Job Application

[VeterinaryCareAssistant]

AIBU to think this is a nosey c* kind of question to ask on a job application?

It had a drop down box where you could select the job.

Why is it anyone's business?

My son was asked this for a part-time job at the co-op! No option to not answer. Very tempted to put 'astronaut' - how would they ever know??

But with the civil service questions like this have absolutely no impact on being offered an interview whatsoever. So, no disclosing what your parents do/did won’t define anyone’s prospects in the civil service!

That is monitoring information, the vacancy holder doesn't have access to it and it has no bearing on your application.

If you don't want to answer, take the prefer not to say option 🤷🏽‍♀️

All of this, it’s the same as asking your sexuality or ethnicity, it’s for diversity monitoring and not information that’s passed to the hiring manager.

Nobody is filtered out by this information, you’re misunderstanding what it’ll be used for.

It is not used to filter applications or given to interviewers- it’ll be looked at overall in terms of x% of the people who applied/were successful were from typically working class/middle class backgrounds, and if the balance isn’t what they’re looking for in terms of diversity the HR teams can consider how/where they are recruiting from and how they can encourage applications from a wider diversity of backgrounds.

They wouldn’t but you’re misunderstanding the purpose of the question.

It’s similar to asking for ethnicity or sexuality, it’s nothing to do with screening applications.

I'm a CS recruiting manager and I assure you that the response to that question is NEVER EVER seen by the recruiting manager. The person who will interview you and make the decision to hire you will only see your statement of suitability and your behaviour answers. The people who do see that response will never see the application its attached to, if that makes sense.

Please don't let it put you off applying. We are desperate for good people more than ever in the CS, and we struggle to recruit because the money isn't brilliant.

It's not classist and it's not toned you put. It's about monitoring social mobility. And I say this as someone as working class as they come.

I am pretty sure these forms always have it written on top what and why anf that it isn't part of application?
If not, might be a good feedback to add it

It’s similar to asking for ethnicity or sexuality, it’s nothing to do with screening applications.

Well I never answer those either ...

It is classist.

75% of CEOs of S&P and many of FTSE have their bonus tied to hiring more of you and less of me.

What do you think they are going to do?

The form isn’t connected with the applicant. The form simply records whether they have achieved hiring more of you and less of me. They have to use CV, interview and going out to deprived schools to find their new employees.

I realise that the form isn’t linked.

But lots of CEOs bonuses are linked to hiring fewer people like me.

The form just provides the stats to prove the HR department has achieved that.

Better hope it's accurate then.

I don’t think you do understand the form isn’t linked if you incorrectly think it’s used to hire fewer ‘people like you’.

This data is used in a wider context, it doesn’t filter though into who is interviewed or hired.

Yes they are if the intent is to change the profile of the people applying for a job or the jobs culture.

That is an aim, which to suceed needs actions.

This idea of data collection before the employer employ anybody encourages the applicant to think that the employer has an entitlement to personal data.

The idea that "they have data" can disadvantge non nationals and others (eg younger applicants) who dont understand why asking about family etc is not allowed and open the door to unprofessional questions being introduced.

You just explained how it did what you say its not doing.

if the balance isn’t what they’re looking for in terms of diversity the HR teams can consider how/where they are recruiting from and how they can encourage applications from a wider diversity of backgrounds.

If the aim is to remove the employee from upper middle classes from role A and replace them with the employee from the lower working class by default the employer is putting in processes to remove one group.
Sucess is the reduction of applications from the first group along side additional applications from the second group.

If someone has a financial incentive they are not going to self-sabotage by aiming to get applications from the group they have been instructed not to hire. So if HR want a group type they will try to change the interview process from start to finish.
That is just human nature.

It's a standard way of measuring social class - presumably it was amongst the questions about ethnicity/age group/sexuality?
the responses should be being used for monitoring purposes rather than selection.

That's if their accurate.

But there's no way of legitimately checking.

I hope no one pays for this rather questionable data.

Wow YANBU!

I was once asked in a job interview what my dad did for a living! Bizarre

I was once asked whether I planned to have children. Those were the days!

They also have targets for female hires and promotions.

In law, accountancy and big business, women are being disproportionately hire and promoted.

Again, the forms don’t cause it. The forms check that recruiters have been achieving it.

Also, as the policies do their job and profiles shift, “we need different types of people” is gradually changing to “client profiles have changed and they like to work with people like them”.

The statements are opposite but both designed to exclude men from professional backgrounds.

My bet is that boutique businesses will flourish.

Meant to quote you in the reply above.

They are doing sexual social engineering too. Again, policies make it happen and the forms check it’s been achieved (statistically, not individually)

@Fivethirtyeight hiring more of us and less of you Wow. Do you feel that way about disability or race or just class?

And if 75% have hiring the working class as a target, good. Because I bet I had less opportunities growing up than you had, doesnt make me and less suitable for an unqualified entry level position. Or do you think with my basic GCSEs I'm going to be doing you out of a degree job?

Fyi, civil service jobs with Behaviours are sifted purely based on those as the actual applicant information and diversity criteria is withheld from the sifters.

It isn’t a “feel”. Targets are published in businesses’ annual reports. Take a look.

Tony Blair devalued degrees when he gave them to half the population. You can push back against a requirement like that.

Sifters can tell if those with the desired credentials deliberately let it show in the contexts of their behavioural examples.