No interview but meet criteria for job

Alz1986

Deleted_User said:

As long as you weren't rejected as the result of a protected characteristic, they could decline you because of your haircut.

This is false, and could lead to an employer being sued. Unless your haircut is potentially offensive, but that would apply to your clothes too and also the words that come out your mouth.

MarkN88 said:

There’s no law that states you have to be offered an interview because you met all the criteria. Loads could apply and everyone could meet the criteria, they can’t interview everyone. 

Correct. Interview panels very rarely interview more than 6 people. Though I have seen some doing 12.

wolfbane9 said:

I'm just surprised as it feels like I've effectively I've been blacklisted from that team because i couldn't take an old post up? Doesn't seem at all right as I haven't done anything wrong but lose out on good opportunities because of it? 

How would I know they'd change the length of contract after interview? That wasn't my fault, simply them wanting to reduce it to match maternity leave, which wasn't advertised? If they changed the salary after offering it I'm sure they'd be in the wrong. 

Why don't you ask them without sounding pushy or aggresive? They may say we dont provide feedback on applications. But explain early that you thought you had met the criteria. But again, they could just say they have plenty of strong candidates. Might be worth going through HR for the feedback, if HR staff are competent and have robust practices in place, they'll pick up any dodgy-shortlisting and push for your interview.

Marvel1

They probably had someone lined up when advertised.

Comms69

Alz1986 said:

Deleted_User said:

As long as you weren't rejected as the result of a protected characteristic, they could decline you because of your haircut.

This is false, and could lead to an employer being sued. Unless your haircut is potentially offensive, but that would apply to your clothes too and also the words that come out your mouth.

MarkN88 said:

There’s no law that states you have to be offered an interview because you met all the criteria. Loads could apply and everyone could meet the criteria, they can’t interview everyone. 

Correct. Interview panels very rarely interview more than 6 people. Though I have seen some doing 12.

wolfbane9 said:

I'm just surprised as it feels like I've effectively I've been blacklisted from that team because i couldn't take an old post up? Doesn't seem at all right as I haven't done anything wrong but lose out on good opportunities because of it? 

How would I know they'd change the length of contract after interview? That wasn't my fault, simply them wanting to reduce it to match maternity leave, which wasn't advertised? If they changed the salary after offering it I'm sure they'd be in the wrong. 

Why don't you ask them without sounding pushy or aggresive? They may say we dont provide feedback on applications. But explain early that you thought you had met the criteria. But again, they could just say they have plenty of strong candidates. Might be worth going through HR for the feedback, if HR staff are competent and have robust practices in place, they'll pick up any dodgy-shortlisting and push for your interview.

Sued for what?...

Brynsam

Comms69 said:

Alz1986 said:

Deleted_User said:

As long as you weren't rejected as the result of a protected characteristic, they could decline you because of your haircut.

This is false, and could lead to an employer being sued. Unless your haircut is potentially offensive, but that would apply to your clothes too and also the words that come out your mouth.

MarkN88 said:

There’s no law that states you have to be offered an interview because you met all the criteria. Loads could apply and everyone could meet the criteria, they can’t interview everyone. 

Correct. Interview panels very rarely interview more than 6 people. Though I have seen some doing 12.

wolfbane9 said:

I'm just surprised as it feels like I've effectively I've been blacklisted from that team because i couldn't take an old post up? Doesn't seem at all right as I haven't done anything wrong but lose out on good opportunities because of it? 

How would I know they'd change the length of contract after interview? That wasn't my fault, simply them wanting to reduce it to match maternity leave, which wasn't advertised? If they changed the salary after offering it I'm sure they'd be in the wrong. 

Why don't you ask them without sounding pushy or aggresive? They may say we dont provide feedback on applications. But explain early that you thought you had met the criteria. But again, they could just say they have plenty of strong candidates. Might be worth going through HR for the feedback, if HR staff are competent and have robust practices in place, they'll pick up any dodgy-shortlisting and push for your interview.

Sued for what?...

Fringe discrimination?

Alz1986

The person with the haircut can take this down different paths - bullying, harrasment, loss of earnings.

If you refuse to employ someone because you did not like their haircut, you would need to be able to explain/ justify why that haircut is against the culture of your organisation. Otherwise, the manager's organisation have subjected an individual to abuse.

You would have to be very daft manager to do such a thing without having an ethical reason for it.

Savvy_Sue

Alz1986 said:

You would have to be very daft manager to do such a thing without having an ethical reason for it.

No, you'd have to be a very daft manager to give any indication that the haircut played any part in your refusal to offer the job. 

Comms69

Alz1986 said:

The person with the haircut can take this down different paths - bullying, harrasment, loss of earnings.

If you refuse to employ someone because you did not like their haircut, you would need to be able to explain/ justify why that haircut is against the culture of your organisation. Otherwise, the manager's organisation have subjected an individual to abuse.

You would have to be very daft manager to do such a thing without having an ethical reason for it.

Oh i see, you have zero knowledge of employment law. my mistake.

Bullying is legal.
Harassment requires 2 or more events, intended to cause alarm and distress.
There is no loss of earnings, as you didn thave a job.

I would not need to explain or justify anything. I am entitled to abuse anyone i feel like, legally. 

You have zero knowledge of employment law, i suggest that you put in some kind of disclaimer. 

Undervalued

Alz1986 said:

The person with the haircut can take this down different paths - bullying, harrasment, loss of earnings.

If you refuse to employ someone because you did not like their haircut, you would need to be able . Otherwise, the manager's organisation have subjected an individual to abuse.

You would have to be very daft manager to do such a thing without having an ethical reason for it.

What, either side of his parting?

Otherwise nonsense!

What legal mechanism are you going to use to make the manager "explain/ justify why that haircut is against the culture of your organisation"? 

Dox

Alz1986 said:

The person with the haircut can take this down different paths - bullying, harrasment, loss of earnings.

If you refuse to employ someone because you did not like their haircut, you would need to be able to explain/ justify why that haircut is against the culture of your organisation. Otherwise, the manager's organisation have subjected an individual to abuse.

You would have to be very daft manager to do such a thing without having an ethical reason for it.

Where do you come up with these rubbish ideas? Presumably you're just trying to wind people up?

samdk

Was this confirmed as the reason for not getting the role?

I'm hiring for a position right now and have rejected quite a few candidates with good CVs who've met all of the criteria because there has been a glut of well qualified candidates.

I wouldn't dwell on this too much but I would work on making sure your application stands out from the crowd.