Direct.gov.uk: why the new job search website needs to be replaced
Post Categories: DWP • Labour Market System • jobcentre Plus • unemployment
Tags: direct.gov.uk, directgov, jobcentre plus job search, Labour Market System
I was never a fan of the old Jobcentre Plus job search website although I used it regularly to seek employment. Many issues with it included:
- Although the job reference code is passed within the page URL; when the site timeout within a few minutes it forgets what job advert/search you were doing and begins at the start
- Although you added restrictions to the area etc. it still picks up jobs in Scotland etc.
The new Directgov search tries to be clever with an “Ask jeeves” like approach to help finding jobs. Instead of browsing by default (like on the old site) you are searching via a sentence-long search phrase. This is so poor I have decided to pull it apart on this blog article!
Directgov: basic, very basic
Now, surely the purpose of a long sentence search phrase is to avoid having to revise your search later?
I tried the following search phrase:
I would like a job in Ipswich that is permanent and is for more than 16 hours per week
Please note: I don’t see this as an excessive search; for example I didn’t even specify the type of job, a certain mile radius of the location, the name of the employer or anything even what I would consider is remotely advanced.
I am instantly presented with this message selection:
Confirm location
Please choose a location. There are no job subjects that match more and than 16 hours per has not been understood.
- Ipswich, Suffolk
- Week, Bridgwater, Somerset
- Week, Totnes, Devon
Yes, there is a place called Week! Actually, at least two!
However, this is probably the crappest English I have ever seen. Perhaps I should have redone my search “I would like a job per Ipswich”.
So, anyway I click on “Ipswich, Suffolk” and I am presented with a further search box with a message reading:
Quick search
What kind of job are you looking for in Ipswich (Suffolk)?
It is clever to know that I didn’t specify a job (although I doubt it is a quick search after having to type a sentence like phrase to search for, prompt my location I wanted and to revise my search before seeing a single result) or perhaps it forgot my initial search when clicking the link saying “Ipswich, Suffolk”.
The problem is, and excuse the simple logic, I didn’t specify a job because I wanted to see all jobs in Ipswich. I typed in “any” but that wasn’t recognised.
I am now, however, presented with a box below the revised search box saying:
Searches now available
Jobs: Search for all jobs in Ipswich (Suffolk)
So, I click the link and I am presented with page 1 of 5 with 20 jobs per page making a total of 100 jobs in Ipswich. Only 100?! I hope this is a search engine bug… this includes admin, retail, hospitality, cleaning, care jobs, sales jobs, management positions, etc. every possible type of job in town and the surrounding areas… only 100 current?
I click on revise… I assume the initial selection were the default job search criteria…
Or change your search preferences.
Search radius
1 mile
2 miles
5 miles
15 milesPermanent/temporary (less than 6 months)
Permanent
Temporary
BothHours per week
1 – 16 hours
16 – 30 hours
30+ hours
Any hoursAge of vacancy
Today’s jobs
Up to 1 week
Up to 2 weeks
All jobsJob source
Jobcentre Plus
Other
It is interesting to know that any job which lasts less than 6 months is to be known as temporary, whereas a temporary job is a job for a fixed term that isn’t ongoing. For example, Maternity Cover positions are temporary and can be for a year in duration.
Back on subject… within 15 miles of Ipswich, all permanent jobs, any hours, all jobs (I assumed the 100 jobs were because it was selecting this weeks vacancies/last 48 hours) and Jobcentre Plus vacancies…. only 100 jobs?
How the Search should work!
Search queries should be constructed like as follows:
[start] [job type] [location] (, [hours] [misc] etc.)
I will create a subheading for each of the above. Those that are in rounded brackets above are optional.
start
The below phrases would need to be matched against the search phrase. They are ignored by the system as the content of such doesn’t matter.
I want a(n)
I want to be a(n)
I need a(n)
I would like a(n)
I require a(n)
I am looking for
I am looking for a(n)
I seek a(n)
job type
The next part of the search phrase will be extracted and used as a variable to determine the job required. Such as:
(job type) job
(job type) position
(job type) vacancyi.e. admin job; sales executive position, retail assistant vacancy
The system would need to look for the word “job”, “position” or “vacancy” to determine the length of the job type/title as some could be one word or multiple.
It could also look for words “jobs” and “vacancies”. The search would accept empty job types (i.e. “I am looking for a job in…”) so if a specific job title or job type isn’t specified it would automatically assume you are looking for all jobs. It wouldn’t prompt you to be more specific or request you to click a link to view such results. If a job type isn’t recognised and a typo isn’t noticed and an alternative couldnt be suggested a message would be displayed with all jobs being listed instead.
location
This will determine where the jobs are – three main keywords begin this section ready to extract the location variable. These are “in”, “on” and “within”.
in (location)
on (name) (for ships etc.)
within (i) miles of (location)
hours, misc
These are optional variables which can be easily matched within the entire search phrase or remainder.
permanent
temporary
temp
more than (i) hours per week
less than (i) hours per week
Conclusion
I could design a better search website than that of Jobcentre Plus but sadly no available API exists to extract information from their database for use in such system.
Link Summary
- 351 Jobcentre Plus advertised jobs were in the Adult Entertainment Industry
- Welfare Reform: Jobcentre Plus needs to scrap its £40m per year Labour Market System
- New Labour POLICY requirements: Are they bullshit or not?
- Jobcentre Plus Job Search: 3 weeks left
- Jobcentre Plus: Nude Webcam Performers
- If you liked school, you’ll love work.
12 Responses to “Direct.gov.uk: why the new job search website needs to be replaced”
Trackbacks:
Leave a Reply
Please Note: We are an independent website NOT an official Government website or a business or affiliate operating on behalf of. Please consider this before posting any personal information or if for whatever reason thinking this is connected to Jobcentre Plus. (Always look for .gov.uk at the end of the URL which specifys a Government website)
Please Note: This post is over 4 months old. You may want to check future posts in this blog to see if there is new information relevant to your comment.
By submitting a comment here you grant this site a perpetual license to reproduce your comment(s) and name/web site in attribution. Only comment if you agree with the below rules.
(1) All comments on Flexible New Deal Scandal are moderated for purposes of filtering out SPAMThank you for your attribution to Flexible New Deal Scandal!
(2) I reserve the right not to publish any comment for any reason such as being racist or offensive
(3) I aim to accept comments within 3 hours (but could be up to 24 hours)
(4) I will post any comments not in favour of any article for balance of discussion
(5) I do not edit comments so if the comment is partially offensive it is unlikely to be approved at all
(6) I reserve the right to append line breaks to comments so they are easier to read or remove any link
Great bands are fairly lacking today. If that’s what you want, rewind to the ’60s. We’re talking Beatles, Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin. Then Pink Floyd, Aerosmith, Rush. Next is Metallica, Pearl Jam, and Soundgarden. Today the scene is Muse, Coldplay, Dream Theater. That’s a basic sample of all the music you need to know.
Hi there!
I’ve been doing a lot of research online lately regarding online promotion and SEO since I just started an Thailand Shop with a couple of friends of mine.
The layout of your website is brilliant and I’d really love to exchange links with you. Have a look at our site if you want, we put a lot of work and effort into it and are dedicated to improve it constantly.
We receive a lot of hits already (contact me for visitor stats) and I think both our sites can benefit from one another. Anyway, just thought I’d share this with you – keep up the good work and contact me if interested!
Greetings, Just what I was scouring the web for! I was researching articles and reviews for our page when I came across your page on ” Direct.gov.uk: why the new job search website needs to be replaced | Flexible New Deal Provider Information & Flexible New Deal Scandal ” which I found on yahoo. We would love you to publish for us, if interested. I’ve bookmarked this post for future reference. Awesome comments here as well
lol one or two of the commentary folks post are a bit spacey, alot of times i question whether they in truth read the content pages and items before posting or whether or not they actually look at the title of the blog post and generate the very first idea that one thinks of. at any rate, it is really enjoyable to look over smart commentary every now and then rather than the exact same, outdated post vomit that i ordinarily discover on the web
The direct.gov.uk is now a private entity. This is what I heard from twitter I dont know if it is true but wouldn’t be at all surprised
I’ve missed something here? The jobcentre website is now the property of business link? Business link is being taken over by SERCO? Well?!
Why is directgov website so fucking shit?!
Today I had the problem of… not being able to search for jobs near me. It recognises Ipswich. After Ipswich I try the local places, so I choose Colchester… the next nearest (rather big) town, I am displayed with the following message:
I never even entered a post code! Felixstowe works fine, try Colchester again afterwards, the same problem.
Anyone else get this? (any place of course)
I must agree with your original poster.
Just like every other day been on the directgov jobsearch section, entered Gravesend (my local town), click show all jobs, “Your search has produced more than 100 results” so it shows me only the first 100.
Refine search to within 1 mile and still over 100 jobs. Refine again to todays jobs within 1 mile and AHHH. 27 jobs available. Thats more like it… Hang on…
Morecambe thats 275 miles away.
Llandudno 278 miles
Lemington Spa 124 miles
Carlisle 333 miles
Out of 27 jobs listed as new vacancies within 1 mile of my location today only FOUR are actually within 50 miles of my home
The number of times I have told jobcentre staff their website is rubbish.
You get 3 different sets of results depending on whether:
1. You search their website.
2. You search on the jobcentre terminals.
3. Jobcentre staff search on their computers.
Once the jobcentre advisor printed out a list of 100 jobs from all over the country, most of which were useless one way or another, but the list did not include the very suitable local job I located the previous day using their website, and had already applied for. The only two jobs on the list within 50 miles of my town, were prefixed with JUNIOR, and TRAINEE, which didn’t really match my 30 years experience.
As I live on the border of south west / south east, I just search all of Britain, then make my own judgement of how practical any travelling might be.
I search for ‘ELECTRONICS DESIGN ENGINEER’, which gets translated to ‘ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS DESIGNER’, then the page goes on to list:
at least a dozen MECHANICAL ENGINEER jobs,
several ELECTRICAL ENGINEER jobs,
often an occasional KITCHEN DESIGNER job,
and sometimes an INTERIOR DESIGNER job.
When the job title is just DESIGN ENGINEER, it is not worth clicking on, because that will be a MECHANICAL DESIGN ENGINEER job.
How can the government spend so much money, intending to help a whole nation’s unemployed get back to work, yet end up with such a crap system?
I’ve offered to fix it for them.
I feel your pain.
Also why do they feel the need to use sessions like this. It means that pages (searches and jobs) can’t be saved in a browsers history or bookmarks and they can’t be emailed. Unless the recipient opens it before the session has timed out. And if that happens the recipient is logged in as the first user and can view any of the account details and change the password. Bit of a security hole I think.
I complained about the website and was told to “take a note of the vacancy reference number.” if I wanted to go back to it later.
exactly too many flaws i dont like the direct.gov job search personally i tolerate it but it is so wrong. another case of the dwp not listening to people
Has any one else noticed this utterly awful website has considerably lengthened there time spent job searching? Which i wouldn’t be surprised if that was intentional (less time for us benefit scroungers to do casual work lol).
There’s too many job categories to search. I personally have to make note of not only the job reference number but also the category i found in it in.
Also the number of mistakes in the adverts many times i have come across incorrect email addresses and telephone numbers and repeated adverts.
The old jobcentre search was deeply flawed but this search engine is dire.
Has anyone noticed how it always returns 5 pages of results? (“all jobs”)
I scratched my head and couldnt understand it…. how come there are exactly 5 pages of results. Well, I tried a less popular location… this time page 3 onwards it gets results nationwide to fill up the space… why?!