Dodgy?

[workcorruption]

I've name changed for this and may change slight details as I don't know what to do. It's come to my attention that an internal post I went for and didn't get was given to someone who had been shown the interview questions beforehand and told what to answer.
This was reported but the person is still in post with seemingly nothing done about it.
Is this....ok? Legally or generally?

Is the job phone public sector?

Charity sector

I'm genuinely trying to get to understand how this can be in any way acceptable

This is really shady but I don't think you can do much. It's unfair. I think you should contact acas or similar to find out if there's anything you can possibly do. Failing that, could you move on?
I worked somewhere where the boss employed her daughter and she soon rose to a much higher position. This kind of thing is so unfair but it is allowed.

It can't be "considered discriminatory", it either is discrimination or it isn't.

Is the person who got the job a different race to the people who didn't? How many people went for the job and what were all their races?

If ten people went for the role, nine were ethnic minorities and one was white and the white person got the questions in advance and got the role, then the company would need a pretty water tight reason for giving them the questions (and they may have one, they don't need to disclose that to you).

If, however, the group who applied were a mix and the person who got the job was a different race to some of the other candidates it would be a lot harder to claim that the reason was discrimination - it would get hard to even make out a case that the company would have to answer.

So, why do you think it might be discrimination?

I was responding to this. I didn't think of discrimination at all.

Moving on is the plan now. It's the last of a long line of things a lot of us have been uncomfortable about.

No this isn't about right unless the successful candidate is a different race to all other candidates - then you could have a small chance of getting somewhere.

Or if the successful candidate was male and everyone else was female.

Etc.

You could always ask for feedback.

Thanks everyone. I'm just genuinely aghast that this is allowed.

How do you know for sure that the person who got the role does not gave any form or disability that meant that it was reasonable tovbe given the questions beforehand. You certainly don't have the right to be made aware of their disabilities which is something between them and the management team.

Honestly, we do know that there was no other reason than to give them an advantage. The interview panel weren't even aware of it until it was discovered.

Your outrage is a bit over the top to be honest. This was an internal interview, a decision would surely have been based on a lot more information than just a thirty minute interview and the answers to six questions. An interview is a notoriously poor mechanism for selecting the best candidate.

In which case, why weren't all candidates given the questions? I honestly can't believe that people are thinking this is ok, but if it is common practice then maybe I am over reacting. I agree interviews are not always a good tool - especially internal ones.
It's done now anyway. I wanted to know if it was acceptable and it seems that it is.

As per my earlier post (first response). No not good practice, but not illegal. There is no legislation about how candidates should be selected. And again, as per my first post, unless there was discrimination or somebody was removed from their role unfairly, it is a company’s prerogative to choose who they want to fill vacancies.

I am terribly naive! Thank you.

How do you know the other person doesn’t have any protected characteristics?

the Interview may just have been a tick box exercise -they knew who they wanted for the job before the interview. But I think it sounds unfair. You can raise it with HR -I don’t see why you shouldn’t.

How is this possible? The interview panel should be the ones coming up with the questions?

As others have said - candidates may be given questions beforehand as a reasonable adjustment. This could be for a hidden disability / neurodiverse conditions. You might not know if the candidate has any of these if they've not disclosed it to anyone else.

If they aren't disabled then agree it's unfair. No employment laws broken though (unless like said above you think you've been discriminated against). No way of finding out either if that candidate did have the questions as a reasonable adjustment as they don't have to tell you if they're disabled.

Sounds like looking for a new job is best as the trust will be gone now for you.

@workcorruption you are not naive - you are angry about possible dodgy and unfair recruitment practices at work. Based on the information you currently have that is understandable. And btw no one has said it is acceptable.

Does your employer have a written recruitment policy? If yes ask for a copy and see if if this has been infringed. If it has you can raise a grievance about this policy not being followed.

However, it is possible the candidate in question was given the questions as a reasonable adjustment. I know you say they don't have any requirements but you don't actually know that and have no right to that information.

Do you believe that you were discriminated against on protected characteristics in favour of a candidate who didn't have any protected characteristics? e.g. are you black and this person is white? If yes then you can raise a grievance that you have been discriminated against.

You can also ask HR for a conversation to find out more about how they recruit and for feedback on why you were unsuccessful.

This may be appalling and discriminatory practice. Or there may be information and nuances that you are not aware of.

If it is as you have described then I would be cross too. But I would really advise you find out more first before charging in.

I really don't want to go into too much detail, but I know that the interview panel didn't know - the questions were seen by a management person who is friends with the successful person and handed them over with ideal answers.

I'm going to leave - it's just one in a string of things that have been happening. I hate that this sort of thing happens. There is 100% no way the successful person has any protected characteristics - the interview panel would have known this!

I've certainly learnt from this though!

A manager friend handing over questions with ideal answers doesn’t sound right at all. But I still don’t see why you are so sure the other person doesn’t have any protected characteristics or that the panel would know. I have protected characteristics under equality legislation, and no-one would know - unless I told them.

There is 100% no way the successful person has any protected characteristics

There is 100% no way that you can know that

It isn't but I think it happens all the time.

This is true. However, wouldn't the interview panel then be aware that the questions had been shown to the person? It was as much a surprise to them as it was to everyone else.

Would you be as outraged to find out this person was given the interview questions if you had been given the job and not them?

Not necessarily - it depends on why they need adjustments. If it is for health or disability reasons then the panel would only receive details if they need to know and if the candidate had given permission to share.