Job interviews and GDPR

[crikie]

My son (17) applied for two casual roles with zero hours contracts at two sports centres operated by the same local authority, advertised at the same time. The applications were processed by the same HR department, but the hiring managers are different. As this is is first job he was hoping to have two opportunities. He was offered interviews for both, but now one of the hiring managers has cancelled his interview, saying that the first interview will suffice for both jobs. We were a little surprised that the HR department shared the fact that he'd applied for two roles - might that be a GDPR breach?

The first interview went ok, but they said there were a lot of applicants for just 3 positions. The second sports centre has more positions, so would have been the better bet. If he isn't offered the first position, he would ideally like to learn from his first interview experience and compete for the second position with the other hiring manager. Would it be reasonable for him to request that the second interview goes ahead?

Not a gdpr breach and it sounds like he will be considered for both roles with one interview. We do that at work, and indeed pass on potential candidates to other teams if they don't work for us but are a good fit for them regardless of the role they apply for.

In all liklihood, the interview questions will be the same, so why do it twice?

It's probably not a data breach but may be a breach of other data protection principles. Was he given a link to a privacy notice? If so it should set out what they'll do with his data eg pass on his cv for other roles within the organisation.

In all liklihood, the interview questions will be the same, so why do it twice?

Because if the first manager is selecting 3 candidates from, say, 10 interviews he may not make the cut. If the second manager is selecting, say, 6 candidates from a different 10 interviews they are likely to fill them from their own interviewees before considering my son's application, simply because they won't be able to compare him objectively.

Not GdPR because the information has been provided to one company or group and he likely ticked a box about sharing it within that group within the t&cs.

He is likely more suited to the role he has been put forward to interview based on his cv and application.

He won't be the only person this has happened to so it won't be as you've described. Probably one hiring manager won't be that involved in the interviews and the other now has a lot of extra work.

Please don’t make a fuss about this - I have no idea whether this set up will affect his chances (probably not). But being seen as a pain in the arse (or having a pain in the arse mother) certainly will.

There will likely be a centralised recruiting system. HR might have flagged the double application and put him forward for the one interview. Or managers might be able to see that he has applied to two roles in the system.

GDPR wise I can’t see a problem, same company and he will have consented to his data being used for recruiting purposes, which it is.

We wouldn’t have one candidate interview for two positions at the same time, we would do a centralised HR interview, discuss both positions and ask the candidate to decide which they’d like to go forward for first. We could switch to the second if needed later.

We would want to avoid a situation where both managers want the same candidate.

The role is exactly the same at both sports centres, with the same skills requirement (a particular qualification, which he has), so HR invited him to both interviews. It was the second hiring manager who cancelled. I suspect she just had more than enough candidates and was cutting down on the interview workload. I can understand that, but want to know if it would be reasonable for him to challenge it via HR.

If he wants to challenge it, I will help him to word it appropriately and reasonably.

He should hear the outcome of the first interview this week, and the other centre is interviewing next week. If the first is a rejection there is arguably nothing to lose. As there appears to be more qualified candidates than vacancies, Manager 2 is unlikely to select Manager 1's rejected candidates over her own succesful interviewees.

You can’t word a complaint reasonably because there is no reasonable way to challenge a company using data provided for recruitment…in order to recruit.

You’re doing your son no favours by teaching him to behave like this. There is nothing more career-limiting than being ‘that employee’ - the one who complains about non-existent grievances.

We'll have to agree to disagree on that. 😂

It's not a "company", it's a Local Authority. That makes a difference. The HR department (usually) does things by the book. The managers in their sports centres understandably try to arrange things for their own convenience.

Nothing untoward in what you’ve described. What does the local authority say in their privacy policy and other information when applying?

I don't know why you're assuming he will not ve selected by manager 2?

Most companies (and especially something like a LA!) use a scoring system, so the 3 top scorers get manager 1's job, your son is close, but doesn't make the cut, manager 2 does interviews, looks at all scores including your son's, and picks the top 6.

Complaining about what you think might have happened if he doesn't get the job will just be odd. He should absolutely ask for feedback though, and keep his eye out for more vacancies. I really think a complaint of the sort you're suggesting would just mean he'd never be selected for interview by them again, however you word it!

No it's not a GDPR breach. I'm confused as to why he (not you) doesn't check whether he'll still be considered for the other position should be not be successful for one at interview. From what you've posted that they said it sounds like they're just cutting down on duplication of interviews (which are a pain in the ass) but he will be considered for both?

If he's not successful in 1 then a polite email saying he's very interested to be considered for 2 and happy to come in for another interview if it would be helpful shows he is keen . But going on about the due process would be off putting. The 2 managers work for same organisation , have same requirements for job so share info . Seems sensible.

You are going him no favours by going down either a GDPR breach route or pissing off the HR team. With little experience, and lots of candidates against him, he needs to accept the rejection, by replying he would love them to keep him on file for both leisure centres as he would appreciate the opportunity.
Of course the managers will arrange interviews to suit themselves!

It's not a GDPR issue. Don't pursue that aspect, he'll come across as a PITA.

A polite email asking if it would be possible to be interviewed again if unsuccessful might - might - be possible to write in a way that isn't embarrassing.

But probably they won't because it gives him an unfair advantage over others.

Unfortunately interviews are not designed to benefit the applicant. Keep looking for other jobs.

GDPR breach over a company that he provided information to sharing it internally?
Oh dear.
Read up on things rather than being that person. You need to be able to guide him properly in the world of work.
Things like no one has full employment rights fir 2 years, bank holidays aren't guaranteed, sick pay only has to be SSP and the employer can discriminate against non protected characteristics (such as tattoos, piercings, weight, dyed hair etc).

@crikie but they have done things 'by the book' as all companies do. The difference is additional duty for an LA but that is concerned with additional recruitment of those with additional refs.
They have not broken GDPR.
It's Law, not something people can 'agree to disagree on'.

Well, of course they aren't going to want to waste time interviewing someone twice for the same role. And in any case, he would have an impossibly unfair advantage over other candidates in the second interview as they presumably use a standard set of questions for that role, so he would therefore know exactly what questions would be coming up.

What they have suggested makes perfect sense, and I agree with a pp that teaching him to kick off about entirey reasonable employer behaviour is not going to do him any favours in the longer term.

I don't really know why you think this is a gdpr breach. He gave them his personal data for the purposes of the recruitment process. They are now processing that data in relation to the recruitment process. What's the issue, exactly?

You sound absolutely mad, and you have no experience of how recruitment works. Stay out of it; you'll only hurt his chances.

Not a GDPR breach and it really isn't the stick to beat people with that some seem to assume.

Why burn bridges when he might want to work there.

I don't understand why you think this is unreasonable- it sounds like they are just trying to make things more efficient.

As a pp said, the interview will be scored for a public sector post, and the candidates with the highest scores selected. If your son misses out on post 1 but has scored highly enough he'll be considered for post 2 with his score carried through. It's not uncommon in the public sector to interview "en masse" for a specific grade and then the line manager-to-be will just have a quick introductory chat with the candidate allocated to their post so the candidate has met them and can ask any questions about the job role etc before they accept the post.

It may even be that the interview panel will be the same for both posts- there are often requirements to have an "independent" panel member in the public sector to make sure the panel aren't favouring an internal candidate. If this is a requirement, using the hiring manager from the other leisure centre would make sense, and would mean there definitely wouldn't be appetite among the managers to do the same interview with the same candidate twice.

Honestly. Listen to what you’re being told. Keep your nose out. It’s a perfectly legitimate recruitment practice.

Op "they were so unreasonable"

Everyone "no they weren't"

Op <sticks fingers in ears>

Why even bother posting?

He will be scored in the first interview. The same scores can be used by the hiring manager for the second interview to compare him with other candidates in that second round of interviewing.

What you seem to want is for him to have a second shot at improving his score by doing another interview when he already knows what the questions are going to be. That would be unfair to the other candidates.