Constructive Dismissal

stator

marliepanda wrote: »

We get a lot of people on here complaining they wasted time and energy on interviews they had no chance of getting.

Now you’re saying companies should just waste everyone’s time even when they have no hope of the job so there’s no hard feelings...

I’d rather someone be straight with me than string me along.

Well, they weren't straight, if you read the OP it seems they lied a few times.

But this was an internal candidate we are talking about. It's not as if someone is travelling across the country, spending money on travel tickets and doing loads of research into a company they already work for!

marliepanda

stator wrote: »

Well, they weren't straight, if you read the OP it seems they lied a few times.

But this was an internal candidate we are talking about. It's not as if someone is travelling across the country, spending money on travel tickets and doing loads of research into a company they already work for!

I don’t see any lies. Just misplaced hope. I’m sure the company would have liked the OP to take it on but clearly the two month trial wasn’t successful

sangie595

marliepanda wrote: »

I don’t see any lies. Just misplaced hope. I’m sure the company would have liked the OP to take it on but clearly the two month trial wasn’t successful

I'd agree. It might have been kinder to tell them that before any interviews, but they didn't. That's what leads me to think there was an element of the employer thinking they'd appoint the OP if they had no other choice. To be honest, that's seldom a good strategy. Things can go wrong very quickly, and it all ends in tears. People should appoint when they are convinced they have the right person - even that is a dodgy call! If you aren't convinced, then it's lunacy appointing. But I see employers appointing poorly so often, and in the end it causes heartache for everyone.

Ozzuk

I've interviewed in scenarios where I'm pretty certain who is getting the job (but I don't tell them that) but sometimes you get a candidate that just blows the others out of the water.

Now it can sometimes be that they are just really good at interviews, but if you structure your interviews properly you can limit that factor.

So I wouldn't take this as completely negative, maybe this candidate it just better qualified than you. You are after all learning the role, I assume you'd need to be backfilled so maybe they saw a candidate that could slot in with less impact than moving you up and backfilling. Sucks, but nothing wrong in that.

Ask them for in depth feedback, as an internal candidate they should be willing to do that, phrase it in a positive way, ask them and your boss what you need to do and how they can support you to secure such a role in the future.

stator

marliepanda wrote: »

I don’t see any lies. Just misplaced hope. I’m sure the company would have liked the OP to take it on but clearly the two month trial wasn’t successful

They told him he was getting a face to face interview. He didn't.

jobbingmusician

OP, I would be circumspect and not do anything for a while. If it really rankles, a grievance against whoever told you you would be interviewed, as I agree that they should have gone ahead with this as part of your development.


But it *could* be that they have just appointed someone who is good at interviews. If this person falls flat on their face once they start doing the job, the employer still has you in the wings. As long as you haven't burnt bridges in the mean time......