Unfair interview process????

carlos39

Hi just wondering if anyone can offer any advise as to weather i can take this further or if i have any ground for grievance ill try to keep short.
Background info:
I have applied for an internal promotion in a large organisation I am aware 8 others applied.  The criteria specified on the job application that all answers to questions must be no more than 500 words and be submitted by deadline.  I submitted application within the deadline and from feedback from internal markers it was found that 7 of the applicants had gone over the specified word count and so the company had agreed they would apply a 10% increase this allowed all but 3 applicants to be marked (other 3 people were over the 10%). My application sadly was unsuccessful and my feedback was given in detail I had only failed on 1 question (the mark you needed was a 3 I had scored a 2) i failed to show detail using a specific word and an extra sentence would have been sufficient to show my understanding and receive the mark needed. Although disappointed i accepted this outcome. 
My problem has come about because one of the unmarked applicants complained about the decision of the 10% rule and now it has been decided by the company that the rule will be 550 words per question this allowed all applicants to be marked, and all applicants bar me have been successful in there application to receive an interview.  I feel that the goal posts as such have been moved during the process and if i were allowed to add in the sentence needed within the new word count I would also be successful in my application in theory 5 of the applicants have been given an extra 200 words above me to sell themselves.  I have asked for a re submission which has been unsuccessful and so i was wondering if this has any legs for me to take it further, my preferred outcome would be everyone has to resubmit the application for remarking within the 500 words to keep it a fair process.  Any help/thoughts would be appreciated.   
  

General_Grant

I hate to be brutal but this is for a promotion in an organisation where you therefore are known.  They have moved the criteria to allow others to be considered more closely but not you.  I think that would tell me that I was not going to get that promotion at this time or they would have moved a little.

carlos39

Thank you for reply yes i totally agree the criteria was changed to allow certain people through the process however with out trying to disclose organisation process is for more than one job in various locations (10 min posts) i am currently already doing the job as a temporary post as are the others its to make the position permanent, my query is should say this is unfair as now with the new ruling i am only one not progressing.

General_Grant

If you are asking whether there is anything unfair in the legal sense that you could use to take to an Employment Tribunal then, unless they have a written organisation policy which said they could not change application criteria and this formed part of your contract of employment, then no, it is not unfair.
However, in the normal, everyday sense, it doesn't seem fair.

carlos39

thank you wanted to keep it informal at the moment other opportunities may arise just trying to see if its worth the pressure at the moment on the relevant department to reconsider.  

Undervalued

The interview process doesn't have to be "fair" it only has to be lawful!
If they treated a particular gender differently or only allowed Catholics (say) to exceed the 500 words then that would be unlawful! Nothing in what you have posted suggests discrimination on any of the handful of legally protected characteristics. Outside of that, varying the "rules" or other criteria for favoured candidates is perfectly lawful.

Lomast

My maths must be failing me today but surely 500+10% and 550 are both the same

carlos39

See your point there originally it was if within the 10% you would have application read so 550 or less would be looked at, some applicants word count was more than this and so they were still not accepted however this was changed again to the first 550 words would be accepted only as part of the application anything after this would be disregarded. 

Marvel1

I think they want a certain someone for the position but have to make it "fair" in advertising it.

I have seen the same in my place, post comes up, I want to, but depending on how advertised and how to apply, I don't bother as i don't wish to waste a few evenings of my time writing it out when I have an idea who will get it and usually right.

Smodlet

Carlos 39, please take this in the spirit in which it is intended:  Perhaps your word count went over unnecessarily as you have occasionally used two words which are actually one word in English in this thread; perhaps English is not your first language, I don't know.  Perhaps paying a little more attention to your written work might stand you in good stead.  There are always ways to say the same thing in fewer words; always.  Just re-read and re-write as many times as you have to.

As for complaining about unfairness, your employer will give this job to whomsoever they please.  If they had to change the criterion to 1000 words to allow the person they want to "qualify", they would do so.  Life is not fair.  I suggest you take this rejection, if that is what it is, in good spirit and resolve to do better next time.  Good luck.

LilElvis

Jsacker said:

Just to point out that, especially given you didn't squeeze it into the original 500 word count, having knowledge of a 10% buffer prior to submission was no guarantee that you would have included the extra sentence to get the mark.
 

My reading of the OP is that he was one of the 2 original applicants whose submissions were within the original word count and that he feels disadvantaged because he wasn't allowed to resubmit, with the additional 200 words the others had, to better sell himself.