Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

Original poster

WIBU to raise a grievance?

22 replies

WorkWo3s · 04/09/2015 15:27

I have also posted this in Employment Issues but thought I'd also post here for perspective/traffic/different views.

I've raised a grievance in work and now I'm not sure if I've just acted in anger.

I applied for a job internaly as did another colleague. I would say this colleague and I were at least matched in terms of knowledge and ability but if I'm being honest I would say I would be a better fit for this position than him.

We were both interviewed two weeks ago - by his best mate! Interview went well, lots of positive feedback for me but I didn't get the job, they just thought that i 'wasn't right' for the job. He has now been given the job. Anyone else internally that has mentioned him getting this new position have all been like WTF? Even if they don't know that I also applied.

During my interview I was told there would most likely be a second stage interview, there wasn't. There is also other history between myself/my manager/colleague who got the job and colleague who was doing the interviewing. In my mind there was no way this could ever have been a fair selection process. And thats what I've raised the grievance based on.

Am I being ridiculous and should just STFU and leave it be?

I have no idea what they can even do if my grievance is upheld?

Any ideas?

FWIW I am now actively seeking alternate employment.

OP posts:

hantslass1 · 04/09/2015 15:41

It does sounds like the HR policies need looking at/properly implementing.

If you are going to leave anyway, how strongly do you feel about raising a grievance? It's a BIG hassle. It's hard. Ultimately sometimes it really is easier to walk away even if it really annoys you because it's even more traumatic to pursue it.

A big hug for you whatever you decide, I'd be fed up too.

Twitterqueen · 04/09/2015 15:41

I have no legal training or experience here so feel free to discount my advice.

I would say though that without any kind of proof, you face a difficult battle. Can you actually prove that you were the better candidate? ie do you have have specific - and higher qualifications than your colleague? Do you have specific experience that he doesn't?

Also, IME, many jobs are given to those whom the interviewer has a good, personal relationship with. This is just human nature and obviously it works well in the long-term if those two people get on well. If 2 candidates are very evenly matched, appointing the one you 'like' most is as good a criteria as any.

CarrotVan · 04/09/2015 15:50

It's perfectly possible to run a fair selection process where candidates and panel members are friends. I've been interviewed (successfully and unsuccessfully) by friends and have interviewed others.

You need some specific reason why you think the selection process breached HR policy/procedure or was discriminatory. The lack of a possible second interview isnt enough. They said there might be one but didn't need it because they were able to make a clear decision after the first stage - that's fine. Presumably there was a panel not a single interviewer so the friendship issue is mitigated by multiple decision makers.

You may disagree with the decision as may others but perhaps your colleague interviews really, really well

Original poster

WorkWo3s · 04/09/2015 16:06

The belief behind it being unfair and not impartial is not just that they are friends, they are childhood friends, best men at each others weddings yada yada. The other interviewer was not part of the decision making apparently, only this one guy.

The other issue is the history between us all, which I could be here all day typing about but its so unbelievable that you'd probably think I was a troll because I can't believe this guy would've ended up in the position he is in with any other 'proper' company.

I have more experience than the person who got the job - in fact I was responsible for a huge chunk of his training - our division of the company were also in the process of managing him out. Poor timekeeping/attendance/lieing being the reason.

I'm just gutted that I thought the company might do something right for once. I'm upset that I've put so much time and effort into it all and I'm getting nothing in return. Most of all I just want the company to realise they cannot do this shit and make sure it doesn't happen again.

OP posts:

QuiteLikely5 · 04/09/2015 16:11

Too right you have got a right to raise a grievance.

Companies can't go around letting their main interviewers interview their best friends! That is bloody stupid and it should be someone impartial.

I mean I could understand if they were just colleagues but , school pals, best man. No.

AuroraTeagarden · 04/09/2015 16:28

I don't blame you for feeling that way but I'm not sure how you'd go about proving it. Having said that, they (the company) have let themselves get into a silly situation if they don't insist on an impartial panel or at least one impartial interviewer - it's not uncommon in my place of work for people to be interviewing people they have a huge work and personal history with so, because of that, they always have one person from HR who doesn't know any candidate personally.

Good luck with your new job search and leave them to it - the interviewer is going to be the one who looks bad if his bezzy mate can't do the job properly!

CarrotVan · 04/09/2015 18:01

How do you know the other interviewer wasn't part of the decision-making? You have to think about what you know and can evidence against specific breaches of policy, procedure or law

Heehawheehawheehaw · 04/09/2015 18:10

From an outsiders view it does sound a bit slanted in favour of your colleague

RealityCheque · 04/09/2015 18:50

It's unfair.

Business IS unfair.

You will do yourself no favours in pursuing this. Fuck all will come from it with the exception of you getting noted by 'some' people as a trouble maker.

A really, really fucking bad idea.

ChristineDePisan · 04/09/2015 18:58

I thought I posted on the thread earlier, but it doesn't seem to be showing...

Anyway...

I think you need to be clear a) why you want to take a grievance (it needs to refer to policies and procedures not being followed, not just an "it's not fair" complaint); and b) what you hope will happen as a result.

Worst case scenario is that the procedure to hear the grievance is long and involved and stressful, and it is not upheld and your "cards are marked" as a troublemaker. Even if the grievance is upheld, that doesn't automatically mean that the other person will lose their promotion and it will go to you instead: how would you react if this is what happens?

letmehaveyoursoul · 04/09/2015 18:58

Unless it's public sector I'm pretty sure they can employ who they like

letmehaveyoursoul · 04/09/2015 18:59

Ps- obv unless there is discrimination in which case you have point

Original poster

WorkWo3s · 04/09/2015 22:34

There is an argument for sexual discrimination. There are no women throughout the company in these roles at all, in any division but I choose to go with the not following procedure grievance so we'll see.

reality why should I care about being labelled a trouble maker in a company that have done fuck all to help me progress in8 years? No matter how many times I've said I want a career, I want to progress, I want to do well for the company. They all say oh you're great, fantastic we're lucky to have you and then do nothing about it. As I said I'm getting out anyway but why the fuck should I meekly accept the loss of a promotion that would involve an extra £10k a year, company car etc etc just because I didn't happen to be best mates with the interviewer?

The last laugh will be mine anyway as this guy is beyond incapable of doing this job I'm just gutted I won't be around to see him land on his lieing arse.

Thanks for everyone's thoughts. It's done now and we'll see how the company handles it. They are already floundering and it's been passed around half a dozen managers before being landed on the supervisor in another office(my manager has been copied in on all the emails and told me this late this afternoon).

With any luck I can hand my notice in sometime this month and get out which I think will be the best in the long run.

OP posts:

OutToGetYou · 04/09/2015 22:39

It might have looked better if you had raised your concerns before you were told you'd been unsuccessful.

Original poster

WorkWo3s · 04/09/2015 22:42

I was only told two days before interview who would be doing it, didn't know colleague was being interviewed for same role until the day of interview when I saw him suited and booted in the kitchen AFTER my interview. As far as I was aware up until that point he was being managed out as above. It's ludicrous to me that someone with time keeping and attendance issues has been given a role which is effectively self managed and no one really knows where you are/what your doing day to day.

OP posts:

ChristineDePisan · 04/09/2015 22:52

Is there anything in your staff handbook that says that you aren't eligible for promotion if you are going through a formal disciplinary procedure? (That's assuming your colleague was being formally managed, not informally told off for his time keeping etc)

Have you come across the Peter Principle before? Maybe it applies here...

Original poster

WorkWo3s · 04/09/2015 22:54

The staff handbooks is rubbish, hasn't been updated since 2008, there is actually nothing in it about internal vacancies or recruitment procedures. There isn't even a timescale for a response to the grievance so god knows how long they'll drag it out.

I'm just heading to bed christine but thank you I'll have a look at that link tomorrow.

OP posts:

DisappointedOne · 05/09/2015 00:41

From an HR perspective this really doesn't sound like it has legs, I'm afraid. I'd focus your energies elsewhere.

InimitableJeeves · 05/09/2015 00:48

Have you got evidence of his bad timekeeping, lying etc? And was that available to the company before the interview? If so, it sounds like you have a good case.

RaskolnikovsGarret · 05/09/2015 07:36

I think you should definitely raise it. That doesn't sound fair at all. I've interviewed friends and not given them the job - easy to justify with fair criteria. This sounds like he's given his mate the job - esp if it was meant to be a two stage interview then wasn't.

confusedandemployed · 05/09/2015 07:40

I agree that it doesn't sound hopeful.

But, the one thing I would do is ask for formal feedback as to why you were unsuccessful. That could elicit a few useful things.

travellinglighter · 05/09/2015 07:50

As your leaving anyway you can use it as an opportunity to pee on their bonfire. If they can have no further effect on your life then when you leave write a polite letter to your managing director pointing out your good points, saying you didn’t really want to leave but as their is no chance of promotion for women in the company then you need to seek work elsewhere.

Flip