a generic CV/Letter combo to EVERY open position in a paper/website.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Rex Widerstrom (5,124 comments) says:

    @MikeMan

    I can sympathise with that employer, but suspect many would be from beneficiaries, who are forced to apply for X number of jobs per week in order to retain their entitlement. Doesn’t matter if one week there’s nothing suitable and next week there’s 2x the number of suitable jobs, as long as they report against x number, they’re seen as compliant.

    Once upon a time the government thought it worthshile investing in people whose job was to actually find work for the unemployed, matching them against suitabke (but only suitable) positions as opposed to looking for an excuse to cut their payments. I was one such person, so when I called up an employer they knew I wasn’t wasting their time and my unemployed charges actually got preferential consideration.

    It worked because the placement agencies were in the private sector, and to a great extent were paid on performance. Then a government (Labour, IIRC) decided that was appalling and army of bureaucrats would do a better job. Sadly National has never thought of handing it back to a suitably incentivised private sector, and ever since the “I’m a good beneficiary because I’ve annoyed 100 employers, only 10 of whom actually had a suitable position” has been the preferred model.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. pq (728 comments) says:

    Mr Farrrar, as you say Wah Wah ah,to the idiots
    holiday over, reality now, Christchurch is hel.
    I leave soon but Chritscurch is helll,
    We are all leaving

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. hinamanu (2,352 comments) says:

    Pfff…..to employers claiming no one in Chch wants to work

    The truth is accomodation is so expensive no one wants to move there and the work is probably all part time and not paying enough to live on. We all know wages are only subsistance levels and rents take much of those wages. Part time work simply isn’t enough. And probably neither is full time wages.

    No one is on here claiming they are paying a living wage to anyone.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. RightNow (6,337 comments) says:

    hinamanu, “the work is probably all part time and not paying enough to live on” – you’re talking through your arse.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    I agree Hinamanu..
    I know of an AK woman who moved here with her children ..She cannot find any rental acc..People tried to tell her re rent prices before she came but she seemed to think they would be cheaper than AK. They are not . Awhile back , a two bedroom unit in Riccarton was advertised at 1,100 dollars per week.
    When I was in AK towards the end of the year , people were very surprised when I told them our local coffee shop was charging 5 dollars per cup.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.