Asked discrimantory questions in interview, who to complain to?

fletch

I was asked the following questions in an interview recently and just wondered would I have grounds for a complaint? And if so who should I complain to?

1. Do you have a girlfriend?
2. You're 23 (years old), that right?

The interviewer also implied that he would not be interviewing non-Irish people, commenting that candidates would have to be native English speakers.

damnyanks

Unless he did it in writing it will be difficult to prove. No point getting worked up about it.

fletch

Suppose it's one person's word against the others alright.

seamus

This is all a bit of a grey area. There's nothing inherently wrong with asking these questions. You would need to prove that the intention of asking the questions was in order to discriminate you, or that the interviewer/company specifically discriminated against you on the basis of the answers given to these questions.

Asking someone their age or marital status doesn't necessarily constitute discrimination. Most people include their age/dob on their CV and asking about your personal life can easily (and sensibly) be described as "just friendly chatting".

Discrimination is a tricky one. Everyone is discriminated against. It's an essential part of functioning in society - we have to discriminate against people in order to get things done. It's only when the basis of that discrimination is on certan things (such as as sex, race, religion) that we have a problem. These are unfair items to discriminate on.
The problem in recent times is that when something doesn't go your way, you think, "That's not fair, they discriminated against me because of X". Where X could be any number of variables, many of which are perfectly fair.
If someone didn't get a job as a doctor because they didn't go to college, that's blatant discrimination, but it's perfectly fair.

You can make an enquiry with the equality authority, but be aware that they operate with an agenda. As soon as you mention "discrimination", they'll instantly take your side. You may spend months chasing a dead end on the basis of their advice.

keefg

Fletch,

I think you should report this incident - have a look at the entemp.ie website to find out how.

If I can remember correctly from those HR seminars I went to, once you make the complaint the "burden of proof" falls to the company to proove they did not discriminate against you. You do not have to provide anything in writing - it is the responsibility of the company to document all questions and responses asked at an interview and keep these records for at least 12 months. They should also have written notes giving their reason for not picking you for the job, maybe not experience enough etc.

There are examples at Legal Island HR seminars of Irish cases where people have won up to 12 thousand euro compensation for discrimination. Hence the reason for interviewers keeping documents I have outlined, to protect themselves from fraudulant claims.

From what you are saying, there are 2 possible discrimination issues here, age & sexual orientation or marital/family status which are included in the 9 protected areas (along with disability, member of travelling community etc).

So, if it's a job you were really after and you think you were discriminated against, you may be eligable for some compo!!

fletch

Well to be honest it wasn't me that got discriminated against (as I subsequently got offered the job but turned it down) but I just think it was very unprofessional of him to ask those questions.
Thanks for the very informative post Seamus.

mikemac

fletch wrote:

The interviewer also implied that he would not be interviewing non-Irish people, commenting that candidates would have to be native English speakers.

Leaving aside that English or American candidates could have gone to the job, I wouldn't call that condition unfair.
As an example, it could have been a pharmacy where products have long confusing names and mistakes could happen if you were trained but had a poor level of English.

Seems fair enough

seamus

fletch wrote:

Well to be honest it wasn't me that got discriminated against (as I subsequently got offered the job but turned it down) but I just think it was very unprofessional of him to ask those questions.

That may be all down to impression I guess. I wasn't there obviously. I know a manager here who I have interviewed with before, and he would be likely to ask those questions. But purely because he's being friendly and chatty. It's all very well and good finding out if someone has the ability to do the job, but you don't know if they're going to be a complete twat or not fit in. Having a chat with them will help you find out what they're really like and will also help put them at ease.

It's just a pity that it seems to have gotten to the point where HR people are so PC (and people are so sensitive) that deviating from the script is a massive issue. I'm definitely not having a go at you fletch - as I say I wasn't there, so the guy may very well have been asking those questions to see if you were likely to have kids or piss off to Oz.

BC

micmclo wrote:

Leaving aside that English or American candidates could have gone to the job, I wouldn't call that condition unfair.
As an example, it could have been a pharmacy where products have long confusing names and mistakes could happen if you were trained but had a poor level of English.

Seems fair enough

The NATIVE english speaker bit is unfair. There is no problem saying that fluent english is required but you can't require that the person is a native english speaker.

the_syco

BC wrote:

The NATIVE english speaker bit is unfair. There is no problem saying that fluent english is required but you can't require that the person is a native english speaker.

I've seen alot of jobs which ask you for either mother-tongue German, fluent German, or just German. The 1st two are usually customer support.

There's an ad on the TV, where an english insurance company really stressed the "england based" call centre, which to me says "you won't be speaking to someone in India".

From this, I mean that they may want someone the customer can understand. Anyone I know from India has an excellent command of the english language, knows how to speak it perfectly, but unless they speak slow and clearly, sometimes I can't understand them, as some have a heavy accent. Fluent means you can speak it well. Native, means you can speak it well, and have an accent that the customer can understand, imo.

=-=

The girlfriend bit I don't understand, unless they want you to relocate.

The age thing, if you look young, may be a different slant on the "so you're over 18" question.

calsatron

The major problem outsourcing call centres are struggling with at the moment is the staff's ability to understand regional accents. I'd agree that all the local staff in the call centres have an excellent command of English, however they tend to learn English with the typical "BBC" accent, the first time they encounter someone with a Welsh/Northern English/Scottish accent they find it almost impenetrable.

Speaking from personal experience, I'm from Glasgow, I find the inability to make myself understood when dealing with overseas call centres a major problem.

delos

the_syco wrote:

The girlfriend bit I don't understand, unless they want you to relocate.

The age thing, if you look young, may be a different slant on the "so you're over 18" question.

According to a colleague of mine who works in HR much of the PC objection to asking about age and relationship status is it can be used to stereotype someone based on sexual orientation. The assumption *could* be that a 23 year old single male without a girlfriend is gay. This seemed pretty far fetched to me as I would have assumed that the person doing the interview was just being 'chatty'.

Eoin

delos wrote:

According to a colleague of mine who works in HR much of the PC objection to asking about age and relationship status is it can be used to stereotype someone based on sexual orientation. The assumption *could* be that a 23 year old single male without a girlfriend is gay. This seemed pretty far fetched to me as I would have assumed that the person doing the interview was just being 'chatty'.

Definitely sounds like a stretch to me! It could just have been chat, but it's hard to tell without the context of the conversation. The age part could just have been trying to see how dates on the CV fit together?

the_syco wrote:

There's an ad on the TV, where an english insurance company really stressed the "england based" call centre, which to me says "you won't be speaking to someone in India".

I know the one you're talking about - it says exactly the same thing to me. I've watched a few documentaries about call centres based in India, and it is incredible the amount of people who go nuts on the phone as soon as they find out they've been routed through to India.

I think Dell also do the same, and someone at work said that it's enough of a barrier trying to follow what someone's saying about technical stuff they know nothing about, without a heavy accent as well. Not saying it's right, or wrong, but certainly it can be harder than trying to understand a more "local" call centre.

OP - I don't really know how you could find those questions particularly offensive or intrusive. I wouldn't even give it a second thought if I was asked either of those questions in an interview, let alone start making complaints about it.