Moral dilemma re recruitment

[SimpleComforts]

Thankfully hypothetical atm but it could become real, if events pan out as I expect?

What do you do when someone you know from a previous job submits a good application but you really don't want them in the role, based on your previous (fairly recent) experience of them.

This is senior position and the person I expect to apply will, I'm sure submit a strong application based in truth but with some exaggeration and a lot of "building her part"i.e she was involved in the project but not nearly so much as she says she was.

If it got to interview, she would almost certainly do well, excellent presentation skills and believes her own PR.

However, IRL, she's lazy, causes enormous conflict among staff , upsets everyone who's ever worked for her, passes off other's work as her own and blames others for her mistakes.

I really don't want to work with her again and I certainly don't want to manage her, but on paper, she's a good fit for the role, it would be a great opportunity for her and it's very close to where she lives.

[EnjoyingTheSilence]

If you’re part of the recruitment process you just don’t get her in to interview.

[DeeThree]

I think you can give a factual account of your previous experience working with her. You can be diplomatic about your opinions, but I'm sure you can get your point across.

[AgentProvocateur]

Don’t interview her. This shouldn’t even be a dilemma.

[SimpleComforts]

But if applications are scored against the criteria she would do well?

[fifteenisthemagicnumber]

Are you on the recruitment/ interview panel?

[SimpleComforts]

Yes and I would be her imeadiate line manager

[MillyMollyMardy]

Would you be part of the shortlisting or interview panel? You just need to factually state your case. If I knew someone had knowledge of a candidate I'd always seek their feedback.

[MakeLemonade]

It’s fine to say that you’ve worked together before and she’s not someone you’d like on your team. Not everyone gets on in the workplace, you don’t have to go into detail, I can’t imagine anyone having an issue with it.

[Dozer]

Not a moral dilemma: wouldn’t invite her to interview.

[MsWonderful]

She wouldn’t be good for your organisation would she? It’s your duty to stop them making a mistake and employing someone awful

[SimpleComforts]

OK so I'm obviously overthinking but all my training is that you keep the short listing papers for 6m in case there's a challenge on a protected characteristic and the recruitment decision should be made on the information in front of you, equally with all the others. Prior knowledge if the candidate shouldn't be an advantage or a disadvantage. If the application is one of the better ones how would you justify not short listing?

[MrsSchadenfreude]

If you’re the hiring manager don’t call her for interview. The fact that you know she has exaggerated parts of her CV should be enough.

[Dozer]

Oh come on, just put down plausible reasons!

[herrcomesthenamechanger]

My training is the same OP. Tailor your interview questions to the qualities you actually want in a person and score accordingly. Will you be the only interviewer?

[Frazzled13]

Prior knowledge if the candidate shouldn't be an advantage or a disadvantage.

Prior work related knowledge should be relevant, particularly if you know she’s exaggerating. Someone could give an amazing interview full of lies. If you know they’re lying, of course you don’t hire them just because you shouldn’t know they’re lying based on the info in front of you.

[ScreamingBeans]

Just tailor the questions to ensure she scores low on them.

And set a presentation that she won't be good at.

You're allowed to ask follow up questions to the main ones and this is where you have the opportunity to pin her down on exactly how much involvement she had with previous projects.

[CloudsCanLookLikeSheep]

Are you seriously saying that as the hiring manager you dont know how to get out of this?

[throwingawaymyshot]

I suspect I'm like your applicant in that people don't like me or want to work with me.

In my defence, I had a very good discrimination case, which HR didn't take seriously, until my lawyer and union got involved. Policies got changed, restructures happened (to removed bullies), people underwent training etc.

No chance do I think they will ever let me progress. I'm pretty sure they think I exaggerate my skills and experience too (I don't, its the other way about really, they minimise my input)

We're only hearing your side of the story here but I sympathise with the applicant. You shouldn't let your personal opinion prevent them from being interviewed. If they challenge why they were unsuccessful for interview / the job - then how will you answer that? Can you not get someone else to interview them?

[SimpleComforts]

And there we have it.

[TableFlowerss]

I would tell the manager/recruiter that she’s a pain in the arse 🤷‍♀️

[EarringsandLipstick]

In my work place @SimpleComforts that candidate would get an interview because they would have met the essential requirements.

However, they wouldn't get the role if you had reservations, that would come out at interview stage & when they were being scored.

[yeOldeTrout]

How much is your process truly audited, OP?
Ours is scoring & paper trailed etc., but no one audits it fully.
Just score her how you know her not what she said about herself.

[SimpleComforts]

It's not audited, until there's a complaint....when it becomes evidence.

[UpperLowercaseSymbolNumber]

Oh come on. There is no protected characteristic here. And it’s not like you don’t like them because, say, their DD beat you’re DD to the coveted role of Mary in the nativity. You don’t want to employ them for good legitimate business reasons, namely there are not a good employee.

[bluejelly]

I am sure you can sure someone outperforms her on the interview, can't you?