Perhaps there should have been a criteria for applicants and if they didn't fit this they couldn't apply, like being a position for a full time employee who could do weekends.
Allowing someone who could never get the job an interview seems silly and a waste of time as well as an opportunity for that person to criticise the decision as they could say they were never going to get the job. I notice this same employee has been told she can apply for another job that requires someone to work full time Surely this will just lead to potentially more accusations.
Anyway it looks like the OP's husband has it all under control and if it is all as described then racism is an incorrect accusation.
Perhaps there should have been a criteria for applicants and if they didn't fit this they couldn't apply, like being a position for a full time employee who could do weekends.
Allowing someone who could never get the job an interview seems silly and a waste of time as well as an opportunity for that person to criticise the decision as they could say they were never going to get the job. I notice this same employee has been told she can apply for another job that requires someone to work full time Surely this will just lead to potentially more accusations.
Anyway it looks like the OP's husband has it all under control and if it is all as described then racism is an incorrect accusation.
True, but anyone can apply for a job. I would just have refused the interview.
True, but anyone can apply for a job. I would just have refused the interview.
Sometimes if its an existing employee who is near enough but not quite there they give them an interview experience. It's so if they can do the job when the times right and think they would be good at it they won't have a meltdown at interview
Not trying to throw shade on your friend's story Lyricalis, in this woman's case (OP's problem) there are plenty of anti-discrimination laws in place, so much so that thinking someone doesn't like you because of race shouldn't even register! And no I'm not suggesting the world's full of sunshine and rainbows, of course racists exist but that aspect of discrimination shouldn't be so readily manipulated by people who can't get their own way.
If people don't like you they will find some way of getting rid of you. It doesn't have to be the actual reason they don't like you, anything will do.
A perfect example, and yes this did happen at yet another company I used to work for, would be my new team leader at the time giving someone getting verbal warning for regularly turning up late, while totally ignoring the fact that at least another two or three people (and I was one of them ) were rarely seen before 10am either. Note that we all worked late too, it wasn't about cutting hours.
This warning gave this particularly person a reputation for being lazy, and so everything they did was suddenly under far more scrutiny than before.
We worked together on a rather technically challenging piece of software. I warned our team leader that we'd need more resources to get it finished. You know what he did? He moved me onto another project and left this poor guy on his own on something that we both knew he would have no chance of getting finished on time. :mad:
So this guy, who already has this unfair reputation for being lazy, now gets into trouble for not being able to finish his work on time, getting another mark against him.
This sort of thing goes on for over 6 months until this guy is stressed out, has lost his confidence, and become a butt of lots of office jokes and snide comments.
I left the company (can you blame me?) around the time this situation had escalated to the point of this poor guy was on his final warning for poor performance. This was a guy that I knew was actually pretty good at the job, certainly better than many before this new team leader came in.
I can't say for sure that it was a racial thing, but that was the only real difference between him and the rest of us.
From the information available the manager appears to have done everything right - he opened up the role to all the team for those who were interested to apply which is very much best practice.
The terms of the new role were set out so it stands to reason that only those who could fulfil those terms would apply, however a p/t worker attended and during the interview asked if this could be a p/t role. They were told no, and it was confirmed the role and the needs of the business were for these terms to be fulfilled.
So talk of racism ensues as that is an easy card to play and thoughts of uncapped compensation may have flickered through the mind.
The Manager advised HR which was correct and will have his own written records of the interview and ensuiung conversations as an audit trail.
If there is any further talk by the employee to the manager or anyone else about percieved unfair treatment then the employee should be actively encouraged everey time to contact HR and be advised that they can raise a grievance . The mananger should keep HR constantly updated on the situation, back it up by email and keep a copy as an audit trail.
Veiled threats and talk of claims should be recorded [date, time, place] and if witnessed, a note of the witness name.
This should all go away, there is no substance for a claim against the manager or the company - again on the information available.
The employee in this case has a poor time-keeping record. That is something I would have thought the manager should deal with before inviting the employee to apply for promotion e.g. to the senior sales post. Otherwise he is condoning the poor time-keeping or even rewarding it. I wonder why he has overlooked it.
Ref the story above about one employee being sanctioned for turning up late, while others were not, I witnessed such a case (he took his children to school first) in an office which was very lax about late starting and where not only did others do the same without question but one of the chief agitators to get him sacked was a senior manager who was often allowed to work from home and sometimes didn't turn up at all or wasn't available at home when supposed to be working. In fact, I can think of at least three senior managers there who had easy come, easy go working arrangements that involved informal "working from home" as and when it suited them. The picked-upon employee, who was no junior either, was eventually sacked and that is something that always left a bad taste with me and left me cynical about how organisations work. They were prepared to turn on someone, despite their own blatant - staggering, actually - hypocrisy and lack of fairmindedness and get enough on him to do the dirty. There was no race difference. There *is* always a difference, though: the difference between individuals - and how they are treated.
I have read this thread with interest. I have a small company (10 employees) and it reinforces my conclusion that whilst all firms should treat their staff fairly, and I think we do, it's certainly no fun employing people these days. I shall be glad to retire i'm afraid.
Obviously if the story has the remotest shred of truth, the person appointing the promotee will tell the other candidates why they were not chosen, including if necessary telling the black woman that there is no racism involved. That will be carefully done, because if a woman feels that she is being discriminated against she will feel very bad about it. A decent boss will be abls rto deal with this routine matter very easily and properly. Of course that is if it has the remotest shred of truth, and is not just yet another thread about mythical black people with a chip on their shoulder who are lazy and complain about being discriminated against. There will be another one on soon, people like to make up these stories.
But if it's true the boss will settle it amicably.
Reminded me of an incident I had while I was doing Maths tutoring at university.
I gave this one lad a score of 0% and he said to me "is it because i am black" and I replied "no, it's because you only attempted two of the 20 questions and got them both wrong"
But I did nothing about it as he did not put in a complaint, and I'd suggest that until something is started officially the OP's husband can't really do anything. He can't respond based on her blowing steam around the office, he has to wait until something formal is started until he can make a response. When it does come to it, He's done everything right and has his perfectly valid reasons for his decisions. It was valid to interview her (he thought she was a part timer having ambition to become full time) and reason enough to find her unsuitable (it transpired at interview that she didn't really want more hours and she was absolute that weekend work would not be possible).
My Husband manages a shop and his assistant manager has given in her notice.
Although the senior sales assistant would have been the ideal choice for instant promotion due to equality he offered all his employees the chance to apply for the position.
The senior sales is already a key holder and is able to work weekends inc Sunday (a requisite of the job) and has 10 years retail experience.
One of the part time staff also applied, she wont work weekends (she made a large point of saying so at the interview) she still only wants to work part time ,she has only 6 months retail experience and has also a bad record of timekeeping.
None of the other staff applied
Yesterday the SSA was offered the promotion.
The part time worker has now got on her high horse and is telling everyone who will listen that she didn't get the job because she is black and is threatening legal action under the RRA.
I have told my husband she wont win, I mean if my husband was a racist he wouldn't have even given her the P/T position ( he had 50 candidates for the job).
He has told her the main reason that it's a full time job and has to include every 3rd weekend and that the other candidate had more experience and that is true .
He has offered the part time worker the chance of applying for the now vacant SSA position but has made it clear that is also full time with every 3rd weekend but she is not interested.
I have told him to speak to his head office and HR to see what they say but he is worried that he will be branded a racist and/or cost his company money in compo.
BTW the p/t time worker has children but they are in their late teens so no child care issues to stop her working full time and weekends
Anyone can accuse anyone of discrimination - it's whether there's any evidence of it that determines whether to proceed. She can proceed at risk, but with no substantive evidence, runs the risk of being pursued for costs.
and I'd suggest that until something is started officially the OP's husband can't really do anything. He can't respond based on her blowing steam around the office, he has to wait until something formal is started until he can make a response.
The OP's husband could put in a complaint about her malicious gossip?
The OP's husband could put in a complaint about her malicious gossip?
If he wanted to go for a confrontational approach, yes, it might be better to opt for being the peaceful side and not lowering himself down to her level.
I suppose he could inform his superiors that this gossip was being passed around the office and ask them how they wish him to proceed in the short term.
Comments
Allowing someone who could never get the job an interview seems silly and a waste of time as well as an opportunity for that person to criticise the decision as they could say they were never going to get the job. I notice this same employee has been told she can apply for another job that requires someone to work full time
Anyway it looks like the OP's husband has it all under control and if it is all as described then racism is an incorrect accusation.
True, but anyone can apply for a job. I would just have refused the interview.
Sometimes if its an existing employee who is near enough but not quite there they give them an interview experience. It's so if they can do the job when the times right and think they would be good at it they won't have a meltdown at interview
Not true. Employers are allowed to state criteria and if a full time worker is needed then they can say only those able to work full time can apply.
It just seemed a waste of everyone's time to be honest and has lead to this candidate thinking she has a chance when she doesn't.
If people don't like you they will find some way of getting rid of you. It doesn't have to be the actual reason they don't like you, anything will do.
A perfect example, and yes this did happen at yet another company I used to work for, would be my new team leader at the time giving someone getting verbal warning for regularly turning up late, while totally ignoring the fact that at least another two or three people (and I was one of them
This warning gave this particularly person a reputation for being lazy, and so everything they did was suddenly under far more scrutiny than before.
We worked together on a rather technically challenging piece of software. I warned our team leader that we'd need more resources to get it finished. You know what he did? He moved me onto another project and left this poor guy on his own on something that we both knew he would have no chance of getting finished on time. :mad:
So this guy, who already has this unfair reputation for being lazy, now gets into trouble for not being able to finish his work on time, getting another mark against him.
This sort of thing goes on for over 6 months until this guy is stressed out, has lost his confidence, and become a butt of lots of office jokes and snide comments.
I left the company (can you blame me?) around the time this situation had escalated to the point of this poor guy was on his final warning for poor performance. This was a guy that I knew was actually pretty good at the job, certainly better than many before this new team leader came in.
I can't say for sure that it was a racial thing, but that was the only real difference between him and the rest of us.
The terms of the new role were set out so it stands to reason that only those who could fulfil those terms would apply, however a p/t worker attended and during the interview asked if this could be a p/t role. They were told no, and it was confirmed the role and the needs of the business were for these terms to be fulfilled.
So talk of racism ensues as that is an easy card to play and thoughts of uncapped compensation may have flickered through the mind.
The Manager advised HR which was correct and will have his own written records of the interview and ensuiung conversations as an audit trail.
If there is any further talk by the employee to the manager or anyone else about percieved unfair treatment then the employee should be actively encouraged everey time to contact HR and be advised that they can raise a grievance . The mananger should keep HR constantly updated on the situation, back it up by email and keep a copy as an audit trail.
Veiled threats and talk of claims should be recorded [date, time, place] and if witnessed, a note of the witness name.
This should all go away, there is no substance for a claim against the manager or the company - again on the information available.
Ref the story above about one employee being sanctioned for turning up late, while others were not, I witnessed such a case (he took his children to school first) in an office which was very lax about late starting and where not only did others do the same without question but one of the chief agitators to get him sacked was a senior manager who was often allowed to work from home and sometimes didn't turn up at all or wasn't available at home when supposed to be working. In fact, I can think of at least three senior managers there who had easy come, easy go working arrangements that involved informal "working from home" as and when it suited them. The picked-upon employee, who was no junior either, was eventually sacked and that is something that always left a bad taste with me and left me cynical about how organisations work. They were prepared to turn on someone, despite their own blatant - staggering, actually - hypocrisy and lack of fairmindedness and get enough on him to do the dirty. There was no race difference. There *is* always a difference, though: the difference between individuals - and how they are treated.
But if it's true the boss will settle it amicably.
I meant the other woman doth protest too much....
I gave this one lad a score of 0% and he said to me "is it because i am black" and I replied "no, it's because you only attempted two of the 20 questions and got them both wrong"
But I did nothing about it as he did not put in a complaint, and I'd suggest that until something is started officially the OP's husband can't really do anything. He can't respond based on her blowing steam around the office, he has to wait until something formal is started until he can make a response. When it does come to it, He's done everything right and has his perfectly valid reasons for his decisions. It was valid to interview her (he thought she was a part timer having ambition to become full time) and reason enough to find her unsuitable (it transpired at interview that she didn't really want more hours and she was absolute that weekend work would not be possible).
The OP's husband could put in a complaint about her malicious gossip?
If he wanted to go for a confrontational approach, yes, it might be better to opt for being the peaceful side and not lowering himself down to her level.
I suppose he could inform his superiors that this gossip was being passed around the office and ask them how they wish him to proceed in the short term.