Onboarding/compliance nightmares

[TheDude]

I am currently undergoing onboarding and compliance checks for a contract at a bank.

So far the process has dragged for a month and the agency (embedded at the bank) are sending daily mails asking stupid questions (latest - do you have any diplomas for the technical skills listed on your CV)

Has anyone had a similar experience - I have worked at many banks and the process has never taken more than a week.

[eek]

I am currently undergoing onboarding and compliance checks for a contract at a bank.

So far the process has dragged for a month and the agency (embedded at the bank) are sending daily mails asking stupid questions (latest - do you have any diplomas for the technical skills listed on your CV)

Has anyone had a similar experience - I have worked at many banks and the process has never taken more than a week.

Don't take this the wrong way but given what has changed in the past month are they trying to find a means to not onboard you?

[Lance]

Don't take this the wrong way but given what has changed in the past month are they trying to find a means to not onboard you?

seems likely.
I've never been asked to prove any qualifications in any contract or perm role ever.

[ensignia]

I am currently undergoing onboarding and compliance checks for a contract at a bank.

So far the process has dragged for a month and the agency (embedded at the bank) are sending daily mails asking stupid questions (latest - do you have any diplomas for the technical skills listed on your CV)

Has anyone had a similar experience - I have worked at many banks and the process has never taken more than a week.

This has been standard fare for any bank I've worked with. Onboarding at an IB at Canary Wharf who shall remain nameless took 7 weeks with all manner of minute detail and information required. The agency was embedded in the bank, too.

A pharma client I worked with took even longer although I think that was more due to their own inefficiencies and budgetary issues.

A month doesn't seem out of the ordinary.

[northernladuk]

seems likely.
I've never been asked to prove any qualifications in any contract or perm role ever.

Nor did the NHS when they took on that bloke on with the fake PHD that was in the news recently. It happens. Also, if you opted in the agency/client have an obligation to check you have the qualifications for the role. The fact that agencies never ask for them is just the agency being lazy. The regulation states that evidence must be provided.

We should be thankful we haven't been asked for them because its possible we should in certain circumstances.

A month doesn't seem out of the ordinary.

Indeed. The two finance roles I've had all took this or longer but in both cases I was allowed to start and they were checked while I was working.

My last client is introducing a check on the tax filings of you LTD now which seems odd but not totally unreasonable if they are taking on a supplier. It's not finance so generally not as stringent but that's a new one for me. But, if it makes me look more like a consultancy than a bum on seat I'd be happy to go along with it.

[TheDude]

Don't take this the wrong way but given what has changed in the past month are they trying to find a means to not onboard you?

Having worked for many banks they are not shy when it comes to rescinding offers so I doubt that is the case.

The only issue I can see is that I was sourced via a recruiter who has a relationship with the hiring manager so they are not receiving a placement fee - maybe they are slowing things down so they can place their own candidate.

[PCTNN]

Don't take this the wrong way but given what has changed in the past month are they trying to find a means to not onboard you?

I also think they're looking for an excuse. Maybe the OP wasn't the first choice for the role but now the original first choice has become available?

[eek]

I also think they're looking for an excuse. Maybe the OP wasn't the first choice for the role but now the original first choice has become available?

If there was a suitable preferred replacement they would just bin the OP off.

So it becomes a question of are they being deliberately slow (and if so why) or is this normal?

[TheDude]

If there was a suitable preferred replacement they would just bin the OP off.

So it becomes a question of are they being deliberately slow (and if so why) or is this normal?

I think they are just incompetent.

There were questions on the compliance forms that were only to be answered by FCA approved persons - I was asked on three occasions why I hadn't filled that section in.

[Lance]

Nor did the NHS when they took on that bloke on with the fake PHD that was in the news recently. It happens. Also, if you opted in the agency/client have an obligation to check you have the qualifications for the role. The fact that agencies never ask for them is just the agency being lazy. The regulation states that evidence must be provided.

We should be thankful we haven't been asked for them because its possible we should in certain circumstances.

Perhaps putting (expired) after every professional qualification on my CV has voided ever being asked.