[Closed] discrimination at work...

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

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 [b][u]on paper[/u][/b] 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...

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.

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.

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

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?

[img] [/img]

*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.

I might be missing something here as I have only skimmed the thread but I am not sure how you think your wife was shafted over maternity. She was a band 5 and for the period of her maternity was elevated to band 6 which presumably means she will have been paid at a higher rate during maternity. At face value that looks like someone was looking after her. Expecting to keep the higher band when coming back sounds like someone being a bit greedy especially if it was explained at the start. Now if your wife starts to get a bit huffy about this I can understand why senior manager may not be seeing her in a favourable light and they may be seeing it as a sign of things to come, so best avoid it and not give her the new job. But as I said, I may be missing some important detail there.

If the new lass really is unqualified for the new role then I would expect her to be exposed fairly quickly and she will then be needing to find a way to get the answers she needs. That may then be the next choice your wife faces as she may be one of the people the young lass comes to for advice. Will she help her out or let her fend for herself? I agree with the other posters though. However unfair it may seem now I can't see any benefit in kicking up a fuss over it. That will only end badly for her. Suck it up and decide what she wants to do longer term. If she likes the job she is doing then crack on with it and do it the best of her ability. Ask for more detailed feedback on her interview though and where she perhaps underperformed as she wants to use it as a learning experience so that she is better prepared for future opportunities. Sure, she may express that she is disappointed to have not got the role but realises that she may not have come across well enough in the interview and wants to improve. Then see where that takes her. No good being bitter about it though.

bikingcatastrophe - just to be clear to you my wife is on a band 4 salary and the person who is covering while she is on maternity is being paid at band 5 for doing the same job, during this time the maternity pay my wife has received has been on band 4...when she returns she will still be paid at band 4...
also the girl who got the job did not meet the essential criteria in the job spec so should not even had got an interview

maybe you should try reading the comments properly before making your conclusions....

the discrimination is due to what they have done with her salary grading while she has been off on maternity....
as for the recruitment process its less a case of discrimination and more a case of nepotism...
either way its a stitch up and the best way to describe whats happened i will quote Miffy and Mundiesmiester:

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.

From what I understand its all* flex-time, flexi-lunch, extended lunches for shopping allowed, work from home etc etc.

*All but the emergency services and people on the lowest-rung/pay.

I suspect your subtle troll will work well Hora and we are blessed you found time ,in the cut and thrust of the private sector, to send it

Thanks

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).

You have to be very good and very driven to move from unskilled (as in a no formal qualifications) HCA to Department management level in 12 months - not many HCA's have that drive or ability.

And it's not so quick in nursing - 3 year degree to get Band 5, couple of years to apply for Ward Sister posts (Band 6) and a couple more for Ward/Department Manager (Band 7). Some might do it a bit quicker but not by much and the norm would be for much longer than 2 years between bands, especially as you are often waiting for someone to die or retire.

Binners !! Where did you find that picture of me ?? I'm callin my lawyers !!

You have to be very good and very driven to move from unskilled (as in a no formal qualifications) HCA to Department management level in 12 months - not many HCA's have that drive or ability.

...and agenda for change a few years back regraded (in a downwards direction!) posts that didn't carry significant managment responsibility and risk (often of actual human lives rather than financial risk), and crucially didn't require some significant or postgraduate graduate level qualification and several years relevant experience.

Perhaps xiphon's mrs was in a b2 hca post but with some other non-nursing and significant qualifications and experience under her belt that meant she had the person spec for a different much higher (and I assume non-nursing) post. As an example, I have in the past employed a couple of psychology graduates as mental health HCA's as they wanted the experience (and bleddy good at their jobs they were too), and who have then gone straight on (quite 'properly' in terms of person spec/experience) to be B5 psychology assistants or B6 doctorate trainee clinical psychologists.

Going back to the OP's wife's post however, I would still be interested to hear what creative HR shenanigans let an underqualified and underexperienced finance bod cover someone's maternity leave paid a whole band above the original post (the grief we have had covering maternity leave at all sometimes, let alone for more money!!), and then leapfrog to a higher band again in the same area without the person spec. 😕

Perhaps xiphon's mrs was in a b2 hca post but with some other non-nursing and significant qualifications and experience under her belt that meant she had the person spec for a different much higher (and I assume non-nursing) post

Which what I badly alluded to (was talking unqualified in respect of the job she was doing not her per se).

and agenda for change a few years back regraded (in a downwards direction!) posts that didn't carry significant managment responsibility and risk (often of actual human lives rather than financial risk),

Indeed.

[b]@julianwilson[/b]

Pretty much hit the nail on the head - she had been a HCA at the hospital since aged 16 (part time job), and did occasional shifts for some money (and to keep her on payroll).

Initially she covered for a ward clerk, then she was seconded to a junior governance position, then applied for a permanent role in governance, then somehow bumped up another grade or two.

I guess the NHS thought her "qualifications" (BSc & MSc) meant she could probably be more use than HCA.

(I don't think the fact her mother is a Matron at the same hospital had any influence... 😉 )

It's just a temp job until she secures PhD funding though.

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?

You do have an interesting mix of seemingly quite left wing politics mixed with the classic 'Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells' Daily Mail reader ethos. 🙂