told job was given to someone more qualified then readvertised.

jdx

terra_ferma wrote: »

Oh dear… one is away for a couple of days and look at what happens…

No, I don’t work in HR. Never said that.

I am appalled by the level of ignorance of the various Anti-discrimination Laws and how they apply to recruitment, including the fact that claims can be brought to Employment Tribunals. (and even more by the arrogance of rubbishing what I say without bothering to back anything up with evidence! :mad:).

My comments are not about the validity of the reasons for not giving someone a job, or the right of an employer to reject someone whose attitude does not fit with the rest of the team (as I said before I have done the same). They are simply about the fact that if an applicant feels that they have been discriminated against they can bring a claim (even if you know you have legitimate reasons for not giving them the job).
I'm also not saying this is right or wrong, just that it's the law and it can cost money if it's not taken into account during recruitment.
Regardless the outcome a claim is very expensive to defend, and the employer will need good evidence to win. I reiterate that ‘does not fit in, don’t know why’ is not going to help you win the case!


The basics:
http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=746
“The employer has the legal responsibility to ensure that no unlawful discrimination occurs in the recruitment and selection process on the grounds of sex, race, disability, age, sexual orientation, and religion or belief. Equality of opportunity is an integral part of the recruitment and selection process, and to this end employers may offer training and encouragement to any under-represented groups.”


Examples of Employment Tribunal cases, principally to show that disgruntled unsuccessful applicants can bring claims (anything you wish to say Bendix?:rolleyes:).

http://www.eurolinkage.org/AgeConcern/Guidance-for-advisers-job-applicant-wins-age-discrimination-claim.asp
“A recent case in the Northern Ireland Industrial Tribunal shows how a job applicant can successfully claim age discrimination‚ using the reversal of the burden of proof under the regulations. Northern Ireland has its own age regulations‚ but they are almost identical to the regulations in force in England‚ Wales and Scotland….”
“..The employer argued that the decision to reject Mr McCoy had not been affected by his age‚ but that the candidates who had been successful had greater ‘enthusiasm and dynamism’. This was not enough to convince the tribunal‚ which found that the decision not to appoint Mr McCoy amounted to unlawful age discrimination.”

http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2006/09/22/37337/rejected-white-police-applicant-wins-damages-in-race-discrimination.html
“Matt Powell, an IT professional, won £2,500 after he found out he was one of 108 applicants told they had been “randomly de-selected” from the recruitment process by Gloucestershire police…..”
It later emerged that nearly two-thirds of white men who applied to join the constabulary in the recruitment drive were turned down, whereas every ethnic minority candidate was invited for an assessment.
“…Clive Toomer, chairman of the tribunal, awarded Powell the money for ‘injury to feelings’ saying he was entitled to feel angry and distressed at the way he was treated.”

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2009/405.html
(Very recent. Appeal, not decided yet as far as I know)

http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=409516&c=1
“A male academic has won a sex discrimination case against the University of Surrey.
An employment tribunal said the university had rejected psychologist David Gilbert for a lecturing job because he had brought a sex discrimination claim against a previous employer. Surrey has agreed to pay him £18,000 in compensation….”
“…..The pair said that Dr Gilbert had performed poorly at interview and that Professor Ogden had found him "arrogant and annoying". But the tribunal said Professor Ogden could provide no evidence of her assertion. It also drew an "adverse inference" from the fact that the two professors did not take notes during the interview…”

http://www.personneltoday.com/articles/2006/08/08/36733/corus-hotels-plc-v-woodward-eat-17-march-2006.html
(Damages awarded because sexist questions were asked at the interview)

If anyone else has evidence to back up what they wrote, I would (genuinely) welcome it and learn from it (otherwise I’m not going to respond and get into a tit-for-tat, sorry I have no time for that).

LOL :rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:
:T What a come back terra, well done and thanks for the info.

terra_ferma

I can see people who were very vocal are now keeping quiet....

speedbird1973

1) All the cases (apart from the hotel/single mum one) are very clear cases of discrimination. No one is arguing that you can discriminate outside the law! We're arguing that "you don't fit" is a legitamate reason to not select someone for a job

2) An employment tribunal isn't legally binding - if they want a binding judgement they go to the county court!

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/reports/article6437702.ece

Nice you took a few hours to answer a question - next time answer the correct quiestion and you'll be sorted!

speedbird1973

terra_ferma wrote: »

The fact that this is all you could come up with proves my point.

BTW I made it very clear what question I was answering and what I was NOT answering.
And no, it did not take me a few hours to find this stuff, just a simple google search.

Then you missed the point! no one is saying discrimination is ok or legal! the cases you have dug up have all been very clear cut, and not relevant to the specific case here.

The prospective employers where all wrong, and even then failed to cover themselves. Completely different to me saying "you won't fit into my team" no thanks.

When I have lunch I'll get more case studies than you.. then I'll obviously be correct as that seems to be your criteria - I think your lack of response is due to the weekend and some of us having "lives"!

Pete111

Used to do quite a lot of interviewing.

Now, thank goodness, soomeone in my team looks after that. However I have no issue with eliminating a candidate on the grounds of 'fit' nor telling them (dressed up a touch perhaps) that this was a key reason for them not getting the job. It's vital in most businesses that the right person (not just with the right skills) gets a given role.

I have no problem with giving feedback and can fully understand why candidates wish to receive this (though it can be a hassle) As regards discrimination however, quite frankly even the most rascist, sexist and ageist manager can usually think of something other than - 'it was mostly because you are an ancient Jamacian bird' - if they need to. Only absolute idiots would get tripped up by this. If they do, it's usually be saying something grossly innapropriate in the interview itself (and even then nothing usually comes of it..)

Love the tie story Bendix. I once had a candidate (good experience on paper, middle mgt, in his early 40's etc) who,when asked to give examples of specific work experiences, referred back in answer to 3 separate questions to a job he had held when aged 16 at Mcdonalds during the job interview. He didn't get it.

Then there was the guy who was sick in the bin halfway through...great days.

tiger

thanks guys.reapplied for the job,interview after christmas.
will try to get the job and if successfully accept ther job verbally (not sign contact),and just a day before start day call them and tell them to get lost ,what do u think???????????

Takoda

Sometimes someone is qualified for a job but they might not fit in with the people working there already.

jdturk

why not take it and get paid for doing a job and keep looking for a better job?

barbara_anne

tiger wrote: »

thanks guys.reapplied for the job,interview after christmas.
will try to get the job and if successfully accept ther job verbally (not sign contact),and just a day before start day call them and tell them to get lost ,what do u think???????????

I think that's pathetic, sorry. Surely you have better things to do with your time?!