Any rights

joeypesci

Privacy Reasons.

tomtontom

If you were a contractor and not an employee, you have no rights in the given situation.

I wouldn't say "that's crappy interviews for you", I'd look at it more as poor preparation for the interview. You should always have strong examples for relevant competencies prepared in advance - something to learn from for next time.

joeypesci

tomtontom wrote: »

If you were a contractor and not an employee, you have no rights in the given situation.

I wouldn't say "that's crappy interviews for you", I'd look at it more as poor preparation for the interview. You should always have strong examples for relevant competencies prepared in advance - something to learn from for next time.

Maybe true but I'd also say "We'll ignore that the question wasn't answered that well, we'll take into account the 5 years of clear evidence of good customer service into account instead. That will override the question".

Any sensible company would. But maybe I'm just biased

xapprenticex

joeypesci wrote: »

Maybe true but I'd also say "We'll ignore that the question wasn't answered that well, we'll take into account the 5 years of clear evidence of good customer service into account instead. That will override the question".

Any sensible company would. But maybe I'm just biased

:money:

.......

joeypesci

I'll submit a Subject Access Request me thinks.

Gavin83

joeypesci wrote: »

I'll submit a Subject Access Request me thinks.

What for? It won't tell you much as you won't be able to view the results of the other interviewees anyway.

The simple fact of the matter is as a contractor you have no rights although I expect you knew this. That's the negative side of being a contractor that you exchange for a great salary compared to your colleagues. However I don't actually think this is what your disputing so I'll move on.

Council interviews are competency based and the position offered purely on the results on the interview. They don't take into account previous employment record, manager opinions or even previous conduct. In theory at least if a terrible employee interviews well and a great employee interviews badly the terrible employee will get the job. Regardless of if you think this is the right way of doing things or fair it's the way it's done in councils across the country. You'll have little luck appealing this procedure. In my experience the rules can be bent if they want someone in particular but they clearly didn't want you in this role for whatever reason and you can't really challenge the decision based on them not breaking the rules. I'd imagine they do it this way purely to avoid any such claims of unfairness in the future.

I'm also not surprised there was a customer services based question in there either as that is generally a fairly big component of IT and the council are normally pretty hot on this. Roughly what was the question out of interest?

I'll make a prediction of what happened here. You thought you'd walk the interview and therefore didn't bother to prepare or consider what they may ask. I don't really blame you and you certainly aren't the first to do this. I've seen plenty of people who really should have been given a job not get it because they were beaten in the interview by someone who had prepared better. You should always prepare for this with the same attitude as applying with a company who know nothing at all about you.

So while I feel sorry for you I feel your fighting a losing battle here. Move on and find another role.

Undervalued

joeypesci wrote: »

This is difficult to write to make this not obvious who I'm writing about.

I've worked as a contractor for a local council up north for 5 years. The local IT ended up being moved over to working for the local council they originally were hired by, to so called company within 4 councils. This company however had no hiring authority so that hiring authority became one of the councils of the 4. That council insists they are not the company, yet appear to have all the control over that company, ignoring their other 3 partners (the fault of those CEs I guess).

This happened about 3 years ago I think. While contracting however, I've spent roughly 3-4 years still actually contracting for the local council but in the IT department of this "Council Company". Then the local council decided they had no money to continue the contract so the "Council Company" took it over. All fine.

Recently however the "Council Company" had a restructure, done !!!! poorly. They had to use the HR department of the hiring council who have done a !!!! poor job and (although I have no evidence) may have broken several procedures. A few people have been moved to roles unsuited for them that they aren't qualified for but to keep a job just accepted it. All contractors (including me) were told we are now at an end and given a fix date our contracts end. So after 5 years of hard work I'm being told "see ya" (which I understand is the life of a contractor).

However, the role for my job was available to apply for so I applied. The "hiring council" is no where near the local council I've worked for, for 5 years. I've never had any complaints about me and my customer service record has always been good. I'm told by local staff I'm liked and that my work is good.

However, in the interview by the hiring council I got asked a customer service question. It appears I didn't answer it correctly. So they've ignore ALL my experience of 5 years, ALL my good customer service experience of 5 years & recommendations from local council staff and told me "Sorry, we've giving the role to someone else because you didn't answer that one question as well as the other candidate". The other candidate who is an external person with no visible evidence of good customer service. Yet they have, on record, my good customer service for 5 years. Just because this other candidate answered the question better.

I'm pretty sure everyone will say "tough, that's crappy interviews for you. Move on to a company that actually values you instead of treats you as poorly as that". But, just curious if I have any rights after 5 years in the same role with no marks on my record and about 5 sick days off in total in 5 years.

Sorry but unless they have discriminated on one of the few grounds prohibited by law (and nothing in your post suggests they have) they can appoint who they please.

tomtontom

joeypesci wrote: »

I'll submit a Subject Access Request me thinks.

Because they're really going to re engage you after you do that!

FBaby

The other candidate who is an external person with no visible evidence of good customer service

When you mean 'external', do you mean private sector? Because there are some times arrangements between government agencies where 'at risk' staff get priority over non governmental agencies. This is mainly to save tax payers money in paying out redundancy packages. This can happen between LA and the NHS for instance.

joeypesci

I can't say if they were private sector just know they are external.

Latazza

You have no case here as said and no doubt had many a opportunity to apply for a role within the last 5 years. Also always good to get fresh blood into teams especially in LA.