Built from the sharp end of the job market.

VouchMe began with a simple problem. I was looking for work in a market where the rules had changed.

There was still an idea, even as late as the 1990s, that you could get a degree, get a job at a multinational — boring perhaps, but safe — and trust that there would always be a place for honest, hard-working people.

By the end of COVID, that social contract was beginning to disintegrate. Restructures had become normalised. The expectation of endless quarterly growth, championed by consultancies and private equity, repeated by Boards, CEOs and executive teams, flowed down through organisations and created a more volatile working dynamic.

For CFOs and executive teams, budgets were no longer static annual plans. EBITDA, margin and cost targets were monitored throughout the year, and there was increasingly little tolerance for missed forecasts. Transparency was expected, underperformance exposed early. Variance demanded explanation. And I was one of those demanding it. The man on tools, on the ground — mouthpiece for others up the chain above my pay grade. Able to disseminate complex ideas into practical takeaways for staff at all levels. Stuff you brag about on your CV.

What I've learned over the years from a programme view is that often the real cause sits outside the control of staff: softer market demand, higher capital costs, reduced consumer confidence, slower sales cycles, procurement freezes, political uncertainty, global shocks, or simply customers spending less. Those insights are often obfuscated and it's my job to spend time discovering and presenting hidden data as clean facts, to decision makers at the Exec and Board level, and even sometimes at a ministerial level. It's something I took a lot of pride in. I was bloody good at it. I think I still am, just a bit jaded and worn out from it all.

Because the problem now is that even when the cause is external, the solution is still often internal. If the numbers no longer work, the fastest lever is headcount. But because the staff themselves have not necessarily underperformed, the cuts cannot always be framed honestly as poor performance. So other language is found: restructuring, right-sizing, operational efficiency, digital transformation, AI adoption, simplification, strategic realignment, future-proofing.

Teams are being reshaped more often. Tenures shorter. The old employment social contract — the sense that work created a durable relationship between employer and employee — is written on single ply toilet paper, it's that thin.

At the same time, the hiring process is more demanding. Recruiters and employers need confidence. That makes sense. But increasingly, detailed reference checks are being requested earlier in the process, sometimes before a candidate has even been meaningfully considered for a role.

And that's where I found myself in September 2025: no contract rollover after completing another transformation programme — my most successful yet — condensing a complex two-year programme into one, while limiting the number of direct staff cuts compared with previous programmes. A roaring success by the measures organisations use for this kind of work.

The market was cooked and jobs had dried up. Everyone could feel the climate had changed. Many flocked to Australia, while those of us who needed to stick it out began pumping out application after application, in desperation.

But every application that led to an interview and then, if you were lucky enough to receive a reference request, meant going back to people who had already been generous with their time. Some were senior leaders, executives, or CEOs. They had demanding roles, full calendars, and real responsibilities.

A thoughtful reference can take 30 minutes, an hour, or more once you count the interruption, scheduling, conversation, follow-up, and mental load. And unlike almost everything else in the hiring process, that labour is usually unpaid.

Recruiters are paid. Hiring platforms are paid. Employers are resourced. Screening systems are funded.

I walked out of a recruiter's office after an hour-long interview, congratulated for being qualified enough to be represented by them, but also told I would need to hand over two references from two trusted ex-managers in the process — without even having an interview lined up.

I was going to have to wait on the sidelines until a tolerable amount of time had passed before I could pester them again. How long was that? A month? Two?

It is incredibly embarrassing being a 45-year-old man, getting rejected job after job, and then going hat-in-hand to former managers asking them to do me a solid, while thinking: they must imagine me to be some kind of loser, not being able to find work three months, six months, twelve months in.

Because that is certainly how I am feeling as I approach an anniversary of unemployment in September 2026.