Equality shortlisting - don’t know how to feel

[Dannexe]

Struggling with this one. I’ve been shortlisted for a job. There were a large number of candidates.

However I’ve been shortlisted because I’m female and this isn’t a role that requires use of my vagina.

I don’t know how to feel about this. I’m inclined to pull out. I don’t want to be appointed simply because I’m female. At the same time it’s a role I really want and women are under represented in the role.

WWYD?

Go to the interview.

Good luck!

You’re being interviewed because your female (since applications from women are often overlooked) but you won’t actually be appointed because you are a woman. If you are appointed it will mean you performed well at the interview.

I just feel really uncomfortable about the fact that my score was the same as a male candidate but I’ve been shortlisted in preference due to my sex. I would have preferred we’d both been kept in. Or neither of us

it just doesn’t sit well with me. I know to get appointed I have to be the best at the final stage but I feel like I shouldn’t still be in.

Women have been overlooked for jobs for many many years, hence the need for positive discrimination. The scales need to be rebalanced. This is one way of doing it.

Exactly.

the change has to happen somewhere

Good luck

I would have agreed - until it happened to me!

Do you think a man would be tying himself in knots like this?

You should 100% go to the interview. I'm intrigued how you found out about the other person's scores- I'm pretty sure that's a breech of GDPR

I was told I was shortlisted due to equality rebalancing. They said at the outset they would do that if two candidates had the same score.

Think of it as you've probably had to work a lot harder than a man to get where you are so it shows more effort / skill etc.

Of course that may differ depending on other factors like class and ethnicity....

I do see why you're uncomfortable though.

I dunno why they felt the need to tell you though - virtue signalling?

The shortlisting is only one part of it. You've made the first cut, you still have to show you are better than the other shortlisted candidates.
I would go.
They're not telling you that your application was awful and they are only interviewing you because you're a woman. They're saying you meet the shortlist criteria and have been nudged ahead of an equally scoring male candidate. Bit shit for him but not your problem.

Silly that they told you.

Like they don’t really believe in it.

Go to interview and try to get a feel of the culture of the place?

I saw your comment on the other thread. Women are 50% of the population. It stand to reason more balance is required. Why would you not embrace that instead of feeling affronted that businesses are finally waking up to the fact that women have brains too!

I'm another who is incredulous that you feel uncomfortable having found out (somehow?) that you have scored the same as a male candidate but they have only taken you forward as a preference.

The company are legally allowed to do this if it addresses a previous imbalance. No man I have ever known would question something like this, and men in general historically haven't questioned situations where women were actively and/or explicitly discriminated against, thus giving them a total advantage over women who would have wanted to work.

It's a situation that works out well for you, because you are qualified to be shortlisted and there is a historic imbalance. Go for the next stage interviews and demonstrate why you are not just shortlist material but the actual best hire for the job.

I mean, surely it's not appropriate that they have told you this? What would happen if you knew a man who had performed better than you but wasn't shortlisted because he was male, and you shared this information with him?

Is this a senior NHS role by any chance?

It’s only done where the scores are the same. Not senior NHS but similar. Very senior.

Oh, I would go for it with a brave heart and smart head then - no regrets and good luck!

The scores were the same and they don't have enough female representation. You won't get the final job if you don't perform best in the interview. All pulling out does is recreate the imbalance with men that they are trying to address. I have no idea why they told you though.

Don't be silly, you need to reframe itvin your mind. You've not been chosen BECAUSE you're a woman, they've used a selection criteria to take through the BEST candidate. I've recruited for years and would have made the same decision here.

When you have 2 candidates you can't get a credit card between, both have good skills and experience for the role and could do it well, you HAVE to use something to make a final decision on who to take through and using sex due to women being under represented in the industry is perfectly valid and what does in fact make you the best person to take through.

The other candidate will have other chances, this is yours so grab it and don't fuck it up for yourself with nonsense on fairness. Sounds perfectly fair to me, good luck 🤞

The male candidate will have been scored more highly because he is male, so to achieve the same score you will have had to be better. Sad but true.

so go in with head high, knowing you have earned your place.

I just feel really uncomfortable about the fact that my score was the same as a male candidate but I’ve been shortlisted in preference due to my sex.

So what's the problem? or do you think it's fine for men to get all the jobs even they don't do them with their penisis?