Internal Job application rejected because of recent promotion

valiumtina86

Hi all,
My partner and I work for the same company. He recently got an internal promotion to a quality auditor role after applying for it and coming out at the top of the other candidates. He's been in this position for 2 months.
Earlier this week, he submitted his candidacy for another internal position (team leader). The job advertisement asked anyone that had recently had an application rejected for the same job to not apply. There were no other specifications apart from the specific skills and experience.
HR rejected by partner's application on the ground that his latest promotion was too recent for him to move into a new role again so soon, and that the recommended time frame to do so would be at least 6 months. They said that the application was good otherwise.
Given that no disclaimer was given on job advertisement that his situation would make it unsuitable for applying, is there ground for a claim on the basis of unfair discrimination?
Many Thanks.

KatrinaWaves

Is he no longer wanting to work for this employer? 

What ‘claim’ does he want to make? There is nothing illegal about having policies about constant job/role hopping in companies. Where I work a manager can refuse internal transfers. 

thebrexitunicorn

Your post doesn’t mention any protected characteristic e.g disability, sexual orientation, race etc.  A discrimination complaint has to be related to a protected characteristic, so no I don’t see any grounds for a discrimination claim.   I also don’t believe that the employer is being unreasonable in setting a minimum period of six months in post before considering a further promotion/move. 

Savvy_Sue

Unless the organisation is huge, and people are constantly able to apply for promotions and transfers, then expecting them to say "don't apply if you've been promoted / changed jobs within the last six months" on every advert seems a little OTT. 

Having a general culture / policy where people stay in a new job for at least six months doesn't seem unreasonable: it takes time to settle into any new role, and it would mean getting both your partner up to speed in the new role, and their replacement in the existing role, on top of presumably having to get someone up to speed in the previous role. If you think such a culture / policy should be spelled out, by all means suggest it.

Tealblue

valiumtina86 said:

Given that no disclaimer was given on job advertisement that his situation would make it unsuitable for applying, is there ground for a claim on the basis of unfair discrimination?

None at all. People are far too ready to shout discrimination whenever they don't like something. Happily we haven't yet got to the point where employers have to cater for every imaginable situation and whim, on any and every possible ground. 

Dakta

Screams to me as totally reasonable - as said above it can take a while to settle in and reach peak efficiency - and the companies already fronting this 'cost' for the first move, why would they want to double that up and create a problem of finding someone to fill the promoted role just taken to boot.

I hate to say it but whilst business and personal interests don't always align... we do need to consider the business need at some level...

ratechaser

My own employer, and others I've worked for, have broad policies on internal mobility, and there is generally a a restriction on moving too frequently (e.g. 'you must have been in your current position for 1 year'). Entirely reasonable as it means less wasted resources on training people that want to job hop. And then also means no need to write it in to every individual job posting.

Nothing wrong here, and frankly if the OPs OH is thinking of some sort of 'claim' then they might as well resign now...

pjread

It depends on situation and relationships, but rather than phoning a solicitor a rational conversation with the hiring manager or the existing manager (or maybe any common 'upper' manager to the two) explaining why "Of course I love my new role, but when I saw this one I thought I could add so much more due to XYZ" might be more likely to actually get you somewhere.

Especially if you genuinely can demonstrate it being a good fit, and if the 'new new' role is likely to be harder to fill than the 'old new' role

Marcon

valiumtina86 said:

HR rejected by partner's application on the ground that his latest promotion was too recent for him to move into a new role again so soon, and that the recommended time frame to do so would be at least 6 months. They said that the application was good otherwise.
Given that no disclaimer was given on job advertisement that his situation would make it unsuitable for applying, is there ground for a claim on the basis of unfair discrimination?

Sounds like HR have come up with a diplomatic way to turn down his application because they knew he wasn't going to get the job.

JReacher1

Marcon said:

valiumtina86 said:

HR rejected by partner's application on the ground that his latest promotion was too recent for him to move into a new role again so soon, and that the recommended time frame to do so would be at least 6 months. They said that the application was good otherwise.
Given that no disclaimer was given on job advertisement that his situation would make it unsuitable for applying, is there ground for a claim on the basis of unfair discrimination?

Sounds like HR have come up with a diplomatic way to turn down his application because they knew he wasn't going to get the job.

There’s no evidence that is the case and your suggestion is frankly just a bit nasty.  We are meant to be nice to new posters 😀

Many companies have a policy that states you can’t apply for another position within the organisation within a specified time period after starting a new role. What the company has replied with seems a perfectly reasonable explanation. 

Sandtree

JReacher1 said:
There’s no evidence that is the case and your suggestion is frankly just a bit nasty.  We are meant to be nice to new posters 😀

Many companies have a policy that states you can’t apply for another position within the organisation within a specified time period after starting a new role. What the company has replied with seems a perfectly reasonable explanation. 

Many company policies can also become more guidelines than rules when the appropriate pressure is applied from above.

We shouldn't jump to conclusions, though the suggestion is technically a possibility, and whats happened certainly isn't illegal discrimination.

If it were me, I know I'd be tempted to have a conversation with the hiring manager and if they agree that you are brilliant for the job see if there is a way to work through/around the policy.  I've not had to deal with this sort of "policy" but have had the issue that internal recruitment was supposed to be a blanket 1 month notice period (irrespective of your contract - which for context was going to be 1 month or more) whereas I wanted the person to start much sooner... funding the cost of backfilling the vacancy it created certainly helped grease the wheels that got it down to 1 weeks notice on this occasion.