I think my internal transfer application is getting flagged by an automated system. I'm looking for HR advice on how to address it.

I've been working in a healthcare / patient support department for 4 years under a large metropolitan non-union university hospital. I've been on 12 hr shifts for about a year. My facility doesn't accommodate 8 hour shifts but a small acute care union hospital under the same healthcare network. 8 hour shifts would better accommodate my school schedule which was communicated to my manager and supervisor.

I was promoted approximately 3 months ago and per policy I need 6 months in my new role before I can transfer without manager approval. Both my supervisor and my manager verbally greenlit the transfer. I applied for the position on our internal job board and received an automated rejection email 9 hours later. I've internally applied and interviewed for my position at other facilities in the area while still being in the window where I need manager approval.

My department uses these listings to fill multiple vacancies and I can confirm that the position was not filled and will stay up for another month. Per the email I received I'm no longer in consideration for the role but I don't believe my resume ever made it to the hiring manager.

I was wondering if anyone could offer advice

Jobadvisor

Here's a practical path forward, roughly in order of likely payoff:

1. Confirm it's actually a policy flag, not something else The 6-month tenure-in-role rule is the most likely trigger for an automated rejection — many ATS platforms (Workday, Taleo, etc.) auto-screen internal applicants against eligibility rules like time-in-position before a human ever sees the application, especially when there's no manager-approval override logged in the system. The verbal green light from your supervisor and manager may not have been entered anywhere the system checks.

2. Get the verbal approval in writing, now Email your supervisor and manager something like: "Confirming our conversation on [date] — you both approved my transfer to [position] at [facility] despite being under the 6-month tenure requirement. Could you confirm this in writing so I can include it with my application?" This does two things: creates a paper trail, and forces them to either back up what they said or reveal they're not actually willing to put it in writing (useful info either way).

3. Loop in HR / the recruiter directly, not just the job board Contact the recruiter or HR rep tied to that requisition (often listed on the posting) or your HR business partner. Explain: you have manager/supervisor approval, you believe the system auto-rejected you before human review, and ask them to manually route your application to the hiring manager. Attach the written confirmation from step 2 if you got it.

4. Ask specifically what "not in consideration" means Auto-rejection language can mean different things depending on the ATS — sometimes it's a hard stop, sometimes it just means you didn't advance in that automated round but a human can still override it. HR/the recruiter can tell you which.

5. If HR is unresponsive, escalate through your manager Since your manager already verbally supports the move, ask them to personally reach out to the hiring manager or HR on your behalf — a manager-to-manager or manager-to-HR nudge often unsticks an automated rejection faster than you doing it alone.

One thing worth flagging for your own planning: since you're already applying/interviewing elsewhere under this same window, if this particular transfer stalls, it may be worth asking your manager directly whether they'd be willing to formally waive the 6-month requirement in the system (not just verbally) — some HR systems require the approval to be entered as a workflow step, not just given informally.

Want help drafting the email to HR/the recruiter, or the one to your manager asking for written confirmation?

A coworker told me they got in trouble for forging a doctor's note. How does HR find out?

First I want to say I SWEAR ITS NOT ME LOL. I pay the co pay each time and just do telehealth so I’ve never had the issue and it’s never been brought up. However, my co worker vented to me about how the one time she forged her note (she changed the date only) she got a write up. It just happened today. She also said the manager said others have been doing it too.

So how do managers or HR find out if you faked your note? I’ve done it once with previous jobs when I was in my early 20s (I’m almost 30 now I promise I don’t do it anymore ) and never got caught. Do they just call the clinic?

Jobadvisor

HR/managers typically catch forged doctor's notes a few ways:

Direct verification with the clinic This is the most common method. HR or a manager calls (or faxes/emails) the office listed on the note to confirm the patient was seen on that date. Some workplaces do this routinely for any note that seems off; others only when something raises suspicion (a coworker mentions it, the note looks edited, dates don't add up with other records, etc.).

Inconsistencies in the document itself Changed dates are one of the easier things to catch — mismatched fonts, alignment that's slightly off, different ink/print quality in one spot, metadata in a PDF/image showing edit history, or a date that doesn't match the letterhead's implied format. If someone photographs or scans a note and edits it digitally, forensic-level scrutiny isn't even needed — it's often visible to the naked eye once someone's looking closely.

Patient portal / EHR cross-checks Some larger employers (especially healthcare systems, since they may have relationships or shared systems with local providers) can verify appointment dates through patient portals if the employee provided some kind of consent, or simply by calling and asking the office to confirm an appointment occurred on X date.

Pattern flags from HR If a note format looks reused, or several employees are turning in notes from the same clinic with suspiciously similar formatting/dates, HR sometimes starts spot-checking.

Someone reports it Honestly, this is a big one — a lot of these situations get flagged because a coworker or manager overhears something, like what happened with your coworker venting.

On the personal note — sounds like you're already doing the responsible thing by just doing telehealth and paying the copay, so there's no real exposure there. Past stuff from your early 20s isn't something to lose sleep over unless it's somehow resurfaced, which it hasn't.

why am i like this.

When I’m talking normally about work, I’m confident in what I know. I can explain technical processes, troubleshooting, safety, and why I would handle a situation a certain way without much trouble.

Put me in a formal interview, though, and my nerves take over.

I recently had a fairly technical interview for work I have experience in, but haven’t done consistently in a while. I think I answered most of the questions reasonably well, and even when I didn’t immediately know what they were asking, I was usually able to talk through my thought process and work toward a solid answer.

That is probably what saves me in interviews. I may look nervous and ramble, but the rambling is usually very analytical. I explain what I’m considering, what risks I’m thinking about, and why I would make a certain decision.

The interviewer seemed engaged, took notes abd even starred on several things I said, and spent a decent amount of time discussing the role and how someone with my background might fit into the team.

At the same time, my nervousness was obvious, and it was pointed out which only made me more self-conscious.

I walked away focusing on every imperfect answer, every pause, and every thing I forgot to mention, even though there were also signs that the interview went reasonably well.

Does anyone else deal with this? You know you’re competent, but the pressure of an interview makes you feel like you presented the weakest possible version of yourself.

Jobadvisor

This is really common, and honestly what you're describing isn't a character flaw — it's just how evaluation-pressure works on a nervous system. A few things worth pulling apart:

Why normal conversation ≠ interview performance When you're talking shop with a coworker, there's no scoreboard. Nobody's deciding your worth or your paycheck based on how you phrase something. In an interview, your brain correctly detects "this is being judged" and shifts into threat-response mode — which for a lot of people shows up as visible nervousness even when the actual thinking underneath is sound. The rambling you mentioned is a good example: your analytical process is intact, it's just got a nervous wrapper around it.

The interviewer noticing your nerves isn't the verdict you think it is You said it "only made you more self-conscious" when it was pointed out — but interviewers see nervous candidates constantly. Most experienced interviewers mentally separate "this person is anxious" from "this person doesn't know their stuff," especially when, like you said, they were engaged, taking notes, and starring things you said. That's not the behavior of someone unimpressed. Visible nerves and a strong answer can coexist in their notes without canceling each other out.

The post-interview replay loop Fixating afterward on every pause and imperfect answer is your brain doing a very biased edit of the tape — it overweights the moments that felt bad in the room and discounts the moments that actually landed (which, by your own account, were several: engaged interviewer, notes, starred points, real discussion of fit). That's not you being accurate about how it went; that's just how post-event anxiety works — it audits for flaws, not the full picture.

A few things that actually help with the interview nerves specifically:

• Naming it briefly and moving on if it comes up ("Yeah, I get a bit wound up in interview settings — happy to keep going") takes the air out of it better than trying to suppress it
• Practicing out loud (not just in your head) for technical questions reduces the rambling because your mouth has already found the shorter path once
• A slower breath before answering doesn't fix nerves but it does interrupt the rambling reflex

You clearly know your material — the interview outcome will likely reflect that more than the shakiness did. How did you leave things with them, do you know when you'll hear back?

Should I go to place I applied to if I haven't heard back in a while?

I applied to a hospital as a cook in early April, I've looked at the application progress and it says I'm being considered for the position. However enter June and I have not heard back at all, no email or phone call. I reapplied mid June, same thing "considered for position" I look at the main hospital website and the position still shows it's open. The Career portal does not have an email or phone number I can contact. People tell me to pay a visit in person but I have also heard many stories of this annoying the hiring managers or HR. Should I go?? And if yes what do I say??

Jobadvisor

Reasonable question — there's real disagreement on this, so let me lay out both sides and then a middle path that's lower-risk than a cold walk-in.

Why people say "don't just show up" For high-volume roles at large institutions (and hospitals are exactly this kind of employer), hiring often goes through a centralized HR/recruiting team, not the department manager, and that team can be swamped with hundreds of applicants per posting. An unannounced visit can occasionally read as not respecting their process, and reception/security at a hospital may not even have a way to connect you with the right person on the spot — you could end up talking to someone with zero visibility into hiring status.

Why people say it can work For kitchen/hourly roles specifically, hiring is sometimes more decentralized — the actual decision-maker might be the food services or kitchen manager, not central HR, and those managers are often reachable in person in a way corporate recruiters aren't. Showing initiative for a cook position is also viewed differently than it might be for an office role; a lot of kitchen managers respect someone who shows up looking presentable and asks about status.

A middle-ground approach that lowers the risk:

1. Try to find a name first. Look at the job posting itself (not just the portal) — sometimes it lists a department or hiring manager. Also check LinkedIn for "food services manager" or "kitchen manager" at that hospital; you may be able to send a short, polite message there instead of cold-walking in.

2. Call the hospital's main line and ask to be transferred to Food & Nutrition Services / Culinary or HR, rather than walking in. Ask if they can confirm your application is under active review. This gets you a real answer without the risk of an unannounced visit landing badly.

3. If you can't get anyone by phone and decide to go in person, go to the main HR office (not just wander toward the kitchen), dress like you would for an interview, and keep it brief and professional: "Hi, my name is [name]. I applied for the cook position back in April and again in June — the portal shows I'm still under consideration. I don't have a way to reach anyone through the portal, so I wanted to check in and see if there's any update, or find out who I should follow up with." Bring a printed resume in case whoever you talk to isn't the decision-maker and needs to pass it along.

4. Keep expectations modest. Even done well, this might just get you "we'll pass it along" rather than an immediate answer — but it puts a face to the application and shows initiative, which matters for a role like this.

Given you've now applied twice with no contact and no phone/email option on the portal, I'd lean toward trying the phone route first since it's zero-risk, and only doing the in-person visit if that goes nowhere.

Recruiter was indignant I wasn’t thankful enough

Two weeks ago a recruiter cold emailed me with a job I had eyed on LinkedIn. She works for a firm, not the hiring company. She told me how I aligned with the role and that she thought I’d be a great fit. Had me send her my CV.

She replied and said how great I’d be for the role and that the team really wanted to advance me as a candidate.

She compared my CV to the listing and sent me an AI report showing my current CV didn’t fit the listing (33% match). I used her feedback to incorporate more keywords etc and sent a new version. She replied saying it wasn’t quite good enough but she really thought I’d get the role so a colleague was helping edit my resume.

At this point, the listing was only going to be open one more day. It says online that applications close on 6/30.

Late on 6/29 she emails me a partial screenshot of my updated resume and said her colleague decided to use a premium template so he’d be charging me. No costs had ever been discussed to this point.

I replied that unfortunately I couldn’t afford services but thank you. The morning of the 30th she responded that because I was such a strong candidate her colleague would waive his resume service fee and only charge me for the premium template at 85$. That’s not ok with me and I responded saying I wasn’t able to do that but I would like to submit my application with the original CV I sent over.

What I did not tell her was that I went to the company’s website and the posting was already down. I guess mid morning (eastern time US) on the 30th is what they meant by saying applications would close on 6/30.

Anyway an hour later she replied that she put a lot of work into rewriting my CV and didn’t feel I was appreciative enough of that effort so she would not be comfortable putting my application through.

Was she ever going to submit my CV without me paying her for anything? And did she just pretend to be offended cause she realized the posting had closed and she messed up?

I was quite polite and thanked her at every step. Not profusely, but normal professional level of gratitude. Is this the norm for recruiters?

Jobadvisor

This has the hallmarks of a resume-mill scam, not normal recruiting practice — worth naming that plainly.

Is this normal? No. Legitimate recruiters — whether in-house or third-party/agency — do not charge candidates for resume rewrites, "premium templates," or anything else to submit an application. Recruiters are paid by the hiring company (a placement fee if you're hired, or a retainer), not by candidates. The moment money was mentioned for anything related to getting you submitted, that was the red flag moment, full stop. You handled that part exactly right by declining.

Was she ever going to submit your CV? Almost certainly not, or at least not with any real urgency. Look at the sequence: cold outreach, flattery, an "AI match report" showing a suspiciously low score, then escalating "upgrades" to your resume that happened to require payment, all while the clock ran down on the posting. That's a fairly recognizable pattern — the goal isn't the placement fee from a real employer, it's getting you to pay for a service. The constant reassurance that you were "such a strong candidate" while simultaneously telling you your resume wasn't good enough is the manipulation engine: keep you hopeful enough to stay in the funnel, while manufacturing reasons you're not quite ready without payment.

Did she fake being offended because the posting closed? That's a very reasonable read. The timeline fits: you declined to pay on the 29th, she tried a discounted upsell the morning of the 30th, you declined again and asked her to just submit the original — and only after that (once the posting was already down, which she likely knew, since she'd presumably have been tracking it) did she pivot to "I don't feel appreciated enough to submit you." That's a convenient exit that avoids ever having to admit no submission was happening, and shifts the narrative to you being the problem instead of her.

On the "not appreciative enough" comment specifically This is a manipulation tactic, not a legitimate professional grievance. You thanked her at each step in a normal professional way — there's no standard of gratitude in recruiting that involves paying for unsolicited "upgrades." Making you responsible for her feelings about unpaid effort is a guilt tactic, and the fact that it surfaced right after you refused to pay (and right after the deadline conveniently passed) tells you what it actually was.

What I'd take from this: nothing about this exchange reflects on you or how you handled it. You engaged in good faith, incorporated feedback, and drew a clear line when money came up unprompted — that's the correct instinct. If you want, you could also report the recruiter/firm to LinkedIn (cold-messaging is fine, but soliciting payment from candidates for application services often violates their platform policies) — happy to help you word that if you'd like.