Smiley face on a job application.

[RunBackwards]

Please, just don't

Probably don't mention twice how good your "banter" is either, it distracts from the fact that actually, your experience could be just what we need.

Please don't cut and paste responses from Investopedia for the written exercise. We will check - particularly when a long paragraph using appropriate jargon and correctly spelled is in such sharp contrast to the monosyllabic text-speak used elsewhere.

Please address the person specification in your cover letter or application form. I'm always amazed how many people don't do this. I cannot shortlist you for the job if you don't, no matter how promising your employment history looks!!

And don't copy and paste generic cover letters. It is obvious when you have.

Don't reply to a rejection email with loads of expletives when you work at the same company. Your email will be forwarded on to your HR rep.

@AmadeustheAlpaca

Interviewers, please don’t waste time interviewing potential candidates when you have already decided prior to the interview who is getting the job and have to be seen to pretend that it’s an open competition. It causes so much distress and anxiety for decent candidates who have taken time and trouble to fill out application forms and stressed about their interview. It is a waste of everyone’s time. So many job interviews are just box ticking. This is quite a nasty sneering thread

This!!! Well the job being made for someone else!!! So demoralising, and horrible

@MrsBrunch

WHAT FONT SHOULD WE BE USING?

I'm an aerial or calibri fan personally

The same reasons the ability to interpret body language, to observe faces and understand people’s reactions is

You do realise that body language, facial reaction etc vary hugely, both culturally and regionally?

Do you test for cross cultural skills or do you only work with middleaged white boards?

Yes, it must be hard for autistic candidates who are probably going to be brilliant at IT jobs like coding

Two stereotypes here.

"Autistic candidates will be good at coding" - some are, some are not, just like many other jobs. What matters is that the candidate states any special interview needs so that adjustments to format and style of interview can be made to ensure a fair opportunity for both sides

"IT jobs don't require good comms skills" - this is one of the most pervasive myths in the industry. There are very few jobs which conform to the Hollywood image of a hoodie wearing bloke spending day and night isolated at a keyboard before yelling Eureka to save the world. Most IT failures emanate from poor communications at each level, including the coding level.

Pointing people at IT simply because you think they have limited comms skills is setting them up to fail.

Is being neurotypical a "skill"? I don't think it is.

Suggesting people with autism or other disabilities lack communication "skills" seems a bit like suggesting someone with paralysis of their legs lacks walking "skills" - it's not a lack of knowledge or practice causing their difficulties, which is what talk of skills refers to. I find it a bit offensive to suggest that disability is caused by a skills deficit.

Surely the question is about what reasonable adjustments are to be made rather than just sifting out disabled candidates for not being able to access structures and systems designed by and for non-disabled people.

@user17163254865

Is being neurotypical a "skill"? I don't think it is.

Suggesting people with autism or other disabilities lack communication "skills" seems a bit like suggesting someone with paralysis of their legs lacks walking "skills" - it's not a lack of knowledge or practice causing their difficulties, which is what talk of skills refers to. I find it a bit offensive to suggest that disability is caused by a skills deficit.

Surely the question is about what reasonable adjustments are to be made rather than just sifting out disabled candidates for not being able to access structures and systems designed by and for non-disabled people.

It’s about reasonable adjustment not you can have the job even if you can’t do it regardless of adjustments. Nobody would suggest a blind driver or a severely epileptic pilot. Being neurotypical isn’t a skill. Bending able to communicate quickly and effectively is. Nobody’s suggesting ‘sifting out’. That’s an extrapolation too far. If they turn up from a blind shortlist and can present and communicate better than others who have applied, then they’ll get the job. They’ll get a guaranteed interview if they meet the spec and declare a disability (but panel won’t know this). We have independent equality advisers on every panel. They still need to be able to communicate quickly and effectively with an ability to engage and command a room.

@C8H10N4O2

Yes, it must be hard for autistic candidates who are probably going to be brilliant at IT jobs like coding

Two stereotypes here.

"Autistic candidates will be good at coding" - some are, some are not, just like many other jobs. What matters is that the candidate states any special interview needs so that adjustments to format and style of interview can be made to ensure a fair opportunity for both sides

"IT jobs don't require good comms skills" - this is one of the most pervasive myths in the industry. There are very few jobs which conform to the Hollywood image of a hoodie wearing bloke spending day and night isolated at a keyboard before yelling Eureka to save the world. Most IT failures emanate from poor communications at each level, including the coding level.

Pointing people at IT simply because you think they have limited comms skills is setting them up to fail.

Yes I know that's why I added another post afterwards. Everyone of us is an individual

And no, we work with a huge range of boards/government groups and expect peoples communication skills to be sufficient that they can assess and flex to variance.

We have a house style font. I expect candidates to use it.

Just a note for employers who take into account how interviewees interact with everyone including reception and the walk to the interview room. Innuendo or inappropriate behaviour or speech should definitely be taken into account. Please be careful if someone appears standoffish, maybe talks a bit too much or little. It can be a sign of nerves for anyone. For me it is due to autism. I find unstructured social communication very hard. I mostly know how an interview should go and generally work situations - hard but do able
Talk in the work kitchen when actually employed or with a receptionist such as about my journey to the interview will be harder. especially if I’m nervous.

I’m not saying don’t do it, I’m sure it puts a lot of candidates at ease, just don’t mark someone down.

And no, we work with a huge range of boards/government groups and expect peoples communication skills to be sufficient that they can assess and flex to variance

But not groups or individuals where the proactive eye contact would be disrespectful or insensitive? And you assume your client boards are too ignorant to recognise or tolerate variations rooted in culture or disability?

"We work with a huge range" is generally pseudo corporate speak for "don't ask me about our failure to introduce genuine, multi factor diversity".

The whole eye-contact thing should not be make or break in my opinion.

I have hearing loss - I use lip reading to assist in my day to day communication, therefore I don’t always maintain eye contact.

I also have a professional management role that involves communicating quickly and effectively as well as engaging and commanding a room. I actually think my hearing loss makes me better at my job as I have to actively listen. Eye-contact is really not essential.

Do many interviews really happen where the successful candidate is known beforehand?

I quite often have an idea of who is the stronger candidate but I almost always appoint someone else.

For my current role there was an internal candidate who "everyone" thought would get it, so that was a bit uncomfortable when I started but it obviously wasn't a foregone conclusion.

From yesterday's experience. Don't come with a spiel on why they way the company does things is all wrong.Once in post I'd welcome your ideas for improvements but slagging us off and making it clear you know better than we do at interview?

I think when an internal candidate gets it, despite an external interview, it's more likely to be because there were no better candidates than because the decision was already made.

@Nikhedonia

*I’ve heard and read recruitment and disability awareness training aplenty. I recruit to posts where the ability to engage, to communicate effectively, to present formally and informally are a core requirement. If you can’t overcome challenges in making eye contact and engaging a Board, I cannot employ you. There are other roles in the organisation where people with autism can work but not ‘front of house’. I don’t recruit to those roles.*

Whilst I can believe you have heard and read disability awareness training, I find it hard to believe that you have appropriately engaged with this training, given honest answers and passed the tests.

To say that someone with autism cannot work in a "front of house" role is frankly shocking and obviously discriminatory.

You are aware it's a spectrum, right? I know plenty of autistic people in senior roles and interestingly, are actually on those 'Boards' and are being presented to as well.

She's not saying she won't employ autistic people, she's saying that making eye contact is a requirement of the job and if people can't do that, they can't do the job.

It was someone else who started on about this discriminating against autistic people. It doesn't, because not all autistic people are the same, not all of them find this difficult.

@CherryPavlova

It’s about reasonable adjustment not you can have the job even if you can’t do it regardless of adjustments. Nobody would suggest a blind driver or a severely epileptic pilot

Again, your ignorance shines through. Firstly, nobody is arguing that someone unfit for the role is hired just to box tick. Reasonable adjustments include those which allow both the NT and ND to continue working without material on output. For me this includes little things working a day from home, not having long loud conversations next to me, considering me when planning office layout and paying for software which helps with my workload planning. Clearly these would be impossible for many jobs so I would not apply for them, but such adjustments could make many jobs accessible for autistic people.

The second demonstration of your prejudice is your example of allowing a blind person to fly a plane. There is zero chance this would ever ever happen. So you are suggesting that an autistic person, based on only assessing their eye contact (which is what you stated in your first post) would have zero chance of doing the role. That highlights significant ableism.

Reasonable adjustments are not akin to letting a blind person fly a plane, they are about making meaningful but manageable changes which workplace more autism-compatible which allow you to leverage the skills of both NT and ND people. I’m amazed that someone in your position is unaware of that. Hence my suggestion that you get further training.

She's not saying she won't employ autistic people, she's saying that making eye contact is a requirement of the job and if people can't do that, they can't do the job.

I present to a number of Boards, I also sit in quite a lot of groups where external people present. I can't think of a single instance where anyone gave a shit about whether someone was making eye contact or not. In fact, in most meetings people are reviewing the papers, looking at the content, jotting down notes and intermittently looking at the presenter.

I genuinely struggle to believe that 'eye contact' is such a requirement of the role.

@Nikhedonia

She's not saying she won't employ autistic people, she's saying that making eye contact is a requirement of the job and if people can't do that, they can't do the job.

I present to a number of Boards, I also sit in quite a lot of groups where external people present. I can't think of a single instance where anyone gave a shit about whether someone was making eye contact or not. In fact, in most meetings people are reviewing the papers, looking at the content, jotting down notes and intermittently looking at the presenter.

I genuinely struggle to believe that 'eye contact' is such a requirement of the role.

Well, that's a different issue, isn't it?

She/her organization obviously think it is important, and they are allowed to you know.

@Scautish. I could argue your sense of entitlement shone through too.

We make every possible adjustment. If you can’t with reasonable adjustments do the job, you can’t do it. Obviously it’s not eye contact alone, but the range of rapid and effective communication skills. I would not employ someone for the roles I line manage who was unable to command a room of senior people, who couldn’t cope in a fast paced environment and who wasn’t flexible and adaptable. I’d not see a label; we don’t. I test skill set. If they can’t manage a good presentation at assessment centre, with any reasonable adaptations they had requested, they are unlikely to be able to do the job. Tough but true. Some jobs are simply not suitable regardless of adaptation.

Reasonable adjustments include those which allow both the NT and ND to continue working without material on output.

What?

No it’s not all about presentation. It’s also about meeting in small groups of four or six and giving hard messages. Communication skills are an essential.

Please don’t turn up to your interview in ripped denim jeans and a crop top... then whilst been shown around ask to leave early because ‘there’s nothing more important than having my hair done and I’ve even managed to get a nail appointment too!’.

She got the job too, against my objections. False nails weren’t allowed and she refused to remove them because they were new... ‘remember how I told you I was getting them in my interview’