tribal_princess said:
'on hold' generally means they have given it to someone else because agencies are shit like that, it's one of their buzzwords.
Erm, not necessarily. Agencies are shit because they also can be quite unscrupulous and what they sometimes do is advertise jobs that they don't have on their books.
What they do is see a job advertised by a random company in the recruitment pages of newspapers, and then they take it upon themselves to advertise the job, and when they get people coming in to register or people who have already registered, the agency puts them forward for the job.
However, many companies have a policy whereby they don't accept such applications made by agencies putting forward candidates, because the companies concerned don't want to pay the agency's recruitment commission, which can amount to thousands of pounds. Why pay thousands of pounds to an agency, when you've had a mountain of direct applications and can take your pick from a wide range of suitably qualified and experienced candidates?
Riot Sky, I *may* be wrong, but reading between the lines, I get the feeling that perhaps a recruitment consultant at your agency has seen a job advertised in/with the Guardian, they've put you forward for it, and been knocked back, by the Guardian saying, sorry, we don't welcome random approaches from agencies, we recruit direct.
I didn't know you'd been put forward by an agency when you first mentioned this, I reckon it's probably worth contacting the Guardian directly and finding out from them whether the post is 'on hold', or whether you're just being strung along by an agency that's just sitting back, reading the recruitment pages and putting you forward for random jobs that they see advertised without actually having any instructions from that 'client' because that company is in fact not their client.