"Strongest candidate by far" yet didnt get the job because I couldn't commit to full time hours

[Eskimo333]

An application for a job came up at work. With previous experience etc I was perfectly qualified to do the job. It was advertised full time, but positions are always advertised full time where I work. So, I asked if there were any objections to me applying for it part time (30 hours). I was told no objections. I applied, got selected, was interviewed. It went really well and I was told there and then I was the strongest candidate but that the difficulty was going to be in whether me being there 3 days a week would impact on everyone else in the team negatively. After consideration I agreed to increase to a fourth day but as a short day (so 35 hours a week). This was then considered by my would be manager (who interviewed me).

I didnt get the job, I was told it had gone to the second choice full time candidate, who has no managerial experience and that despite me being the strongest candidate and way more experienced than anyone else, 3.5 days wasnt flexible enough and would have an impact on the rest of the team.

I certainly dont want to take this forward legally, just looking for opinions on whether this was fair. I am finding it hard to feel like this is not discrimination. I need to be part time based on child care and I was already stretching myself to do 3.5 days rather than the intended 3.

I love where I work but am now feeling like it will be impossible to ever progress as this will be the case for the forseeable future!

[Schoolchoicesucks]

JustMe9 it'not always true that you won't advance in a career working part-time.

There was a feature on radio 4 this week about a successful job share team and also this

timewise.co.uk/power-50/

[ChicCroissant]

It is disappointing on a personal note, OP, but entirely fair in a business sense. They want someone in every day.

[BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz]

Would the increased salary from the promotion cover the additional childcare? Do you have a dp or dh who could drop to 4 days so you could increase to 5?

[Medievalist]

It sounds more than fair. They didn't just dismiss your application but sounds like they gave it considerable consideration but didn't think a PT role would work.

[PleaseGoogleIt]

I think I would have upped to full time for the right promotion (sounds like you really wanted it). Nurseries and childminders are available 5 days a week - DD goes 4 but I think I'm going to go back to full time as workload is full on and I enjoy my days at work.

[MitziK]

What's their idea of fulltime if 35 hours a week isn't it?

[Oblomov19]

So sad. Most companies so behind the times. Don't they know that most people want to work a 3 or 4 day week.
And I bet businesses can allow that. Most of the time.

[CinnabarRed]

But there are some jobs that really do need to be full time. A receptionist, for example, that has to be available 8:30-6:00 M-F. No good offering that to someone for 4 days per week. Or some client facing positions where service users need both continuity of personnel and those personnel to be available during office hours.

I’m not disputing that many jobs can be done part time; just saying that there are lots of jobs that can’t without the employer in question being behind the times.

Job shares are possible, of course, but more often as 2.5/2.5 day splits, or close to that. 4/1 days splits, for example, are nigh on impossible to make work because the person on 1 day, or even 1.5 days, doesn’t get enough exposure to what’s going on.

[MeanMrMustardSeed]

Sounds fair to me. They want FT, you don’t. They appointed someone else.

[RosaWaiting]

What would annoy me was being told it was fine before you applied.

That’s clearly not true so why didn’t they think before telling to apply?!

[Schoolchoicesucks]

timewise.co.uk/power-50/
Trying another clicky link