Internal job application
Discussion
The Mrs had applied for another role at her employer. Two applicants. No interview and was told the role no longer existed couple weeks ago.
She found out today 3rd hand the other person who applied for it has been offered and accepted the job.
Discounting the IMO unprofessional way she found out about it is this legal? I thought if more than one candidate applied they’d have to at least go through an interview process.
ETA - the person who got it was facing redundancy in their current role if that makes a difference.
She found out today 3rd hand the other person who applied for it has been offered and accepted the job.
Discounting the IMO unprofessional way she found out about it is this legal? I thought if more than one candidate applied they’d have to at least go through an interview process.
ETA - the person who got it was facing redundancy in their current role if that makes a difference.
Why?
Would they interview if you have a CV from engineering for a Legal job?
We have three phases; HR pre-lim screening, then I see the CV’s (phase 2), then I invite for an interview and dismiss the others (phase 3).
Surely the simple answer would be that your partner wasn’t suitable for the position and until she finds out officially, then she’s doesn’t know as the second hand information may not be correct.
Would they interview if you have a CV from engineering for a Legal job?
We have three phases; HR pre-lim screening, then I see the CV’s (phase 2), then I invite for an interview and dismiss the others (phase 3).
Surely the simple answer would be that your partner wasn’t suitable for the position and until she finds out officially, then she’s doesn’t know as the second hand information may not be correct.
BMR said:
ETA - the person who got it was facing redundancy in their current role if that makes a difference.
This bit is key (I'm assuming your OH isn't facing redundancy also?); as stated here the company is duty-bound to offer the role to the person facing redundancy if it is a suitable alternative (i.e. they are able to competently perform the role).Thanks for your replies. I was wrongly under the impression there was a process to be followed if more than one candidate applied.
My OH isn’t facing redundancy but the role she applied for she has actually done it filling in for absence, holidays etc whereas the other person hasn’t.
When she applied for it we knew the other person would most likely get it. I just think it’s been handled completely wrongly. Going from the role no longer existing to suddenly the other person has it!
My OH isn’t facing redundancy but the role she applied for she has actually done it filling in for absence, holidays etc whereas the other person hasn’t.
When she applied for it we knew the other person would most likely get it. I just think it’s been handled completely wrongly. Going from the role no longer existing to suddenly the other person has it!
It does seem unfair.
It's only fair to give somebody an opportunity if they are displaced.
Not unknown to advertise a job and then pull the advert even after the closing date, when HR get involved or when business need changes.
Hope your wife is still in a safe job and content or if not that she gets a job in the open market
It's only fair to give somebody an opportunity if they are displaced.
Not unknown to advertise a job and then pull the advert even after the closing date, when HR get involved or when business need changes.
Hope your wife is still in a safe job and content or if not that she gets a job in the open market
My last company went through the farce of interviewing anyone who applied for the promotion, when in reality we knew who would be promoted
(Jobs for the boys, drinking club)
a lot of people annoyed and would have preferred if they just announced it, especially as they made each candidate do a 30 minute presentatiion.
Op I feel for you Partner, but clearly they had already made there decision.
(Jobs for the boys, drinking club)
a lot of people annoyed and would have preferred if they just announced it, especially as they made each candidate do a 30 minute presentatiion.
Op I feel for you Partner, but clearly they had already made there decision.
Sy1441 said:
If the “at risk” employee had the requisite skills / qualifications to carry out the role then they should have had first refusal.
True but technically do they not need to 'advertise' the job anyway rather than just hand it to them, even if they are pretty much guaranteed the job?It varies company to company; where I worked we did not need to advertise it if there was an at-risk employee in the running for it.
Sounds like the OP’s OH was simply unlucky with her timing - maybe the job was already posted then the Redundancy Consultation started and the person put an interest in the role. The company withdraws the advert and gives the role to the at-risk employee and, because it’s Redundancy and a sensitive nature, makes a bulls
t claim about the job no longer existing in the hope no one questions it. Seen it happen before; stty way to handle it but I would put money on it.
Sounds like the OP’s OH was simply unlucky with her timing - maybe the job was already posted then the Redundancy Consultation started and the person put an interest in the role. The company withdraws the advert and gives the role to the at-risk employee and, because it’s Redundancy and a sensitive nature, makes a bulls
t claim about the job no longer existing in the hope no one questions it. Seen it happen before; stty way to handle it but I would put money on it. Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff