Interview terminated

hyubh

Usernamenumber2000 said:

As I was telling the interviewer about myself, I said that I am currently working full time in the healthcare sector.  This was during the first section of the interview which was not scored. A decision was made by the interview before even testing whether I was a good candidate for the role, stopped the interview and terminated my application. The interviewer said that my full time job had no relevance to the position, that I could not commit the time nor commit years of service to the role.

Firstly, I beg to differ because I would have thought that having a job already makes you employable, then there's experience working with the public, working in a team, transferrable skills like time management etc. A retail job does not require a qualification and full training is provided by the company. Secondly, If I applied for the position, I know how much time I have to commit to it. Thirdly it does not say that the position requires years of service to the role, plus it is known that retail have a high turnover of staff. So in all, was I judged unfairly because I had a full time job? There is the Part-Time Workers (Prevention of Less Favourable Treatment) Regulations but nothing about being judged unfairly for full time workers. 

For me, this is close to saying, the healthcare job is your vocation, the thing you put (and will continue to put) your true efforts into; the retail job, in contrast, would be doddle, a bit on the side that you genuinely believe anyone can do. Even the terminology of 'full time' job (which you use four times in your post) could be seen to denigrate the retail one being applied for. If I was the interviewer, I'd think I'd be put out, too.

MrFrugalFever

Sorry but unfortunately it’s time to just take it on the chin and move on.

I’ve terminated an interview within 5 minutes because the applicant told me they couldn’t actually work the advertised hours as they already had commitments but where hoping they could be fitted in elsewhere. No, I advertised those dats and times because that is exactly where I needed them for successful operation of the business!

MrFrugalFever

thebrexitunicorn said:

There isn’t really anything you can do. The employer hasn’t behaved unlawfully. Maybe they think the part time role plus the full time work is too much.  

That really isn’t for the interviewer to decide, at all. In fact, the applicant has every legal right to opt out of the Working Time Directive and work as often/many hours as they deem fit, without the judgement or preconception of their prospective employer. Now if the employer decides that a performance related issue is directly linked with working too many hours (less productive) during the probationary period then they would be expected to discuss this and look at possible resolutions but in all reality it would be non-confirmation of employment at that point.

I would imagine it is more a point of lack of flexibility that has prompted the interview termination rather than anything else, the idea of recruiting part time is one of a numbers and cost game. Keeps costs down through low contractual obligations but offers greater flexibility to pay additional overtime hours when one requires, win win for the retailer.

TBagpuss

As others have aid, they have not acted unlawfully so there isn't anything you can do. 

You may feel they were unfair but there isn't any evidence of that - it's not unreasonable of them to want someone who they deal is likely to stick around longer term - yes, retail can have high turnover but as with most jobs, having high turnover  has costs for the employer so it's entirely reasonable for them to prefer staff who are more likely to commit over a longer period. 

Similarly, while it's up to you how many hours you are willing to work, equally, there is nothing unfair about them preferring candidates who have or are likely to have better availability and more flexibility.

Your post does come over as a bit dismissive of retail work so it's possible, too, that that attitude came across when you were in the interview.

It's perfectly fair, and reasonable, for either party to end the interview process as soon as they feel they have enough information to make a decision - if they decided that you weren't the right fit, it would have been a waste of your, and their time to continue. 

Andy_L

MrFrugalFever said:

thebrexitunicorn said:

There isn’t really anything you can do. The employer hasn’t behaved unlawfully. Maybe they think the part time role plus the full time work is too much.  

That really isn’t for the interviewer to decide, at all. In fact, the applicant has every legal right to opt out of the Working Time Directive and work as often/many hours as they deem fit, without the judgement or preconception of their prospective employer. Now if the employer decides that a performance related issue is directly linked with working too many hours (less productive) during the probationary period then they would be expected to discuss this and look at possible resolutions but in all reality it would be non-confirmation of employment at that point.

I would imagine it is more a point of lack of flexibility that has prompted the interview termination rather than anything else, the idea of recruiting part time is one of a numbers and cost game. Keeps costs down through low contractual obligations but offers greater flexibility to pay additional overtime hours when one requires, win win for the retailer.

Do you have a link to the piece of employment legislation that says employers can't do that?

Usernamenumber2000

You can search it on the GOV website under maximum weekly working hours.

Usernamenumber2000

MrFrugalFever said:

thebrexitunicorn said:

There isn’t really anything you can do. The employer hasn’t behaved unlawfully. Maybe they think the part time role plus the full time work is too much.  

That really isn’t for the interviewer to decide, at all. In fact, the applicant has every legal right to opt out of the Working Time Directive and work as often/many hours as they deem fit, without the judgement or preconception of their prospective employer. Now if the employer decides that a performance related issue is directly linked with working too many hours (less productive) during the probationary period then they would be expected to discuss this and look at possible resolutions but in all reality it would be non-confirmation of employment at that point.

I would imagine it is more a point of lack of flexibility that has prompted the interview termination rather than anything else, the idea of recruiting part time is one of a numbers and cost game. Keeps costs down through low contractual obligations but offers greater flexibility to pay additional overtime hours when one requires, win win for the retailer.

Thanks for your advice. I agree with what you have said. 

General_Grant

Andy_L said:

MrFrugalFever said:

thebrexitunicorn said:

There isn’t really anything you can do. The employer hasn’t behaved unlawfully. Maybe they think the part time role plus the full time work is too much.  

That really isn’t for the interviewer to decide, at all. In fact, the applicant has every legal right to opt out of the Working Time Directive and work as often/many hours as they deem fit, without the judgement or preconception of their prospective employer. Now if the employer decides that a performance related issue is directly linked with working too many hours (less productive) during the probationary period then they would be expected to discuss this and look at possible resolutions but in all reality it would be non-confirmation of employment at that point.

I would imagine it is more a point of lack of flexibility that has prompted the interview termination rather than anything else, the idea of recruiting part time is one of a numbers and cost game. Keeps costs down through low contractual obligations but offers greater flexibility to pay additional overtime hours when one requires, win win for the retailer.

Do you have a link to the piece of employment legislation that says employers can't do that?

Usernamenumber2000 said:

You can search it on the GOV website under maximum weekly working hours.

I think the question may have been whether "without the judgement or preconception of their prospective employer" was included in legislation.