Advice please on unfair recruitment practice

Summer2

Recently I applied for a job as a Community Employment Supervisor. It's a publicly funded position, although the actual employer is a limited company. I am extremely well qualified, experienced and had all the skills the employer asked for. I didn't get the job.

I know the person who got it, and as far as I'm aware she has little or no relevant expereince, skills or qualifications. She has some but not anything like I've got.

She already works for the company in a junior capacity. I strongly feel she was given the job because she's known to the company already. I was interviewed but some of the questions weren't relevant and I strongly felt that they were going through the motions.

I worked so hard for that interview and I know I have more relevant, skills, experience etc. As it's a publically funded position, I feel so aggrevied that they didn't follow fair practice here. I didn't see any evidence of a score sheet and the interviewers didn't seem to make notes.

Is there anything I can do?

scunermac

Welcome to the real world. I feel sorry for you but this happens all to frequently nowadays. It seems like 90% of jobs being advertised these days, already have the successful applicant picked before the interview (Be it a relation, or a well known person), and the interviews are just for show.

This is just my own opinion from recent experience, and one that seems to be echoed by many who I have spoken to recently.

F.U.B.A.R

This is (beleive it or not) completely legal -.- If they already have someone in mind, as scunermac said above is 90% likely, they will just go through the motions to make it apear that everyone has a fighting chance but they sut ask pointless questions for about a week or so and then officialy hire the person they want although she/he has been working in this position un-officialy for the duration of the application process

dan_d

I would also say that this seems to be particularly true when it comes to public or publicly funded positions.

MazG

Well yes, of course it's more likely to happen in the Public Sector, because in the Private Sector, an employer is at perfect liberty to choose someone they know to fill a position.

While I know it can be frustrating for applicants, you should keep in mind that a person known to the employer is always going to have an advantage if they are a good worker. That is, if the employer knows the person already works well in with the existing team, knows the processes, has shown interest in learning any new aspects of the role etc, then I don't think it's all that unreasonable to choose that person over another candidate who might appear superior on paper.

To be honest, I sometimes think the public (and publically funded) sector have come too far in advertising/tendering every little thing. Bureaucracy often gets mistaken for transparency...

HellFireClub

Summer2 wrote: »

Recently I applied for a job as a Community Employment Supervisor. It's a publicly funded position, although the actual employer is a limited company. I am extremely well qualified, experienced and had all the skills the employer asked for. I didn't get the job.

I know the person who got it, and as far as I'm aware she has little or no relevant expereince, skills or qualifications. She has some but not anything like I've got.

She already works for the company in a junior capacity. I strongly feel she was given the job because she's known to the company already. I was interviewed but some of the questions weren't relevant and I strongly felt that they were going through the motions.

I worked so hard for that interview and I know I have more relevant, skills, experience etc. As it's a publically funded position, I feel so aggrevied that they didn't follow fair practice here. I didn't see any evidence of a score sheet and the interviewers didn't seem to make notes.

Is there anything I can do?

Welcome to Ireland OP, it's not what you know it's who you know.

scunermac

MazG wrote: »

To be honest, I sometimes think the public (and publically funded) sector have come too far in advertising/tendering every little thing. Bureaucracy often gets mistaken for transparency...

You hit the nail on the head here. Why must they advertise jobs that have basically already been filled? Its so frustrating.

MazG

scunermac wrote: »

You hit the nail on the head here. Why must they advertise jobs that have basically already been filled? Its so frustrating.

Most frustrating indeed.

They must advertise because we were forced down this track by things being too bad in the other direction years ago. Government and Local Government contracts being given to buddies of those with friends in high places, Civil service jobs going to nieces/nephews of senior civil servants or politicians etc... While I would never want to return to those days, I still think we have come too far in the opposite direction, or perhaps more accurately, in giving the impression that we have come in the opposite direction.

It is a frustrating waste of time for candidates who prepare for interviews where there is already a preferred choice; for contractors to prepare tender after tender where the job will go to the cheapest (cowboy!) tender but might end up costing more because of poor quality work.

It must also be frustrating for managers in the public/publically funded sector who are forced to arrange and attend interviews and meetings to fill a position they know well would be perfect for 'Fiona on the Front Desk' (for example), who is bright and capable and has shown herself to be an excellent team member and worker.

Most inefficient system, I say.

seraphimvc

the worst thing is that, do these people have the hearts to actually help the country???

such a shame, ireland.

Eoin

MazG wrote: »

While I know it can be frustrating for applicants, you should keep in mind that a person known to the employer is always going to have an advantage if they are a good worker. That is, if the employer knows the person already works well in with the existing team, knows the processes, has shown interest in learning any new aspects of the role etc, then I don't think it's all that unreasonable to choose that person over another candidate who might appear superior on paper

A lot people miss this point, and confuse it with cronyism. Not everyone wants to hire a mate or family member, at the cost of getting a more qualified candidate. Sometimes it makes perfect sense to hire the known quantity.

MazG wrote:

It must also be frustrating for managers in the public/publically funded sector who are forced to arrange and attend interviews and meetings to fill a position they know well would be perfect for 'Fiona on the Front Desk' (for example), who is bright and capable and has shown herself to be an excellent team member and worker.

It happens in the private sector too, and there's no easy solution.

You can:

1) Not advertise and give the job to the person you want to give it to from the outset- Result, people kick up a fuss about not having the chance to apply.

2) Advertise, and explicitly say there's a preferred candidate - pretty much same result as above

3) Advertise and not say anything - when the preferred (normally obviously so) candidate gets the job, there are complains because it was a foregone conclusion, and their time was wasted etc etc.

channelsurfer2

yeah it happens a lot.. like the case of the politician who hired his wife etc. a lot of public bodies just advertise the job to comply with the legislation and then hire who they wanted in the first place. jobs for the boys or girls as they say.

MazG

It happens in the private sector too

Yes, that is true. But I don't think it happens as frequently as it does in the public/publically funded sector. Employers in the private sector, particularly employers in smaller organisations, are not under the same scrutiny or pressure to be 'seen to be fair'.

To address the OP, if you genuinely feel that you are the better person for the job, then I suppose you could write a letter to the employer requesting feedback from the interview. If the feedback is positive, then you could take things further and request an explanation as to how your interview plus qualifications plus experience were deemed to be insufficient for the job.

conan doyle

Summer don't loose heart. This happens all the time in public sector jobs. I'm old enough to remember the job situation in the 1980 and it was the same thing then ,who you know and not what you know. We've gone back to that now so keep your chin up and remember it's not you, it's just things are. Good luck with the job hunt.

Summer2

Many thanks for all your replies. I plan to follow this up if I can. I have requested feedback and if it turns out to be positive, I shall ask why I didn't get the job. Even if I only succeed in embarrassing them, it might be worth it. Part of the problem in this country is that people take this s*it and say nothing.

I've been applying for other similiar jobs and not getting them. I blamed myself - maybe my interview skills not good enough etc. Now I think it's not me. It's that those jobs are gone before I ever sat on the chair.

I'm old enough to remember the 80's, and yes it's the same old story. Very disheartening...I went abroad for years and seriously thinking of going again.

BTW, the other thing is that employers here tend to ignore experience gained abroad. Incredible! It's like you have to start all over again, on arrival back here. Ignorance is at the root of this, IMO.

End of rant! Thanks again and if I get anywhere with this I'll keep you posted.

pow wow

On paper they'll have made whoever did get the job look like the better candidate, so although you might get a glowing review, they'll get a better one. If you're following up with the recruiting company I doubt they'll be embarrassed in the least - these things are sewn up to make sure it appears the better candidate got the job, regardless of how much more qualified/experienced you are. I've seen it done countless times in the public sector jobs I've had, and had it done to me at interview more than once. Whatever their response is it won't be what you're hoping for.

Jim2007

Summer2 wrote: »

I've been applying for other similiar jobs and not getting them. I blamed myself - maybe my interview skills not good enough etc. Now I think it's not me. It's that those jobs are gone before I ever sat on the chair.

Just a thought, but supervisory positions are all about soft skills, technical skills and experience are just a backdrop, are you sure your displaying the right skill set at the interviews?

Jim.

Mrs OBumble

Summer2 wrote: »

Even if I only succeed in embarrassing them, it might be worth it. Part of the problem in this country is that people take this s*it and say nothing.

Ahh, Ireland is a pretty small village. I'm not sure that embarrassing anyone is a route to getting hired anywhere that these folks are working in the future.

I also think you're forgetting something: if you're that much superior to the appointee, your salary expectations may have been higher, or the company may have thought that you'd get bored and find another job more quickly.

The "best" appointee for a job isn't always the one with most skills and experience, someone overqualified can sometimes absolutely ruin an effective team.

College educ

Yes I know the feeling. I have been refused interview now for several jobs including the one I currently do.. I recently applied to the VEC for two positions and met all the criteria. I was notified I had not been selected for shortlisting despite having a phd in education and Degree and Masters in the subject area requested. I raised this matter with the body concerned and was subsequently brought in for interview alone after the position had been filled.. This was their way of covering their tracks, however I know the person appointed is not as qualified as me and the questions they asked during the interview were totally ridiculous .. For example why do you want this job if you have a PHD? And do you know where the school is the road is very bad during the winter.. I have contacted the company involved and been told I cannot complain as they are not answerable to anyone.. I have taken this matter up with the Minister for Education as to date I have been mistreated like this on approx 10 occasions.. But I'm afraid it would appear the company is right because the Ministers Office advised there is nothing they can do about the recruitment process. Things will never improve if this us allowed to continue.. What can I do ... You only get a job in Ireland if you are related to the right person or if you know someone in the company concerned.. Not much point in writing legislation if there is nobody to follow it through.. No point in educating our children if they won't get a job anyway..