She might of even asked for less money.

my wife has spoken to the other girl…and the salary has not been reduced…
she bears no ill feeling towards the girl but is angry at the process and the decisions of senior management…

sometimes decisions seem unfair but were made for good reason, sometimes decisions are made and really were unfair or discriminatory.

thing is you’ll never know, you’ll never get a straight answer or you’ll struggle to understand\believe it if you do.

unless the boss actually admits to something which is never going to happen there’s nothing you can do after the fact but move on.

Hard to see why this is dicimination or an issue requiring unions. If I understand correctly:

1 you wife has her old job to go back to
2 she has applied for different jobs within the same firm
3 she has been unsuccessful
4 the other candidate performed better in the interview (apparently)
5 your wife thinks she is under qualified
6 presumably those hiring for the role disagree
7 they hire the other lady

Sound like, she just needs better luck (or perhaps preparation) for the next opportunity that comes up. I hope that goes her way, but on the basis of what you have said here, I can’t see any reason for stirring up trouble in this case or any grounds to do so. More likely to come back and burn her unless there is more happening than you have outlined.

Surely the only unfairness / discrimination here is that the OP’s wife will go back to her old position on her old grade, yet that position was re-graded at a higher level for the period of her maternity leave. Either the job is the higher grade or it’s not – I can’t see how it can be reduced to a lower grade once the original post-holder returns.

Surely the only unfairness / discrimination here is that the OP’s wife will go back to her old position on her old grade, yet that position was re-graded at a higher level for the period of her maternity leave. Either the job is the higher grade or it’s not – I can’t see how it can be reduced to a lower grade once the original post-holder returns.

that bit is true…i should have been clearer from the beginning the discrimination is mainly around this issue…that her role was re-graded at a higher level while she was off but will revert to the lower grade on her return… their reasoning is that while she was off her cover would have to also work on a another project that was contracted to the NHS…but my wife had also been working on this very same project for 18 months in addition to the role…the fact that she questioned this decision pissed of the director who made the decision and she has shown contempt towards my wife ever since….she has also been involved in the decision making process for the two roles she has applied for and has been turned down for both…also due to my wife’s friendship with someone who the said director now sees as an enemy (her words) is also a factor in the way she treats my wife and possibly had an effect in the desicion not to offer her one of the jobs…but like you say 29erKeith with little or no evidence there’s little my wife can do…

with regards to the interview she bears no ill feeling towards the successful candidate but the process used to appoint her…

your wife thinks she is under qualified

the other candidate had no qualifications and only 12 months experience there….the job spec specifically outlined that it was essential that the post holder had a professional finance qualification of CIMA or equivalent or had relevant working experience up to that level…
so how can they be even the most suitable candidate and more the fact how did they even make the interview shortlist when they clearly didnt fulfill the selection criteria…
it makes a mockery of the fact that she spent 3 years at uni studying accountancy, 8 years working for the NHS in finance and spent 3 years and a good portion of her own income to study for and gain her CIMA when this happens….

Well sounds harsh…maybe comes down to interpretation of “relevant work experience up to that level.” sounds like plenty of wiggle room there. Anyway there are no answers of STW, but hope she has better luck in the future.

THM it is like you are saying recruiters never ever make a decison based on anything other than objective measures of the candidates…you are not that naive are you?

maybe comes down to interpretation of “relevant work experience up to that level.”

so an accountancy degree, 8 years NHS finance and CIMA qualified is the equivalent to fresh out of college doing a levels and 12 months of NHS finance experience is it….??

gonzy, you can complain all you want – but at the end of the day, your wife got 2nd place.

Move on?

It happens all the time. There’s more to life than the NHS though. If wifey’s that aggrieved, perhaps she should look around?

Hi gonzy,
I just mentioned your wife’s situation to a mate, he’s a HR manager also working for the NHS, he says it definitely sounds like you’ve got a case.

He advised that your wife join a union if not already in one, then put in a grievance with HR, list all your points and build your case, and take it as high as possible, but yep he said the way you’ve described it and the way the 19 year old jumped from a band 3 to a band 6 sounds off.

Good luck

And another 1p goes on the tax bill 😀

Recruiting and interviewing people is not a case of “you have the best qualifications and the most experience, we’ll have you”, if it was (as mentioned earlier) there would be no need for interviews. Interviews (should) also look for potential for growth, personality fit, drive for the job and a whole myriad of other things away from the CV.

For these reasons the Op’s wife got beaten by anther candidate that the interviewers feel was a better candidate, accept it and move on, this is exactly what the interview process is there for. Oh, and don’t mention the candidates age and discrimination in relation to the job, there are plenty of people who are wonderful at their jobs with only 1 year of experience and I suspect an equal number who are very average at it after 5 years or more.

Sooo many variables OP:

We are all different at work, does your wife have an abrasive character etc etc etc etc. What if (you’d be the same) the hiring manager felt he just didn’t gell? Would you hire someone that you didn’t connect or felt awkward with?

I’ve lost count how many times a role is advertised with x criteria and almost over-qualified candidates (or even just candidates with ticked all boxes on paper are beaten at interview by a candidate who has seen as enthusiastic, willing and with potential. The hiring manager (it happens countless times) may take the view he may restructure workload/responsibilities within the team and give more responsibility to another existing member etc.

It could possibly be your wife (NO offence) thought the role was hers and didn’t perform as she could have done at an interview. The role was hers for losing.

If you go chasing this role/situation internally what does that say?

Once upon a time this could have been your open wife? Up and coming, enthusiastic. Wants to learn/develop herself further with part time study etc. She won the role at interview. Remember, it doesn’t always go to the best candidate on paper.

Finally. Thank heavens the other candidate wasn’t a bloke. You’d be royally chasing ‘what is rightfully yours’ wouldn’t you then.

So anybody here work for the NHS or have experience?

AFAIK (correct me if I’m mistaken)The banding system is there for this reason, the inexperienced under qualified employee gets the training/experience by working their way up the bands, a band 6 is just short of managerial, how does a 19 year old college leaver go from a band 3 to a band 6 within such a short period of time?

If it was in a different department I.e admin, marketing etc then it is understandable as no real professional qualifications are needed, but the finance department?

The only reason I can think of is, they will probably start her on the lowest possible band 6 salary where as they would have to pay your wife the nearer the top end of the scale.

Might not have been offered a band6 but a lower grade?

If wifey’s that aggrieved, perhaps she should look around?

her maternity leave finishes next month and she has to go back to work and do a minimum of 3 months before she can leave…she would love to leave before that but we simply cant afford to pay back the maternity pay if she does…

just to add i had another look at the person/job spec and it said it was essential that the successful candidate had to have a degree in a finance related subject and had to be either ACCA or CIMA qualified…the candidate had neither so why did she even get an interview in the first place when she did not meet the criteria…
the salary grading was in actual fact a grade 7 not 6 as i had originally thought…
the girl has also confirmed to my wife that they have offered the job at the band 7 salary and not at a lower grade..
she also contacted my wife immediately after her interview and said that she struggled to answer some of the questions as she didnt know the answers…more in depth answers my left butt cheek!!
the more my wife digs into this the more it seems like it was a set up…but like you say they have covered their tracks pretty well and she has no physical proof so cant prove anything….i’ve told her she has to take this on the chin and put it down to experience now and move on but that does not stop her from still feeling shafted which she has in this case…

Hmmm…. Here’s me with 25 years experience in critical care wondering exactly how hard any of these folk work for their band 6 and 7s…

I’ve conducted internal interviews, it’s HELL. There is always a candidate who has been there for 20 years, and frankly doesn’t even see why they should have to go through the process, it’s just insulting. The whole thing is conducted as a Future Grievance Avoidance Exercise.

OK I’m exaggerating but this kind of attitude does come across at interviews, more in what isn’t said. And the other lassie is just trying to make your wife feel better.

She needs to learn from this and move on, and before she files a grievance, she should have a think about what she is trying to achieve with it. She won’t get handed the job.

She won’t get handed the job.

she didnt expect to be handed the job but if the process of recruitment had been fair and she had been beaten to the post by someone who actually met the criteria then that would have been fair and she would have gladly accepted the outcome….the fact that the successful candidate did not meet the criteria in the first place and should not have even been interviewed suggests that something is not right about the recruitment process within that division of the NHS….my wife’s grievance is towards the process and the actions of the key decision makers in this whole episode

just to add i had another look at the person/job spec and it said it was essential that the successful candidate had to have a degree in a finance related subject and had to be either ACCA or CIMA qualified…the candidate had neither so why did she even get an interview in the first place when she did not meet the criteria…

I would ask about this tbh [ not a complaint but clarification as it seems very odd] as you should not be able to shortlist let alone selct someoen who does not have the skills or qualifications you ask for …the reasons for this should be blindingly obvious

Been in the recieving end but postively when someone else had to stand down for a job [ after the interview] because they did not have a degree. it was of no relevance to the role but meant i got it over them…we both agreed it was unfair though

Ultimately what would you like to see happen OP?

The Job taken away from the girl and given to your partner?

Compensation?

Neither are particularly pleasant.

Been in the recieving end but postively when someone else had to stand down for a job [ after the interview] because they did not have a degree. it was of no relevance to the role but meant i got it over them…we both agreed it was unfair though

i agree with this and so does the wife that if the post had no relevance to education/qualifications then she would have no qualms about losing out to the girl but as the education/qualifications are relevant to the post and the girl did not fulfill this criteria, then there must be something wrong with the recruitment process…

Hora given your profession why not add something constructive?
They may not be “pleasant” but what has happened seems to be outside of normal practice within recruitment – why not give your view on this?
Would you say it is the norm to give the job to candidates who do not have the essential criteria for the job ?
Is it the norm to even interview them?
is it the norm within the public sector?

Your right though none of this is pleasant I would question now whether it is fair and whether they can actually do this tbh- possibly can in private sectir but I am not aware of anyone ever being shortlisted who did not meet the essential criteria for any job in the public sector

Does sound a bit crap, even if your wife was much worse at the interview it doesn’t sound like the successful candidate is actually qualified, I’m surprised the people doing the hiring are willing to take that risk.
Personally I lost out on an internal promotion about 10 years ago, on paper I was the obvious candidate but I sucked in the interview and the other guy got it, slightly awkward as he was then my boss but it all worked out in the end – his role became much more managerial and spreadsheet based and mine stayed technical which is what I wanted anyway.
Not really sure there’s much you can do in this your wife’s situation without some obvious evidence to support your case, she’ll likely just do more harm to her career if she raises a grievance and nothing can be proved. Sucks but this is reality, shit happens.

Ultimately what would you like to see happen OP?

The Job taken away from the girl and given to your partner?

Compensation?

Neither are particularly pleasant.

the wife wants neither, whats done is done…she really likes this girl and doesnt blame her for getting the job, and wouldnt want the job taken away from her…she doesnt begrudge her for applying to the job…everyone is entitled to apply…but there was a selection criteria that was in place that the girl did not meet and the senior managers/directors either failed to see that or completely ignored it…
in an ideal world she would like to see this addressed so it doesnt happen again in the future and those who were involved in the decision making process should be held accountable…but in reality that’s not going to happen so she’s going to have to suck it up and soldier on for the next 3 months before she can leave…

It’s only 3 months.

Head down, get it done & leave. When she has an exit interview, then is the time to come clean.

Can she speak to HR independenelty re recruitment procedures. I would be surprised if they wish to defend this or this is within agreed guidelines

IANAL but i when people do not folow their own guidelines for things they are on very dodgy ground.
I would be amazed if they can select folk for intereview/jobs who dont have the essential criteria as it is essential you have them to do the job

FWIW I am a union rep – though I have also been management and recruited- and i have never heard of anything like this tbh.
I would ask HR tbh.

Junkyard I see allsorts in all ways. Some wonderful which is why I still do the job.

(sorry I was meaning she won’t get handed the job as a result of the grievance process – not suggesting that she thought she was owed the job, apols for unclearness !)

But railing against the perceived unfairness isn’t helping, and the more she does this the worse it will be for everyone. It’s just work at the end of the day, and if the knob ends employed somebody younger who really isn’t up to the job then they will have to deal with the problems with that at some point. Best advice is as loads of people above have said. Smile nicely, don’t sue them, polish her CV.

BTW- OP I can sympathise. It seems like you are inbetween a rock and a hardplace on this.

amaan – Member

So anybody here work for the NHS or have experience?

Yes I have, including recruiting/appointing people in the NHS, and explaining to disgruntled candidates why they didn’t get the job. Happily I have never had to appoint someone who interviewed well but I knew to be the ‘wrong’ person, as the good ones I appointed also scored highest at interview. (and with shortlisting maybe 8 for interview out of as many as 70 applicants, I have also ruthlessly binned lord knows how many applications without the right qualifications and experience!)

IMHO, to be able to go from a b3 to b6 at age 19 in finance dept without professional qualifications suggests to me that the bandings of posts is rather up the spout, ie that b6 should be a 5 or less. And/or that there has been some serious back-scratching and golf played.

However, and it is sad to say that a ‘good’ hr/workforce development department (and by ‘good’, I mean one that effectively protects the interests of the organisation and the Chosen Few against the interests of the rest of the rokforce and the patients) will have covererd all bases, and there will be a ‘legit’ but obviously cooked-up explanation for everything that has happened including a rationale for how the successful candidte has been offered a post lacking major parts of the person spec.

By all means involve unions of you want to blow smoke up their asses but I wouldn’t expect to have a band 6 at the end of it. 🙁

You can fly up the NHS bands quickly – in 12 months, my wife went from Band 2 (Health Care Assistant) to Band 6 (currently covering for someone who’s a Band 7).

Wife interviews for bands 3-6 on a regular basis and I mentioned your wife’s situation. She confirms that candidates are invited to interview on the basis of meeting qualification/experience criteria, they are then asked a variety of set questions which they are then marked on. No different from most other interview processes.Unfortunately for your wife the successful candidate scored higher -only in the situation where more than one candidate has the same highest score does other factors such as experience fall into the mix.
Looking at the glass half full, your wife needs to see this as a learning opportunity and go for it again next time and succeed. Easier said than done.

and there will be a ‘legit’ but obviously cooked-up explanation for everything that has happened including a rationale for how the successful candidte has been offered a post lacking major parts of the person spec.

Possibly but i will be interested to see how they have got round the essential bit – any suggestions?

By all means involve unions of you want to blow smoke up their asses but I wouldn’t expect to have a band 6 at the end of it.

The issues is about making sure HR follow their own rules and choose fairly it is not about making you a Band 6 – it is unlikely to help your wife get this but may help others.

She confirms that candidates are invited to interview on the basis of meeting qualification/experience criteria

She did not meet the criteris on qualifications she lacked an essential qualification- this is the critical point – what does your wife think now?

Would have been helpful if I had read the second page – 😳
Definetly something fundamentally wrong there if the other candidate did not meet essential qualifications/experience and in addition if HR confirmed that your wife scored highest.
Something very strange happening in the process. Yep worth taking the matter up with a union rep.

Just sounds like a lot of typical public sector, not-living-in-the-real-world whining to me!

Getting unions involved? For the love of God! Seriously?

*runs off and hides* 😛

in all honesty she wouldnt accept the post if they offered itto her now as she knows she’d be doing a job they didnt want her to have so gave it to someone who didnt meet the criteria…
like i have said the director who is in the thick of all this has been waging a vendetta against her ever since she questioned the fact they increased the salary for her maternity cover but would revert it on her return…but once again my wife cant prove this vendetta as the director is playing very cleverly…

binners – i was expecting a comical comment from you a lot sooner… 😀

On the plus side, your misses is going back to her old role, on reduced hours. This old role she will be able to do in her sleep which is a good thing, as having a young toddler at home, at least she can catch up on her sleep somewhere.

As for the mat cover and appointment of new role it does sound as if your misses was shafted.
I think the managerial team liked the other girl and she proved herself whole on covering the position and the new role was a ‘done deal’ for her and they held show interviews to prove an open and fair practice.

Have a chat with a union rep, but submitting any sort of “unfair” claim will mark your misses as a trouble maker and might make any further promotions difficult. Unfair but true.

My suggestion would be to suck it up for the 3 months she has to work. Take it easy at work and do the bear minimum and concentrate on being a mum. Continue to look for another position either in or out of the NHS.