Recently, it was revealed on the mainland internet that an administrative unit in Jianli City, Hubei Province, recruited a candidate who scored only 3.17 out of 100 on the writing test. It sparked heated debate. Later, the government said it had canceled this vacancy. Netizens accused the government of treating people like fools and demanded an investigation into the behind-the-scenes social relationships.
China Times reported, that the candidate surnamed Sun scored 9.5 points on the vocational aptitude test, 0 points on the comprehensive competency test, 3.17 points on the writing test, and 83.76 points in the interview. The final score ranked first. The job listing was for a professional technical manager.
Under the pressure of public opinion, on the same day, the Human Resources and Social Security Department of Jianli City explained that there had been only one applicant but since the score was so low the job opening had been canceled.
At the same time, Economic View added that on April 2 this year, Hubei Province’s civil servant recruitment exam website and the city government of Jianli website published a document titled “Announcement of the unified recruitment of civil servants of administrative units in Jianli in 2022.”
In the announcement, the office in charge of weather effects in Jianli City is planning to recruit. There were originally four applicants, two dropped out, the other two participated in the test with scores of 54.17 and 3.17, respectively.
After assessing the seniority, both entered the interview round. By July 30, officials said, the candidate with a test score of 54.17 had “voluntarily given up” his or her interview, and the candidate with a score of 3.17 had attended the interview.
This made netizens angry. NTDTV compiled some comments from netizens:
One person said: “Canceling is done? We’re not stupid, bro,” “This need to be investigated to the end. Did the thief get caught and just need to return what they had stolen? I suspect that this test was prepared in advance. This kind of government response is tantamount to treating people as fools.”
Another said: “Sounds like a joke,” “4 people applied, 2 people dropped out and 1 person voluntarily gave up the interview. Can you be more funny? So the 3.17-point examinee passed the exam, right?
“Despite the current transparency, you still dare to do that! It’s ridiculous!” “Let’s ask, what’s the standard score? Is it 3 points?” How did the person with 3 points make it to the interview list? That’s the problem.”