(indirect) discrimination of disablity at interview?

xapprenticex wrote: »

What do you actually want out of this?



Even if you told them they were (indirectly) discriminating against you, i highly doubt it would boost your chances of getting a job there now or later.



Take a 'L' and move on to the next interview.

Honestly not much but I am fed up with being turned down for interviews due to certain expectations when I know I can do a role and knowing that flaw is based in disability and not reflective of work skill its more I wanted to see if people saw it as discrimination because as much as I can try and improve my interview skills certain things will be very difficult to change due to what they are plus I wanted to use the feedback to not boost an ego but break down the issue into related to disability so I can adjust myself best I can and not feel a failure.

shortcrust wrote: »

Their perfectly legitimate recruitment approach didn't suit you and you didn't get the job. Hundreds, perhaps thousands of people have had the same experience today and it has nothing to do with autism or discrimination.

Six of one, I never said it wasn't legitimate but at same time in this modern world it didn't take into account certain things and a personality test makes certain expectations of "normal" of which many people with autism would struggle with which is why I see it as potential indirect discrimination.


Since they as expected focused the interview questions on things specifically autistic people struggle with such as social situations it doesn't take it into account nor does it show the skill of the interviewee.


I for example struggle in social situations but shine in the workplace, since the questioning only focused on social situations it meant I came across as bad and says everyone should be confident I have a lot of empathy for people but not traditional confidence which is why I work well in call centres, confidence does help but I'd say people would rather a calm friendly person who deals with their problem than a overconfident person who isn't that great that may sound like judging im just giving a example.

motorguy wrote: »

He failed an interview process that everyone sits because he didnt have the skills they are looking for, therefore surely this is the very definition of equality?

I'd dispute the word "skills" as I have the skills for the job as well as other skills including tech skills of a very high level, years of experience and they had young staff there who had no prior work experience.


I also was onto the 3rd stage of the interview process first 2 were telephone interviews and I passed with great answers since that was more a traditional style interview.


Though I would dispute how I am in a non work related social event relates to how well I can handle a phonecall.

sangie595 wrote: »

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.

The OP needs to prove that. They haven't said anything to show that they have here.

I'd also point out that the OP says that they are "fed up of being turned down". I can certainly understand that. But if it is the case that they are not getting jobs, it is entirely within reason to look at whether there are other factors at play. Certainly, before you can prove discrimination you'd need to show that this was the only factor at play - or, at least, a very substantial one. Compared to, for example, having been out of work for "a few" years (what does that mean?) having "lost their job" (that can mean a lot of things), and followed by a death shortly afterwards (which I'm sorry about, but equally, employers are going to query why that resulted in you being out of work for years). Because, if I'm being brutally honest - with no recent experience of work, out of date skills, and no clear reason for being out of work for so long, nobody would need a disability to struggle to get a job. Those things on their own would raise alarm bells.

I realise this, at the interview itself they did say they don't mind experience gaps as long as there is a clear reason for them which I was honest and mentioned after I left my previous job I needed a short while to recover with the tragedy but then I had a gap in my employment.

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.

I lost out on jobs recently due to getting to interview stage but told I didn't have enough experience since I was going for office based as well as call centres, or given feedback and told I need to give shorter but more direct answers which I took into account and most recent one was just told they didn't think I was right for the role which surprised even the people who offered me the interview since they know what I was rejected for didn't fit with what they knew about me again thats a case of at most bad impressions at interviews since I can't show my actual skills every job I have had is when employers took a chance and never once had a complaint against me from customers or other employees.

I was only out of work for years since I took some time out with grief (less than a year) then reapplied but wasn't getting responses outright and work was drying up its only since I moved to a better location I am getting interviews again.

I lost my job as the employer was downsizing and went bankrupt shortly after and that was biggest employer in the town I lived in.