Editorial Policy
This page explains, in specific terms, how content gets published on this site — both job listings and blog articles — and what standards it has to meet before it does. We wrote it because “we’re committed to quality” is a meaningless sentence on its own. What actually matters is the process behind it, so that’s what follows.
Two different kinds of content, two different processes
This site publishes two distinct types of material, and they go through different review processes because they serve different purposes. Job listings are structured, factual data — a title, a company, a location, a salary range, a closing date — sourced from employers or public postings. Blog articles are original written guidance — CV advice, interview preparation, salary information, career planning — researched and written by our editorial team. Both need to be trustworthy, but “trustworthy” means something different for each.
How job listings are sourced
Listings reach this site through three routes:
- Direct employer submissions. A company or its recruiter posts a vacancy through our submission process. This is the most reliable source, since the information comes straight from the people doing the hiring.
- Manual editorial addition. Our team adds listings we find on employer careers pages or public job postings, when we think a role will be genuinely useful to someone using this site.
- Structured import. Listings can be bulk-imported from CSV files or, in future, live data feeds, using a standardised format that captures the same core fields regardless of source (title, company, location, salary, job type, working arrangement, closing date, and the original application link).
Whichever route a listing takes, it passes through the same review gate before it goes live. Full detail on that review process — what we check, what we reject, and how we verify accuracy — is on our dedicated Job Verification & Methodology page. In short: no working application link, no publish. No closing date, no publish. Any sign of an application fee or obvious scam pattern, no publish, and we flag it for further checking.
Minimum standards for every listing
We won’t publish a job listing unless it has:
- A real job title that describes an actual position (not a vague placeholder like “Great Opportunity!!”)
- A company name — we don’t publish anonymous listings from unnamed “confidential clients,” because that pattern is disproportionately associated with low-quality recruitment spam
- A working link to the employer’s genuine application process
- A specific closing date, so the listing can be correctly marked active or expired
- A location, or an explicit remote/UK-wide designation
Salary information is included whenever the employer provides it. When they don’t, we say so plainly (“Salary not specified”) rather than guessing or padding the listing with a vague range designed to look more complete than it is.
How blog content is researched and written
Every article on this site’s blog starts from a real question we’ve either been asked directly through our contact form or observed people searching for repeatedly — things like how UK CV conventions differ from other countries, what to actually expect from a competency-based interview, or how salary bands genuinely vary by region rather than by national headline averages.
Articles are written by our editorial team with direct experience of the UK jobs market — reviewing listings, talking to employers who post with us, and tracking the kinds of questions job seekers raise. Where we reference general patterns (typical interview formats, common CV mistakes, how notice periods usually work), we’re drawing on that accumulated, practical experience rather than repeating generic advice found elsewhere. Where a claim depends on official data — the National Minimum Wage rate, statutory redundancy entitlements, right-to-work rules — we link to the relevant government source (GOV.UK, HMRC, ACAS) rather than restating a number from memory that could go stale.
We deliberately avoid a few things that are common in low-quality career content: recycled listicles with no original insight, advice copied nearly verbatim from other sites with the nouns swapped out, and generic filler written to hit a word count rather than answer the question a reader actually came with. If an article doesn’t teach you something you didn’t already know, or doesn’t help you take a concrete next step, we don’t think it’s earned its place on the site.
Author identity and expertise
Every blog post carries a named author byline with a short bio, visible at the bottom of the article. We think anonymous “Staff Writer” bylines make it harder for you to judge whether the advice is coming from someone who actually understands the UK jobs market, so we avoid them. If you want to see what else a particular author has written, their byline links to their full article archive.
How we keep content current
Job market advice goes stale in ways that are easy to miss — salary figures shift, government thresholds change annually, hiring practices evolve. We review older articles periodically and update them when the underlying facts have moved, rather than leaving outdated numbers live indefinitely. Every article displays both its original publish date and its last-updated date, so you can judge for yourself how current the information is. If you spot something that looks out of date, our Corrections Policy explains how to flag it.
Editorial independence from advertising
This site carries display advertising, including Google AdSense, in clearly marked slots that are visually separated from both job listings and blog content. No advertiser has ever influenced, and will never influence, which jobs we publish, how we rank them, what topics we cover on the blog, or what we say in an article. If we run affiliate links in future — for instance, linking to a specific CV-writing service or online course — that will be disclosed directly on the page it appears on and summarised on our Affiliate Disclosure page. Full detail on how advertising is placed and labelled is on our Advertising Policy page.
What we do when we get something wrong
We will get things wrong sometimes — a listing with an inaccurate salary because the employer updated it after we published, an article that states a figure that’s since changed, a broken link. When that happens, we correct it and note the correction where it’s material (for instance, a factual correction to an article will update the “last updated” date; a significant change will be noted directly in the text). We don’t quietly edit and pretend nothing happened. See our Corrections Policy for exactly how to report an issue and what you can expect once you do.
What “useful” means to us
Every editorial decision on this site — what to publish, what to reject, what to write about — gets filtered through one practical question: does this genuinely help someone who’s looking for a job in the UK right now? A listing that looks impressive but leads to a dead application link fails that test. An article that’s technically accurate but so generic it could apply to any country’s job market fails that test too. We’d rather publish fewer, better things than pad the site out with content that exists mainly to rank for a keyword.
How we handle topics where genuine expert opinion differs
Career advice isn’t always a matter of pure fact — plenty of genuinely useful guidance involves judgement calls where reasonable, experienced people can land in different places. CV length is a good example: most UK guidance converges on two pages as a strong default, but there are legitimate, well-reasoned exceptions for specific seniority levels and industries. Where our content touches on a genuinely contested area of practice like this, we aim to state our actual recommendation clearly (because vague, hedge-everything advice isn’t useful either) while being honest that it’s a judgement call rather than an objective fact, and noting the situations where a different approach might serve you better.
How editorial content and the job listings side of the site inform each other
Our editorial team works closely enough with the job listings side of the site that blog content is genuinely informed by patterns we observe in real vacancies — which skills employers are actually asking for, how job types and working arrangements are trending, what kind of detail employers do and don’t typically include in a posting. This is part of why our advice content aims to feel grounded in the current UK market rather than generic — it’s written by people who spend real time looking at live job listings, not solely researching the topic from published third-party sources.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do you accept paid or sponsored blog posts?
We do not accept paid guest posts or sponsored articles disguised as editorial content on our blog. Any commercial content is clearly labelled as advertising and kept visually and structurally separate from our editorial articles.
Who decides which jobs get published?
Our editorial team reviews every listing — whether submitted directly by an employer, added manually, or imported in bulk — against the same minimum standards before it goes live. There’s no separate “premium” tier that bypasses review.
How often do you update older blog articles?
We review articles periodically, particularly ones covering figures that change over time (salary data, statutory rates, government thresholds), and update them when the facts have moved. The publish and last-updated dates on each article reflect this.
Can I request that an article cover a specific topic?
Yes — use our Contact page to suggest a topic. We can’t guarantee we’ll cover every suggestion, but genuinely common questions from UK job seekers are exactly what we’re looking to write about.
Does advertising affect which jobs appear higher in search results?
No. Job listing order is determined by relevance to your search and filter criteria and by posting recency, not by any commercial arrangement. See our Advertising Policy for full detail on how ads are kept separate from listings.