I know people don't like swearing in thread titles but...
the bastard people who offered dh a job last week have rescinded the offer. Gits. As soon as he told them he's been off sick for a while with depression they started to get funny. Even though he did all the right things, explained it's a one-off situation (to do with his boss), supplied them with a good reference from his last boss.
AND they are a sodding primary care trust so they should know better even if it weren't illegal to discriminate. Which it is.
(And I've just heard my BIL has been involved in a nasty car crash - his fault, he's OK but the poor people he hit aren't. And my sister had to help them, being a nurse and all. She wasn't in the car, it happened a few hundred yards fro the house. Horrible.)
I have a feeling that the employment protection and anti discrimination stuff only kicks in when you have the job. I do hope I'm wrong. Most job offers are said to be subject to "satisfactory" (ie totally subjective) references and sickness records.
No, not in writing, but made verbally to the recruitment agency and to dh in person.
Dh tried to do the right thing and explain the circumstances to the manager making the offer. And then he gets kicked in the teeth. By the bloody health service!
They are trying to blame it on references - started shrieking because dh's old boss didn't get back to them the same day (WTF, he's got a magazine to edit). Dh chased and old boss got straight back to them. But now they are complaining because dh's current firm has a policy of supplying brief factual references only in writing. That's what they do for every member of staff, as the firm has explained to the new company (basically to protect themselves against being sued but is standard procedure in other firms, too).
But the PCT offering the new job is saying 'if they won't fill in our form, it's not a satisfactory reference'. Just a bloody excuse. Dh is not the company chair, he doesn't have the power to change the firm's whole policy on references. And the PCT won't accept any other referees, personal or previous employers.
You're right that it is not fair at all, poor Mr Edam.
[Since the thread contains discussion of the DDA, I just wanted to add that I do not think this would be unlawful discrimination since the DDA only applies to cases of long term disability. A condition which lasted for less than a year is not a protected disability.]
When I was on the management committee at our nursery a candidate disclosed similar information to us about her health and after the medical we required, we still hired her, acknowledging that although she may need support in the future, we still thought she was the best candidate.
I don't agree with Branflake. My DH has a number of health issues and although he was completely upfront about them once he had been offered the job, and even said that he wouldn't DDA if they thought it was all a bit much there was no reason to disclose them at interview.
I am so sorry Edam - is it worth getting a letter from your GP saying Mr Edam is now completely healthy/nearly completely healthy and sending that? Also, I know DH had problems with his old boss but could someone from the firm give an off the record reference over the phone?
I know, branflakes, we thought very carefully about it but most of the advice we got was to disclose. And that employers these days (especially the public sector) would be aware of their responsibilities under the DDA. <<hollow laugh>>
Dh has been in touch with the employment bods at MIND for instance, who encouraged him to be upfront.