I would have thought, if you were an applicant for a £100K a year job, you would be on first name terms with your employers.

So what on earth was wrong with Stuart calling Margaret by her first name.

Just seemed to me to be another "Let's Get Stuart" incident.


Stuart seemed very personable throughtout the process - and came over better with Mr Vig-i-len then Joanna.

The licence business was just splitting hairs, I thought.

Stuart only knows Margaret from the show, he's never been formerly introduced and this is an interview. I would have expected nothing less from Margaret

It could have been worse - he could have called her Maggie

Would you call an interviewer by their first name, whether you've seen them on the tv or not? I don't think so.

It is extremely unprofessional. He has never met her - only seen her on the television.

It doesn't matter who the person is, or what job they are going for, it is only correct and proper to address the interviewer by their surname.

You'd think the fact that Alan Sugar is called "Sir Alan" or "Lord Sugar" would have given Stuart a clue!!

And then to ask "Sorry, I didn't catch your name" to Gordan...disgraceful.

It's hardly a hanging offence is it, though.

Its Bordan - disgraceful you could get that wrong

Yes I would call an interviewer by their first name as I'm sure most people would.
Margaret doenst have any title like Dr,Lord,Prof etc so I dont see any issue with calling her Margaret.

Damn it. I must be full of shit...

I have to say it has demonstrated to me how much people can get away with doing to a person if they are seen to be "think skinned" or a strong personality. He is just a person, he might be too arrogant and too keen to emphasise his success and talent but that doesn't mean he should be treated like that.

Why bring him on the show at all? You would have thought they'd have investigated these things before the process began- otherwise I'm gonna apply next year with a completely made up CV, get on the show and take a profit from the exposure.

In the situation it was just common sense that you do not get too over familair with the person interviewing you!!

You not having an issue with it is beside the point. Many women of Margaret's generation would not expect to be addressed informally by an interviewee who is very much her junior and who does not know her. Since he is happy to bow and scrape to Lord Sugar (services to electronic tat and Labour party funds) Baggs could have managed the courtesy of addressing her by title and surname.

Margaret is or soon will be Dr. Mountford.

I couldn't but help notice that none of the interviewers call AS Lord Sugar!!!

There were special circumstances but yes I would in my 30 years of postgraduate experience I've never experienced the circumstances where I'd been expected to speak formally to an interviewer.
I wouldn't want to work for any company where it was expected.
Margaret was a bit up herself and didn't like being addressed by a 21 year old on first name terms, I have no time for "The Brand" normally but I don't think he did anything wrong here.

What he did wrong was to presume to call Margaret by her first name before they had been formally introduced. If he had waited to be introduced and then said "nice to meet you Margaret" it would've been ott of her to make a big deal about it. Stewart just came in and greated her like an old friend, which you don't do in an interview.

It seems to me that the interviewers are briefed to be as unpleasant as possible to upset the interviewees.

They do that on the Irish one as well. It's like their final task - a test of their personalities. They can bs all they want in the boardroom but their true character comes through when they are in a one on one situation, with a person who puts them under as much pressure as possible.

Mags is correct, it was an interview and Stu should have acted accordingly

That said, when corrected himself to 'Miss Mountford', she appreciated that

Permission should be sought before addressing a superior by forename. Simple manners. 'Margaret' indeed!

I know who the Queen is but I doubt I'd waltz up to her and say, "Hello, Liz."

who was that bloke who refused to shake hands ? I thought that was incredibly rude .

and Margaret let herself down there , we've seen them in the boardroom calling her Margaret , she didn't seem to mind then .

That's different though. She had been out with them on tasks and knew them. This was her first time meeting Stewart and he should have treated it as such. I've never seen him refer to his Lordship as Alan. I think it was his youth showing through. None of the older candidates made the same mistake.

I completely agree. In addition, it's a simple matter of respect. Margaret is a lot older than Stuart, who is still wet behind the ears. It's presumptious and precocious to call someone so much older by their first name, unless invited to do so.

If someone I was interviewing and had never met called me fredster, I would not employ them.

I actually thought it caught him off guard seeing Margaret of all people in there. For once, I'll actually defend him and say I don't think he was being deliberately annoying, but was just taken aback.

Can't actually believe some people think it was fine for Stuart to address an interviewer HE'D NEVER MET BEFORE by her first name. It doesn't matter if it was "her off the telly".