# Job application - unsuitable Why?



## Turbury (19 May 2008)

Hi all,
Does anyone know what information (if any) you are entitled to regarding unsucessfull job applications. I recently applied for a job put wasn't even called for interview, I do not know why, can I ask the company to tell me why I was unsuitable for the position?


----------



## newirishman (19 May 2008)

Sure you can give them a call and ask. However, I doubt that you get much out of it. There is no legal obligation to tell you.


----------



## tech3 (19 May 2008)

yes, under the freedom of information act they are entitled to tell you why you were unsuitable and this information will be very useful when applying for other jobs.maybe if you study the criteria this will give you the information you are seeking....
Don't go in with all guns blazing ... ask politely and who knows where it will get you. good luck


----------



## Brendan Burgess (19 May 2008)

I think that the Freedom of Information only applies to public bodies.

You could write a very nice letter to the company saying that you really wanted to work for them and that you were disappointed not to be called for interview and is there any feedback they could give you on your shortcomings. 

Brendan


----------



## rmelly (19 May 2008)

I think I have read here before that you can request under data protection laws, but was sceptical as to whether this was correct.

Did you meet all the criteria?


----------



## z103 (19 May 2008)

> I do not know why, can I ask the company to tell me why I was unsuitable for the position?


I'd be very nervous about giving out information like that. Might end up in some employment tribunal for discrimination or something.

Maybe the position was withdrawn.


----------



## aidan119 (19 May 2008)

In the old days you could ring up and someone may give you a few helpful pointers, eg cv was bad, experience not sufficient etc.
However, in this day and age of litigation any sensible employer should say nothing as they have no obligation to do so.
Don't be wasting time and energy, drop it and keep looking.


----------



## Turbury (20 May 2008)

The job was a lecturing position in a third level college and I met all the criteria. The main reason I would like to get the info. is to improve my chances next time - thanks for all the replies!


----------



## pernickety (20 May 2008)

Sorry to sound cynical, but could it have been a job that was 'earmarked' for someone (internally) and just advertised as a matter of following procedure?


----------



## gearoidmm (20 May 2008)

pernickety said:


> Sorry to sound cynical, but could it have been a job that was 'earmarked' for someone (internally) and just advertised as a matter of following procedure?


 
Having had experience of such appointments, they still have to hold interviews even if only for the sake of appearances, especially for public jobs.


----------



## csirl (20 May 2008)

> The job was a lecturing position in a third level college and I met all the criteria. The main reason I would like to get the info. is to improve my chances next time - thanks for all the replies!


 
Then the FOI Act applies. You are entitled to get copies of the notes that the interview panel made during your interview and how they scored you.


----------



## Purple (20 May 2008)

csirl said:


> Then the FOI Act applies. You are entitled to get copies of the notes that the interview panel made during your interview and how they scored you.


They might get lost


----------



## Purple (20 May 2008)

leghorn said:


> I'd be very nervous about giving out information like that. Might end up in some employment tribunal for discrimination or something.


Same here. There is no way I would get into such a conversation.


----------



## gearoidmm (20 May 2008)

csirl said:


> Then the FOI Act applies. You are entitled to get copies of the notes that the interview panel made during your interview and how they scored you.


 
The problem for the OP was that they did not get an interview and want to know why so this does not apply


----------



## Complainer (21 May 2008)

gearoidmm said:


> The problem for the OP was that they did not get an interview and want to know why so this does not apply


There should be a record of the shortlisting evaluation, and the OP can ask for an explanation of why they were not shortlisted. Most public bodies will have policies or codes of practice on recruitment which will commit them to provide such information.


----------



## Pique318 (22 May 2008)

Turbury said:


> The job was a lecturing position in a third level college and I met all the criteria.


In your opinion...
Maybe you met the minimum standard but other applicants were far more qualified.


----------



## becky (22 May 2008)

You are entitled to know the reason whay you were not 'shortlised' for interview.

I'd ring/write and ask for same first.


----------



## ClubMan (22 May 2008)

becky said:


> You are entitled to know the reason whay you were not 'shortlised' for interview.


Under what rules/legislation?


----------



## becky (22 May 2008)

Under FOI.


----------



## berflan (29 May 2008)

As a person who conducts interviews for potential employees I first separate my applications into two piles.  A definate no and the ones with potential.  The potentials are then divided into various groups and depending on the number of applicants interviews are arranged in blocks.  This can be a very time consuming process and sometimes we may have over 100  potentials, we can not interview everyone.  A suitable applicant is often found before all potentials are interviewed.  I would not take it personally, sometimes it is just the luck of the draw.


----------



## MrMan (29 May 2008)

Plus there is always the possibility that the application wasn't received, did you receive notice that it was? If not its no harm to call and they may include you in an interview if the post hasn't already been taken.


----------



## tallpaul (29 May 2008)

FOI Act may entitle you to find out why you were not shortlisted. FOI enables you to get a copy of all relevant records surrounding the process. The FOI request may unearth a marking sheet or some such document, but only if the document exists. 

You should also look closely at Section 18 of the 2003 Act which seems to be what you are looking for. However there are exemptions under this Section that may or may not apply in this case.


----------



## Flax (29 May 2008)

Turbury said:


> The job was a lecturing position in a third level college and I met all the criteria. The main reason I would like to get the info. is to improve my chances next time - thanks for all the replies!


 
Did you follow up your job application with a telephone call? If not, is it possible they never received your application?


----------



## Lomond (29 May 2008)

I have experience of shortlisting in third level institutions. The process operates with a pre established criteria which is usually based on a set of essential and desirable requirements from the job description.

The shortlisting process would focus on skills, experience, qualifications and any other key requirments and is applied to all candidates.

The notes from the shortlisting are kept and there is an expectation that some unsuccesfull candidates may follow up with a phone call. This is not an issue and usually there is a clear reason why you have not got through the shortlisting process. Its no big deal to phone and politely ask for the reason.


----------



## rmelly (29 May 2008)

I'd do that rather than making an FOI request, especially if you want to be considered for future positions.


----------



## Complainer (29 May 2008)

rmelly said:


> I'd do that rather than making an FOI request, especially if you want to be considered for future positions.


It is very unlikely that the person who will deal with the FOI request will be the same person who deals with applications for future positions. Even it if were the same person, the principles of fairness, openness and transparency will apply to future positions, and the process for future positions will be open to the same FOI process. It would be a foolhardy HR person that allowed bias arising from previous FOI requests to creep into shortlisting processes.


----------



## rmelly (30 May 2008)

but in the real world...


----------



## Complainer (30 May 2008)

rmelly said:


> but in the real world...


In the real world. any person showing bias would be open to review by an independent person, and to a formal complaints process. It's easy to wink-wink-nudge-nudge about possible problems, but perhaps you'd like to show some real evidence that such problems have occured and continue to occur?


----------



## rmelly (31 May 2008)

I am well aware of the goings on, I have no intention of showing you real evidence.

Your belief in a 





> review by an independent person, and to a formal complaints process


 is naive at best.

Put a candidate or CV in front of me and I'll find a dozen reasons he/she shouldn't get the job - whoever it is and whatever the position.

Have you gone through the FOI process as described below?


----------



## Complainer (31 May 2008)

rmelly said:


> Your belief in a  is naive at best.



It might help move the discussion forward if you are specific about your concerns about such processes, rather than just using the FUD factor approach. These review processes exist for most public bodies.



rmelly said:


> Put a candidate or CV in front of me and I'll find a dozen reasons he/she shouldn't get the job - whoever it is and whatever the position.


You miss the point. It's not a matter of what dozen reasons you find. It is a matter of these reasons standing up to independent review when referenced against the published job requirements. If they stand up, then they are valid. If they don't, your bias is exposed.



rmelly said:


> Have you gone through the FOI process as described below?


I've used FOI a number of times, though not for recruitment issues. I find that most of the rubbish spouted about flawed recruitment processes is down to candidates' denial.


----------



## rmelly (31 May 2008)

Complainer said:


> I find that most of the rubbish spouted about flawed recruitment processes is down to candidates' denial.


 
Exactly, so why encourage the OP and give false hope.


----------



## rmelly (31 May 2008)

Complainer said:


> It might help move the discussion forward


 
I'm not going to put my career at risk to prove a point. I am not referring to hearsay - I am familiar with official/unofficial policies and attitudes toward FOI.


----------



## Complainer (31 May 2008)

rmelly said:


> Exactly, so why encourage the OP and give false hope.





rmelly said:


> I'm not going to put my career at risk to prove a point. I am not referring to hearsay - I am familiar with official/unofficial policies and attitudes toward FOI.


I never suggested that you would breach professional confidences. If you want your slurs about bias in recruitment against people who would have submitted FOI requests in the past to carry any weight, you will need to be much more detailed, without breaching any confidences. 

Nothing I said would have given anybody false hope. This tugging-of-forelock attitude that we mustn't complain in case we cause offence to somebody needs to be challenged. These attitudes only survive as long as we let them.


----------



## rmelly (1 Jun 2008)

What will complaining actually achieve in this case - will it get her the job? Complaining for the sake of it is not particularly constructive.

My comments on FOI relate to it in general, not to it's use in relation to recruitment specifically. You admit to not having used the process for recruitment, so this entire discussion is redundant.

I also don't appreciate being preached to about complaining - I do my fair share of complaining when it is warranted - I just don't view it as a "badge of honour" like you clearly do - if your userID, footer & website is anything to go by.


----------



## eileen alana (1 Jun 2008)

Complainer - I have read your website and think its very informative and if more of us compained every time we come up against poor customer service, the world might be a less stressful place to live in.


----------



## Complainer (1 Jun 2008)

rmelly said:


> What will complaining actually achieve in this case - will it get her the job? Complaining for the sake of it is not particularly constructive.


We seem to have lost sight of the original question. The OP was inquiring about how to get information on why their application was not successful. As several posters have pointed out, a simple phone call to the relevant HR department may well be all that is required to elicit useful information that can help the OP when applying for future jobs.

It would only be in the case where this information is not forthcoming that the OP will need to invoke a complaints procedure. To dismiss this procedure because it will not get her the job is missing the point. The OP is seeking information.



rmelly said:


> My comments on FOI relate to it in general, not to it's use in relation to recruitment specifically. You admit to not having used the process for recruitment, so this entire discussion is redundant.


No, it's not redundant. Regardless of whether you or I have personal experience of the use of FOI in recruitment situations, the fact remains that the OP has a legal entitlement to such information under FOI. It may well not be necessary to invoke this right, but it exists, nonetheless.



rmelly said:


> I also don't appreciate being preached to about complaining - I do my fair share of complaining when it is warranted - I just don't view it as a "badge of honour" like you clearly do - if your userID, footer & website is anything to go by.





eileen alana said:


> Complainer - I have read your website and think its very informative and if more of us compained every time we come up against poor customer service, the world might be a less stressful place to live in.



Thanks to both of you for your feedback, which is always welcome when constructive (both positive and negative).


----------

