(indirect) discrimination of disablity at interview?
Options
Comments
-
You need to understand that your clear reason and their clear reason aren't necessarily the same thing!
School and college leavers may be more malleable, easier to train, and come attached to funding rewards for employing young people.
I understand what you are saying. I just honestly don't see this as discrimination. And if I can see even a vague element of potential discrimination, I'm the person who usually says so. The fact that I don't see any? I think there are things in your situation which may influence them anyway. It's not fair, but it happens, and it happens to people with no difficulties too.
Honestly, I think it was a lousy stupid interview process that defeated you, not the disability. I'm no fan of these psychometric typed tests. I think they are rubbish. You just got caught in something trendy!0 -
I'd just have to point out that everyone, including the OP, is assuming that they didn't make adjustments. I'm not seeing any evidence we know that. We have no idea what the OPs results were, how those compared to those of other candidates, and whether, or even if, any adjustments were made.
This is a fair comment. However, my concerns do remain. I retain worries about 'emotional intelligence' type selection procedures being used more than necessary. Setting the bar high for EI will disadvantage autistic applicants, so surely it follows that the onus should be on the employer to demonstrate why the bar is set where it is.I was a board guide here for many years, but have now resigned. Amicably, but I think it reflects very poorly on MSE that I have not even received an acknowledgement of my resignation! Poor show, MSE.
This signature was changed on 6.4.22. This is an experiment to see if anyone from MSE picks up on this comment.0 -
I don't disagree. But that's a far cry from evidencing discrimination. And no, the onus isn't on the employer. In discrimination caress the onus is on the claimant to show that discrimination may have taken place. Only when they can do that does the employer have to prove it didn't. The OP is not going to be able to meet that condition.jobbingmusician wrote: »This is a fair comment. However, my concerns do remain. I retain worries about 'emotional intelligence' type selection procedures being used more than necessary. Setting the bar high for EI will disadvantage autistic applicants, so surely it follows that the onus should be on the employer to demonstrate why the bar is set where it is.0 -
You need to understand that your clear reason and their clear reason aren't necessarily the same thing!
School and college leavers may be more malleable, easier to train, and come attached to funding rewards for employing young people.
I understand what you are saying. I just honestly don't see this as discrimination. And if I can see even a vague element of potential discrimination, I'm the person who usually says so. The fact that I don't see any? I think there are things in your situation which may influence them anyway. It's not fair, but it happens, and it happens to people with no difficulties too.
Honestly, I think it was a lousy stupid interview process that defeated you, not the disability. I'm no fan of these psychometric typed tests. I think they are rubbish. You just got caught in something trendy!
I agree, they had a short presentation first where it went on what a excellent employer they were, how they had incentives to work for, they didn't do normal interviews and were different for giving personality based ones etc, may be wishful thinking but out of the 4 people at the group interview 3 were done by hip looking young people who were chatty and mine was done by a much older male dressed formally and not very chatty0 -
sharpsharp wrote: »
Id say experience was a difficult thing as they were hiring school and college leavers with no/little experience over someone with a lot of experience but gap in employment that i'd say is a type of discrimination but understandable which is another reason I find I lost out on other jobs because they question the gap, I can see why people who haven't worked but haven't got gaps in employment/education either can be seen as more desirable but then someone with a lot of experience but a gap shouldn't be as much as a warning sign as it is.
They can employ school leavers / graduates and get away with paying them between £5.90 and £7.28 an hour. Assuming you're over 25, then they have to pay you a minimum of £7.83 an hour. They may also get grants.
In contact centres that makes a big difference to their profit margins, which are waifer thin.
Big gaps do matter. They ring alarm bells.0 -
Smellyonion wrote: »Theres no such thing as equality. To have true equality, you wouldn't need interviews, hire on a coin toss. Interviews exist to differentiate.
Interviews are there to filter the best candidate for the job. This person didn't make and if it was an interview focused on emotional awareness then yes, the autism likely played a part. Is it fair? probably not, is it illegal? Unlikely. If you need a delivery man, it's not discrimination to not hire someone with 1 leg and one 1 arm.
The op should see it as a blessing. Why would they want to work for such an employer, it's not a good fit. Chin up and try again.
Really? You'd better give these guys a ring and let them know then.
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en0 -
Really? You'd better give these guys a ring and let them know then.
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en
I'm not sure about the delivery person (doesn't need to be a man, one assumes) either. In a time when someone with no legs can be a champion runner, I'd have to say that making such an extreme statement about people with disabilities not being capable of doing deliveries is discrimination in itself.0 -
I think I'm getting too deep in this one. From a philosophical perspective. Equality doesnt exist in nature. In humans, it will be always be there. Unless you attempt to make everybody look the same and think the same and be unable to differentiate between themselves. Many societies have tried this (Soviet union), it does not work because humans are inherently selfish and strive for differences and competition.
If you take a child from a poor family who is likely to live until 65, have a 30% chance of being unemployment and 95% chance of having a low income, place them as a baby into a rich family who brings them up as their own. Develops strong confidence, dresses differently, goes to Eaton, gets into oxbridge. Their life is now dramatically different. Peoples lives are dictated by their unequal experiences leading to unequal outcomes. Sure governments try to reduce this through taxation and equality laws, benefits etc. But true inequality is a myth.
Around the delivery man (I get it, not very inclusive to women)point, I guess the point is that if it effects the job itself to such an extent that it makes it impracticable, I dont think that it counts as discrimination. Reasonable adjustments are not possible.
I have done some work on psychometric tests (which are most BS tbh, sold by talent management firms under some form of pseudo science to businesses at extortionate rates). Op would have to make the relationship between the test and its inherent discrimintaion towards the autistic spectrum of emotional awareness. This will be really tough to do without methodological expertise. One line of inquiry, the op could try contacting the talent mangement firm behind the test and ask how it controls for autistic emotional awareness.0 -
So is working in a call centre just about whats in front of you? Or does it involve talking to colleagues about customers, and inferring things about what those customers might be thinking and feeling? Does it maybe involve reading customer records and gauging how a customer might be thinking and feeling, often by reading between the lines and understaning subtle coded language? Does it involve writing about how customers are thinking and feeling? Is doing stuff like that a really important part of the job, not just because it's required for effective direct contact with the customer, but because it's needed for decisions about prioritisation, escalation etc?
Skills and abilities that are required for a job don't stop being required for a job because someone is disabled.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.5K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.9K Spending & Discounts
- 235.6K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.2K Life & Family
- 248.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards