Discrimination?

[GrumpyCowToday]

Do you think this is discrimination?

The job is for a managerial position in a care home.

Candidate A
30 years old with 2 children
7 years relevant experience
HE Certificate in Dementia
Registered nurse (with a degree)
First Aid certified

Candidate B
55 years old with grown up children
10 years relevant experience
no other qualifications (literally none!)

Candidate B got the position.

Does A get on with people internally?

It would be hard to tell if it was discrimination unless both candidates had the exact same experience and qualifications - even then one could come across better in the interview process.

Sometimes those who have more qualifications are paid better so it could be that B was a cheaper option even.

You can have all the qualifications and experience but if someone else interviews better thats it. Interview is the thing that decides who gets the job as everyone invited has shown in their application they are a good candidate for the job.
Just because you all thought she would get it does not mean she was the best fit.

I have interviewed people that were amaizing on paper but when interviewed they just didn't sell themselves at all or came across rather rude and like they were better than everyone else. And equally I have interviewed people who were ok but not amaizing on paper and who were fantastic in their interview and I knew instantly they would be great fit to the team and very capable.

I'd be wondering why an RGN is going for a care home managerial position that does not require that qualification tbh.

Your update sheds another interesting light on this:

As yourself - is A showing particularly good leadership skills by discussing the process with colleagues and dropping the insinuation that B is some unqualified idiot who only got the job because A was being discriminated against?

*Ask yourself

If a diploma in HE and a Nursing Degree where an essential requirement of the job you would have a point.

However if BOTH met the job requirements and person spec (which they must have done to be interviewed) then I guess (using a matrix) B did better at interview

How can you possibly say to A that she would get the job when you had no idea what external candidates there were.

Even if B "only has 10 years" experience in that field she has more life experience behind her which may be relevant to a managerial role.

If A is 30, has done a degree, 7 years experience and has 2 kids (2 lots of maternity leave) does she have a true 7 years experience or is it more like 5 with the maternity leave.

Do the owners think she is too matey with her colleagues to become their manager. It sounds like that may be an issue if you and your colleagues were saying she would get the job to her.

That may be why they felt an external older candidate would be a better colleague.

• better manager I meant.

Honestly, candidate A seems too immature to be a manager if she's jumped straight to discrimination because she didn't get it. Maybe the other person interviewed better? Maybe they have more managerial experience? Maybe they have qualifications A isn't aware of? Why does A know so much anyway? Did they see Bs cv?

She needs to accept she didn't get it and move on. Work with her new colleague abd learn from them. It's not like they will be around forever, they retire in 10 years. Or could leave before then going on how high turn around is in care homes. She could get it then.

Candidate A could have been a complete douche bag ... Wrong fit/personality even. It's only discrimination if someone had actively said I chose candidate B because A had children for example. Otherwise it's a matter of opinion that looks discriminative but is not.

Everyone saying management experience - it's specific and role specific for care as a registered manager. It won't just be she's a people person.

Person B probably interviewed better.
The manager isn't always going to be there to give injections so the district nurse will have to come in anyways potentially.
An older candidate will also retire earlier so they may need to recruit again in the next 10 years. So I don't reason that she is an easier hire on the basis of her age.
I don't necessarily think there is anything in this as the person specification for the job was fulfilled by person B.

How do you know her qualifications and experience?

In my experience when an external candidate gets a job over someone that's worked there. The person overlooked is not well liked by the powers that be. Just my experience.

@Ireolu

I agree. Promoting from within is always easier, so there's a very good reason why they haven't.

Unless the role requires those specific qualifications, then the additional years of experience seem to be more valuable. Not discrimination, just recognition that experience is of better use to them than certificates.

It's only discrimination if someone had actively said I chose candidate B because A had children for example

Even then it's a bit shaky since parenthood isn't a protected characteristic, though at a push it could be indirect discrimination on the grounds of sex

I agree, though, that without the interview notes we can't know, and it may be that B was a better fit personality-wise - something possibly underlined by the poor optics of A leaping straight to a suggestion of discrimination

A few years ago I had an experience like candidate A - but without the children. I was the deputy in the department. I had the medical degree and the relevant PhD, along with the history of managing complex international programmes of work. I was, then, in my early 40's. Had been with organisation a few years and before that had similar high profile jobs in other similar organisations both in the UK and internationally. I was an experienced line manager and had previously managed a large team - but in my current position hadn't managed anyone for about 3 years.

I was the internal candidate up against a younger and less experienced person. Again no kids. She had a medical degree but no relevant PhD and had never run a project, let alone programme of work. She hadn't got the international experience (in our field that was important) and had at least 10 years less experience than me. She had no line management experience and hadn't even been in a supervisory role.

Guess who got the job? Hint: it wasn't me.

The "reason" was that I didn't have enough recent line management experience which was fine- if it wasn't for the fact that the person who got the job had none at all.

Sometimes it's just politics. I was known in that dept and had spoken out about a few things in the past. That was my downfall.

Oops sorry. Hadn't finished. That particular organisation (not the UK civil service btw as I've said I worked for them in the past but a charity) had a habit of hiring young, inexperienced people on the basis that they challenge the really shit senior management less.

Promoting from within is always easier, so there's a very good reason why they haven't

Also a very valid point ...

Has candidate B managed a nursing home before? That would be enough to beat A in terms of experience.

I have no idea because I haven't interviewed either candidate. Qualifications, experience, children and age often mean nothing.

I've recruited the less qualified person a few times because they interviewed well and had a lot of potential to do the role through their experience.

Care homes don’t need a registered nurse, so the qualifications are immaterial. So it is down to person specification surely.