Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • sharpsharp
    • By sharpsharp 9th Aug 18, 3:27 PM
    • 15Posts
    • 7Thanks
    sharpsharp
    (indirect) discrimination of disablity at interview?
    • #1
    • 9th Aug 18, 3:27 PM
    (indirect) discrimination of disablity at interview? 9th Aug 18 at 3:27 PM
    I went for a job interview and as part of it they wanted a personality test done beforehand, and the interview rather than be asked normal questions was questions based on your answers for example about controlling your emotions and empathy.

    I am autistic and recovering from mental health problems I made them aware of the autism at interview but they rejected me based on my answers about my emotions
    I feel this is unfair as it doens't show my actual work capability and a normal interview method would do so, not arguing their right to an opinion but wondering if in some form its discrimination to not take that into account.
    Last edited by sharpsharp; 09-08-2018 at 3:29 PM.
Page 2
    • sharpsharp
    • By sharpsharp 9th Aug 18, 8:12 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    sharpsharp
    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.
    Originally posted by sangie595

    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.
    Last edited by sharpsharp; 09-08-2018 at 8:16 PM.
    • sangie595
    • By sangie595 9th Aug 18, 8:54 PM
    • 5,497 Posts
    • 9,458 Thanks
    sangie595
    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!
    • jobbingmusician
    • By jobbingmusician 9th Aug 18, 8:58 PM
    • 19,282 Posts
    • 19,811 Thanks
    jobbingmusician
    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.
    Originally posted by sangie595

    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'm the Board Guide on the Matched Betting; Referrers and Jobseeking & Training boards. I'm a volunteer to help the boards run smoothly, and I can move and merge posts there. Board guides are not moderators and don't read every post. If you spot an illegal or inappropriate post then please report it to forumteam@moneysavingexpert.com (it's not part of my role to deal with this). Any views are mine and not the official line of MoneySavingExpert.com.

    The good folk of the matched betting board are now (I hope!) supporting Macmillan, in memory of Fifigrace. Visit
    https://www.gofundme.com/running-the-leeds-10k-for-macmillan
    • sangie595
    • By sangie595 9th Aug 18, 9:08 PM
    • 5,497 Posts
    • 9,458 Thanks
    sangie595
    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.
    Originally posted by jobbingmusician
    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.
    • sharpsharp
    • By sharpsharp 9th Aug 18, 9:12 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    sharpsharp
    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!
    Originally posted by sangie595

    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 chatty
    • motorguy
    • By motorguy 9th Aug 18, 10:02 PM
    • 17,604 Posts
    • 10,672 Thanks
    motorguy

    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.
    Originally posted by sharpsharp
    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.
    "We have normality. I repeat, we have normality. Anything you still can't cope with is therefore your own problem."
    • motorguy
    • By motorguy 9th Aug 18, 10:08 PM
    • 17,604 Posts
    • 10,672 Thanks
    motorguy
    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.
    Originally posted by Smellyonion
    Really? You'd better give these guys a ring and let them know then.

    https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en
    "We have normality. I repeat, we have normality. Anything you still can't cope with is therefore your own problem."
    • sangie595
    • By sangie595 9th Aug 18, 10:51 PM
    • 5,497 Posts
    • 9,458 Thanks
    sangie595
    Really? You'd better give these guys a ring and let them know then.

    https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en
    Originally posted by motorguy

    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.
    • Smellyonion
    • By Smellyonion 10th Aug 18, 5:53 AM
    • 136 Posts
    • 85 Thanks
    Smellyonion
    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.
    • JamesO
    • By JamesO 10th Aug 18, 6:28 AM
    • 369 Posts
    • 1,009 Thanks
    JamesO
    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?
    Originally posted by motorguy
    ____________
    Blue Lives Matter
    • shortcrust
    • By shortcrust 10th Aug 18, 8:21 AM
    • 2,127 Posts
    • 3,252 Thanks
    shortcrust
    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.
    • Takeaway_Addict
    • By Takeaway_Addict 10th Aug 18, 8:31 AM
    • 5,883 Posts
    • 6,830 Thanks
    Takeaway_Addict
    I'm not understanding why you even whilst autistic cannot answer questions on empathy and emotions?

    Were you specific in how you wanted an adjustment?


    Asking them to ignore half of their process probably doesn't come under reasonable IMO
    Originally posted by Takeaway_Addict
    I apologise if wrong but I am yet to see what adjustments you requested?
    Don't trust a forum for advice. Get proper paid advice. Any advice given should always be checked
    • chrisw
    • By chrisw 10th Aug 18, 8:52 AM
    • 1,776 Posts
    • 1,009 Thanks
    chrisw
    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 chatty
    Originally posted by sharpsharp
    Wow, how discriminatory is that satement?

    Are you saying older males who dress formally are incapable of assessment interviews?

    You've fallen into the same stereotyping trap you are accusing the employers of.
    • Takeaway_Addict
    • By Takeaway_Addict 10th Aug 18, 8:55 AM
    • 5,883 Posts
    • 6,830 Thanks
    Takeaway_Addict
    Wow, how discriminatory is that satement?

    Are you saying older males who dress formally are incapable of assessment interviews?

    You've fallen into the same stereotyping trap you are accusing the employers of.
    Originally posted by chrisw
    lol nice catch!
    Don't trust a forum for advice. Get proper paid advice. Any advice given should always be checked
    • Undervalued
    • By Undervalued 10th Aug 18, 10:35 AM
    • 3,490 Posts
    • 3,150 Thanks
    Undervalued
    Wow, how discriminatory is that satement?

    Are you saying older males who dress formally are incapable of assessment interviews?

    You've fallen into the same stereotyping trap you are accusing the employers of.
    Originally posted by chrisw
    Yes indeed.

    The OP would do well to reflect long and hard about that comment!

    Statistically, as interviews are generally conducted by more senior people, there is an increased likelihood of them being older than many applicants for more junior posts. Also, more senior people within an organisation are more likely to dress formally.

    However, I am aware that what I have just said is also stereotyping to some extent! What the OP needs to do it to try and learn to recognise that, although I appreciate their condition could make that more difficult.

    So, apologies if I have stereotyped again but hopefully you see what I mean!
    • sharpsharp
    • By sharpsharp 10th Aug 18, 12:27 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    sharpsharp
    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.
    Originally posted by shortcrust

    Sure but the questioning was about on a personal level not work related, I do well in a work enviroment due to the formality and structure I could not for example in a non work related setting outright tell the difference between something thats mocking, something thats mildly teasing, someone pretending to tease but mocking but I have enough willpower to be polite and not get agitated with it and be formal.


    I did give one example to employer of my empathy being so good that I often got praise from customers who rang back just to do so, and how I went out of my way to make sure a job was done right and such.
    Wow, how discriminatory is that satement?

    Are you saying older males who dress formally are incapable of assessment interviews?

    You've fallen into the same stereotyping trap you are accusing the employers of.
    Originally posted by chrisw

    Never said that anywhere. but I knew someone would jump to that conclusion so I was careful but the point was it showed the differences in their interviewing techniques, age may play a part in how someone interprets things, I may or may not of got the job if the younger staff interviewed me but at least it would of been everyone getting the same.


    Perhaps they did make adjustments of some sorts I am in my 30s and the interviewer looked much older than me, the other interviewees looked barely into their 20s and their interviews were done by staff who looked their late 20s maybe they thought young people need young interviewers who knows.


    All I could pick up on in the limited time I saw all the interviewers was the young ones were more "energetic" and friendly compared to mine who seemed he didn't want to be there.


    Whilst you can call that stereotyping I call it just using my imagination and looking at potential reasons.


    Yes indeed.

    The OP would do well to reflect long and hard about that comment!

    Statistically, as interviews are generally conducted by more senior people, there is an increased likelihood of them being older than many applicants for more junior posts. Also, more senior people within an organisation are more likely to dress formally.

    However, I am aware that what I have just said is also stereotyping to some extent! What the OP needs to do it to try and learn to recognise that, although I appreciate their condition could make that more difficult.

    So, apologies if I have stereotyped again but hopefully you see what I mean!
    Originally posted by Undervalued

    I realise this, however the company dress code is casual they even stated they don't like uniforms the company itself kept directly or indirectly mentioning how hip and modern they are to work for and not needing uniforms/dressing casual as part of that. Nothing wrong with dressing formal I turned up with a shirt and tie very formally the presentation was done by a senior member of staff who had baggy t shirt and trousers and talked about the staff nights out being rowdy and people having far too much, the person who gave the tour was far older than me and dressed casual and she was a manager, the managers/team leaders we spoke to on tour all dressed casual.


    So nothing wrong with being formal dressed but it makes me think of the person who gave me interview being a odd one out may of potentially effected my chances.
    Last edited by sharpsharp; 10-08-2018 at 12:31 PM.
    • Comms69
    • By Comms69 10th Aug 18, 12:35 PM
    • 4,950 Posts
    • 4,973 Thanks
    Comms69
    Sure but the questioning was about on a personal level not work related, I do well in a work enviroment due to the formality and structure I could not for example in a non work related setting outright tell the difference between something thats mocking, something thats mildly teasing, someone pretending to tease but mocking but I have enough willpower to be polite and not get agitated with it and be formal.


    I did give one example to employer of my empathy being so good that I often got praise from customers who rang back just to do so, and how I went out of my way to make sure a job was done right and such.



    Never said that anywhere. but I knew someone would jump to that conclusion so I was careful but the point was it showed the differences in their interviewing techniques, age may play a part in how someone interprets things, I may or may not of got the job if the younger staff interviewed me but at least it would of been everyone getting the same.


    Perhaps they did make adjustments of some sorts I am in my 30s and the interviewer looked much older than me, the other interviewees looked barely into their 20s and their interviews were done by staff who looked their late 20s maybe they thought young people need young interviewers who knows.


    All I could pick up on in the limited time I saw all the interviewers was the young ones were more "energetic" and friendly compared to mine who seemed he didn't want to be there.


    Whilst you can call that stereotyping I call it just using my imagination and looking at potential reasons.





    I realise this, however the company dress code is casual they even stated they don't like uniforms the company itself kept directly or indirectly mentioning how hip and modern they are to work for and not needing uniforms/dressing casual as part of that. Nothing wrong with dressing formal I turned up with a shirt and tie very formally the presentation was done by a senior member of staff who had baggy t shirt and trousers and talked about the staff nights out being rowdy and people having far too much, the person who gave the tour was far older than me and dressed casual and she was a manager, the managers/team leaders we spoke to on tour all dressed casual.


    So nothing wrong with being formal dressed but it makes me think of the person who gave me interview being a odd one out may of potentially effected my chances.
    Originally posted by sharpsharp
    Or a more experienced interviewer, perhaps with experience of disabilities.
    • sharpsharp
    • By sharpsharp 10th Aug 18, 1:13 PM
    • 15 Posts
    • 7 Thanks
    sharpsharp
    Or a more experienced interviewer, perhaps with experience of disabilities.
    Originally posted by Comms69
    Maybe, maybe not but thats a what if but I did mention the autism when I had interview and he said he had no idea and no one had told him about it and he said he didn't really know about autism.

    For a what if maybe more experienced means hes more used to a old fashioned interview style even though he has years of experience I don't think thats discriminatory but it does have a everyone is the same idea rather than take things into account.

    I will admit one of my flaws which is directly linked to my autism is even when I am relaxed I don't give off the best body language even though I always smile and use hand gestures at interview maybe they picked up on that as well and didn't tell me but that would be more evidence that they expected people to act a certain way and not showing actual work skill.

    There was a role play part of interview but they told me I did well at that.
    • Tabbytabitha
    • By Tabbytabitha 10th Aug 18, 2:40 PM
    • 4,382 Posts
    • 6,969 Thanks
    Tabbytabitha
    I have to ask, are you in Scotland?
    • sangie595
    • By sangie595 10th Aug 18, 3:42 PM
    • 5,497 Posts
    • 9,458 Thanks
    sangie595
    Maybe, maybe not but thats a what if but I did mention the autism when I had interview and he said he had no idea and no one had told him about it and he said he didn't really know about autism.

    For a what if maybe more experienced means hes more used to a old fashioned interview style even though he has years of experience I don't think thats discriminatory but it does have a everyone is the same idea rather than take things into account.

    I will admit one of my flaws which is directly linked to my autism is even when I am relaxed I don't give off the best body language even though I always smile and use hand gestures at interview maybe they picked up on that as well and didn't tell me but that would be more evidence that they expected people to act a certain way and not showing actual work skill.

    There was a role play part of interview but they told me I did well at that.
    Originally posted by sharpsharp
    Hang on a minute. You told them you had a disability at interview. Not before interview? If so, how on earth did you expect that to make a reasonable adjustment on the spot and in the middle of interviewing people. That's not reasonable. It would be totally unreasonable!

    That said, I think you are wasting your time. You have no evidence of any discrimination. Whether there was or wasn't, evidence is required. You don't have it.
    Last edited by sangie595; 10-08-2018 at 5:23 PM.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

134Posts Today

1,135Users online

Martin's Twitter