To refuse to interview someone who made a spelling mistake in their covering letter?

[snickersnack]

We advertised a position on our website for a graduate ? it did specify that we wanted someone with ?exceptional written, verbal and analytical communication skills?. We?ve had over 90 applications, and are just about to start the short listing process. We?ve just had a big disagreement in the office over whether it?s ok to ditch applications from people who?ve made spelling or grammatical mistakes in their letters and cvs. I mean, seriously, how hard is it to ask someone to proof-read your letter before you email it in? But apparently I?m being an elitist snob and should give them the benefit of the doubt.

Oh know you can't do that. You'll be sewed for discrimintating against the lexicographically challenged. Sew you will.

I think that since what you want is the BEST person for the role, then you need to use some flexibility - so don't have a blanket rule, then you are free to interview someone who looks fab but has a spelling mistake, and a reason not to interview someone else who looks unsuitable, but has good qualifications.

spellcheck has its limitations - e.g. it would not pick up 'of' instead of 'off' or 'greet' instead of 'great'

I must admit when I was recruting last year I had a dreadful looking CV and was very reluctant to interview this person but they had all the skills I wanted. I did interview in the end and I found out the employment agency had completely changed the format which had resulted in the bad layout and some extra long "sentences", the CV she brought with her was beautifully presented.

I was shocked that Alan Sugar selected a winner who had made some hopeless spelling mistakes on his CV though

YANBU.

If someone hasn't bothered to get their covering letter proof read they obviously aren't that keen. You have 90 candidates and you need to start somewhere.

Yanbu. It jars on my fillings too. I don't think people think it's such a big deal these days though

Oh, I think the grammar should have been correct as well.....I just suggested spellcheck as an example to show it isn't that difficult to correctly use language....

You have to have your spell check on UK English as opposed to US as well, otherwise things have 'z' instead of 's'. Lots to be said for a good old fashioned dictionary.

I agree with the OP, but that could be because I'm marking GCSEs and am pissed off with the variety of spelling mistakes. I don't give the extra mark for spelling and punctuation unless they're pretty good. Being able to spell Jesus, Judaism and Muslim helps in RE! The attempts at omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent are amusing as well.

wahts the problems??

Glad to see my prejudices confirmed - always nice to achieve a near 100% YANBU score!

Our only output is our written work - it's what clients pay for, so precision is really important. I agree that spell check has its limitations, but surely you'd pass it past someone else first? The applications have all come to us directly, so they can't blame recruitment consultants.

My personal favourite was the candidate who wrote "My attention to detail is imaculate and its very important to me to write clearly" (sic).

Am going to go to the short listing meeting now and be as elitist and snobby as I like, safe in the knowledge that IANBU!

I would ditch all CVs for this role that didn't meet your requirement of being exceptionally written, and that includes poor spelling.

When I was a business mag news editor I once interviewed a young guy as a reporter who seemed perfect. After the interview we asked him to write a sample news story about floral tributes to the Princess of Wales, who had recently died. Great story, but he spelled her name Dianna, every time. He didn't get the job. Basic. Mind you, he was snapped up by someone else at the same publishing house and I ended up being commissioned by him to write some features years later when I went freelance, which was interesting...

YANBU. Why? Because you have already made up your mind about this person. You don't want them working for you, and, that being the case, she won't like working for you.

So why waste your time and hers?

Sorry. I still don't see a single spelling mistake as being that bad. Fluency and a wide vocab are much more important. You might be turning down a fantastic candidate that ticks all the other boxes.

In fact it shows that the candidate didn't use spell checker and that therefore all the rest of the correct spelling were his/her own work

They are graduates, I expect some find it hard to form a written sentence without text type and smiley faces. Give them a chance! Anyone can use a spell checker, why not look at content and ability first.

'I used to work for a magazine and I never answered any emails, which were written in text-speak.

One of the editors used to reject any applications, which contained the phrase 'relish the opportunity'.'

But poor grammar and inappropriate use of commas were permissible.

Everyone needs a screening process. My agent rejects any proposal which invites her to look at their "fictional novel", or "peruse" anything.

We can all get spellings wrong but the fact that an applicant hadn't spellchecked the covering letter (or CV) reflects badly. It's not really a spelling issue, more that they are not thorough enough in their approach and you'd have to assume that would carry through to their work.

You are being assessed for your suitability from the moment you submit your details. A shoddy covering letter means you've fallen at the first hurdle. A bit of effort is all that's needed.

I've rejected CVs or covering letters with spelling mistakes for journalism jobs. It's journalism. You need to write clearly and correctly. You need to get it right and you need to read over your own work, correct it, and not rely on spell-checkers. If you can't do that, don't apply for a job that requires good writing skills.

(And when you have hundreds of CVs for one job, your first priority is not 'giving them a chance'. Your priority is selecting the right person for the job in a hugely competitive field, and weeding out the wannabes and the incompetent.)

Exactly, krang! If I've got 90 applications, I need a method of whittling down the list to a sensible number that I can focus on properly. Given that there are a fair number of well qualified candidates who've put together thoughtful and perfectly constructed applications, spelling mistakes are a handy way of cutting down the list to a more manageable level that I can review properly.

It's a given that anyone who hasn't written fluently or expressed themselves well doesn't make the cut. That's not up for debate...we're talking about the slightly less incompetent here.

'It's a given that anyone who hasn't written fluently or expressed themselves well doesn't make the cut. That's not up for debate...we're talking about the slightly less incompetent here.'

Your point of view is understandable, snicker.

But as such is the case, why start a thread in AIBU about it?

You'd already made up your mind.