Outgoing employee on interview panel?

[Troyes76]

Posting here for traffic!

I volunteer for a local charity, and our administrator is leaving, so we are about to interview for a new administrator (paid role)
The administrator who is leaving is adamant that she should be on the interview panel for the new administrator (ie the person who will take over her role)

To me, this sounds wrong - surely if you're leaving then you shouldn't be involved? I've looked on the ACAS and TUC websites but can't find anything - does anyone know the answer to this? Thanks!

I have often thought that it would make a pleasant change to be interviewed or recruited by somebody who actually understands the job (and whether the candidate is utterly bullshitting, which is most definitely a thing).

Why not give it a go?

It could depend - if you need to hire someone with specific expertise that only the outgoing person has, then it would make sense for them to be on the panel to assess the level of in-depth specialist knowledge.
But without that, then no, I would think it is more important that the person who will be working with them are on the panel.

Generally a massive no unless it’s for something like maternity cover and the person is coming back. Just say no. It’ll be awkward for the candidates to see/compare to who they are potentially succeeding

I have supported recruitment for my replacements and also had team members who were being replaced support me on interviews. No issues with HR so I dont see the problem

If she's leaving it's none of her business!

It will give the interviewees an opportunity to ask questions about the role and get answers from the horse's mouth. Better than asking panel members who have no in-depth knowledge of the job.

It's unusual, although there isn't any law against it. But I would err on the side of saying no, as she's leaving, so she shouldn't really be put in a position where she has any say over new hires - she won't be working there anymore, it isn't really her place to do that.

As an administrative role I'd say making sure the new hire gets on with existing staff remaining would be more useful. Most interviews now tend to have 3 people involved, usually one person from HR, the manager in charge of the hire or someone who deals with capabilities, and then one other person who will either be directly responsible day to day for the potential employee, or will be working with them frequently. Stick with that kind of format and it should be easy to pick people to do the interview.

My instinct is to say that having the departing person on the panel can be quite helpful in terms of properly assessing skills and also to answer questions. However, that person would not have any meaningful role in actual decision making - ie they would advise the hiring panel but not actually have a vote as such.

But her insistence is a bit odd. Why is she leaving? Are you confident that she's not trying to sabotage and/or get a friend/colleague into the job by insisting that she is part of the process?

I've interviewed for my replacement before, what's the problem? I didn't have the final say on the hire, but I was the one best placed to say if these people had the necessary qualities/knowledge to do my job.

It depends. Why are they leaving? What were they like as a role? Do you think the role needs some change?
Why do they want to be on the panel? Do they have a set view of how it should be done?

While her involvement might be useful, she cannot insist on being part of the panel. Being adamant she should be on the panel is very odd - what reasons does she give?

Do you trust her judgement? If so then its fine. If not, then don't let her.

Don't see the problem. Surely the person who best understands what a job is and who might be suitable for it would be the person actually doing that job?

The only time I would say this is a bad idea is if the former employee is leaving under a black cloud and couldn't be trusted to behave professionally.

While it is none of her business, it could work to your advantage.

No law against it but would they be a positive member of a panel? I have done this where the postholder needed particular skills noone else could assess or for senior roles but not as a rule. I'd worry they are just being a bit nosey!

I inteerviewed for a job and the woman I was replacing helped interview me. It was a little awkard to be honest, she seemed a bit defensive.

In my last two interviews the outgoing person was on my panel.

I very much doubt they had the final say - but they were there to ask the role specific questions.

word of warning though - I did ask in both interviews why they were leaving. It gave me an idea if they were bailing from a poor manager or terrible workload. (how they answer can be an answer in itself)

I got the job for both - so obviously being forthright didn't put them off.

Thank you everyone, I was unsure whether there was a law against it so thank you for clarifying.
She feels she is in the best position to assess whether someone can do the job (which as many of you have said, is fair enough) However, she is very critical of others and can be negative which makes me think it would be unfair on the candidates.

I've done it, makes sense as you know the role

I support small charities with recruitment, so have some understanding.

Regardless of the rationale, and some pp are right, there are some advantages, the fact she’s INSISTING and you then go on to say:

However, she is very critical of others and can be negative which makes me think it would be unfair on the candidates.

Makes me think someone needs to put their big girl pants on and tell her no. She wants to control the selection process and if there are any doubts she won’t be entering into it in good faith, she shouldn’t be anywhere near the panel.

I'm dubious at her being the best person to determine that - just because she can do a job role doesn't make her qualified to pick someone else to do that job.

Where I work administrators aren't interviewed by other administrators, if they're specialised tech admin then they're interviewed by the capability lead for the discipline, and if they're office admin then the interview includes the office manager. The other administrators don't get involved, they're not really qualified to do it.

If she's overly critical it doesn't sound like she's be particularly useful in an interview anyway. I wouldn't include her on the panel.

It's a no from me. If the job is to be remodelled or changes made the incumbent could be a hindrance. Generally, this is thought to be bad practice.

Surely On a panel she only has one vote? I have sat on a few panels for my replacement as I wanted the best person to avoid unnecessary pressure on other colleagues. Also half of the duties were a mystery to the management 😉

What a weird thing to ask though OP. Unless they were being fired for embezelment?

The person who has been doing the actual job has a far greater knowledge of what is needed in a replacement, surely. I think it's a fabulous idea.

I don't see the issue. When I have left for promotion or relocation I have always been involved in recruitment for my replacement. It's only if you're leaving because you're unhappy with your team/job that I think it's not appropriate.