Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • Mortgage Reduction Novice
    • By Mortgage Reduction Novice 8th Jun 17, 8:01 PM
    • 1,738Posts
    • 9,330Thanks
    Mortgage Reduction Novice
    Interview for new position with a twist...
    • #1
    • 8th Jun 17, 8:01 PM
    Interview for new position with a twist... 8th Jun 17 at 8:01 PM
    Two internal candidates were interviewed for a new role within their department. Both were told to apply by the head of department and interviewed by HoD and a HR representative.

    Candidate 1 was offered the position, accepted and went on maternity leave 2 days after.

    Candidate 2 was offered the maternity leave cover position at the same time as an offer was made to candidate 1.

    Your thoughts please...
    MFW: Nov 2008 £156k, Jun 2015 £129k, Jun 2017 £114k.
Page 1
    • PasturesNew
    • By PasturesNew 8th Jun 17, 8:08 PM
    • 58,779 Posts
    • 341,085 Thanks
    PasturesNew
    • #2
    • 8th Jun 17, 8:08 PM
    • #2
    • 8th Jun 17, 8:08 PM
    Bit cheeky.

    If I wanted the job I'd suck it up and hope she didn't come back.

    If I was pee'd off I'd take the job (out of spite) and actively look for a new one, thus dumping the firm in the doo doo when they thought they'd been the smart ones only to discover the "pushover" handing their notice in at an inconvenient time.
    • Takeaway_Addict
    • By Takeaway_Addict 8th Jun 17, 8:43 PM
    • 5,541 Posts
    • 6,303 Thanks
    Takeaway_Addict
    • #3
    • 8th Jun 17, 8:43 PM
    • #3
    • 8th Jun 17, 8:43 PM
    Two internal candidates were interviewed for a new role within their department. Both were told to apply by the head of department and interviewed by HoD and a HR representative.

    Candidate 1 was offered the position, accepted and went on maternity leave 2 days after.

    Candidate 2 was offered the maternity leave cover position at the same time as an offer was made to candidate 1.

    Your thoughts please...
    Originally posted by Mortgage Reduction Novice
    My thoughts were the company quite rightly ignored the fact candidate one was pregnant and allowed her to be promoted.

    Candidate two has a great opportunity togain the experience needed and presuming Candidate 1 is returning full time (which she may not) candidate two at about 7/8 months should look at opportunities to work elsewhere having gained some great experience.
    Don't trust a forum for advice. Get proper paid advice. Any advice given should always be checked
    • Kynthia
    • By Kynthia 8th Jun 17, 8:52 PM
    • 4,897 Posts
    • 6,884 Thanks
    Kynthia
    • #4
    • 8th Jun 17, 8:52 PM
    • #4
    • 8th Jun 17, 8:52 PM
    My thoughts are that the company picked the best person for the job, correctly not factoring in the fact one candidate was pregnant in their decision. Clearly the second candidate has potential if they were asked to apply, so is being given the opportunity to get some relevant experience to help them do better next time. It's up to them whether they take the opportunity or not.

    Why, what are your thoughts?
    Don't listen to me, I'm no expert!
    • ohreally
    • By ohreally 8th Jun 17, 8:52 PM
    • 6,056 Posts
    • 4,607 Thanks
    ohreally
    • #5
    • 8th Jun 17, 8:52 PM
    • #5
    • 8th Jun 17, 8:52 PM
    I was in a similar position years ago, didn't get the post but the employer then asked me to take the role on an acting basis. I agreed but it stuck in my craw.

    I think if the same situation arose today I would politely decline their offer and may cast an eye out for a move.
    • TELLIT01
    • By TELLIT01 8th Jun 17, 8:59 PM
    • 3,548 Posts
    • 3,624 Thanks
    TELLIT01
    • #6
    • 8th Jun 17, 8:59 PM
    • #6
    • 8th Jun 17, 8:59 PM
    I can certainly understand the OPs apparent displeasure at the situation. They were apparently only thought to be second best for the job, but good enough to do the work when the other applicant left within days. Hopefully the OP is on the same money that the original person was on.
    One thing to be cautious about is a situation I have come across on more than one occasion. Staff member provides temporary cover for absence, 'temporary' is several month, and they are expected to do the entire job. Person being covered for doesn't return and the job is then advertised. Person covering the job is then told they don't have the required qualifications to be appointed to the role! That really is taking the ****.
    • lincroft1710
    • By lincroft1710 9th Jun 17, 3:30 PM
    • 9,289 Posts
    • 7,217 Thanks
    lincroft1710
    • #7
    • 9th Jun 17, 3:30 PM
    • #7
    • 9th Jun 17, 3:30 PM
    Another scenario I witnessed many years ago, "A" was often offered temporary promotions which he always took until one day he refused because he believed he was being taken advantage of (he did receive the pay of the higher grade whilst on temp promotion). Temp promotion was therefore offered to and accepted by "B".

    A couple of months after "B"'s stint ended, a permanent promotion vacancy arose. It was offered to and accepted by "B".
    • theoretica
    • By theoretica 9th Jun 17, 7:49 PM
    • 4,740 Posts
    • 5,967 Thanks
    theoretica
    • #8
    • 9th Jun 17, 7:49 PM
    • #8
    • 9th Jun 17, 7:49 PM
    Something very similar happened in my work recently, though not all internal candidates. One lady was offered the role but is going off on maternity leave and the second candidate is covering the maternity leave. Everyone I have spoken to is pleased. It is very common when interviewing that several candidates could do the job - the best gets it. In this case the second candidate also gets an opportunity.

    Not offering the role to the best candidate because she was pregnant would be illegal discrimination. Readvertising the maternity cover without offering it to the second candidate seems like a waste of time.
    But a banker, engaged at enormous expense,
    Had the whole of their cash in his care.
    Lewis Carroll
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,642Posts Today

8,067Users online

Martin's Twitter