To think being prejudiced against the privately educated is OK

[EastLondonObserver]

I have spent 25 years working in the advertising industry at some of the most highly regarded agencies in the world. Most of these have been dominated (in certain roles, at least) by the privately educated who gained their entry to the industry through having personal/family contacts in it, were subbed by rich parents while working in low-paid or free internships to gain experience and had that empty confidence private schools instil.

Perfectly capable graduates educated comprehensive schools didn't get much of a look in. However a few managed to break through, including myself.

Consequently, throughout my career I have actively rejected almost all privately educated graduates applying for entry level positions. This runs into hundreds of applicants. I have managed to do this without being called out. Sometimes I have rejected them even when they clearly would have done a better job than a comprehensive school educated alternative. These were corporate companies - it made no meaningful difference to me if they were mildly less successful as a consequence. The only exception was one graduate educated at Harrow and Bristol. I gave him the job as an experiment. He was average at best.

I did this in the name of social justice: re-distributing opportunities away from those with unearned privilege.

Have I been unreasonable? Has anyone else done the same?

Offered the job to the candidate who worked in the Uni library and at Pizza Hut instead. She had to learn new systems, IT, work with all sorts of people and worked both jobs at the same time all through uni.

Great. You presumably considered all applicants and found this applicant to match your job requirements best. Presumably your CEO and HR department are in agreement with your choice!

That's very different to the op secretly binning applications she doesn't like the look of. And that's what this thread is about.

‘If they have got that far through the process presumably their skill sets similar?’

no, one of them can ski and ride ponies. The other one has actually down some real work because they needed the money.

so no, I wouldn’t say they were similar inwould say that one was obviously and clearly a better candidate.

‘Presumably your CEO and HR department are in agreement with your choice!’

the CEO of our billion ££ company couldn’t give a stuff about the hiring of a new editorial assistant. I presume. He’s too busy hiring his old Yale buddies into leadership positions - and unfortunately I’m not making this up.

‘If they have got that far through the process presumably their skill sets similar?’*

no, one of them can ski and ride ponies. The other one has actually down some real work because they needed the money.

so no, I wouldn’t say they were similar inwould say that one was obviously and clearly a better candidate.*

Oh, so one candidate can ONLY ski and ride ponies.

I assumed they also had a good education and went to University (assuming that that's required for your job), can read and write etc, and has any relevant IT or language skills.

‘I assumed they also had a good education and went to University (assuming that that's required for your job), can read and write etc, and has any relevant IT or language skills.’

oxford, actually. Never had any kind of proper paid job, not worked in any kind of office or admin, ‘working’ for free ski-ing …
the other candidate can also read and write, has PROVEN IT skills, had the same degree ( red brick Uni)…
why on earth would I choose someone with no real discernible life skills? They didn’t get into Oxford because they were extraordinary in some way, they got in because they went to the right school, private, famous and had the right ‘pedigree’.

Sure, some jobs require 'life skills' while others require more academic or technical skills. I'm sure the Oxford graduate had no problem finding a job elsewhere.

‘Sure, some jobs require 'life skills' while others require more academic or technical skills. I'm sure the Oxford graduate had no problem finding a job elsewhere.’

exactly. In a nice firm run by a friend of mummy or daddy. Where your ski-ing ability is seen as a big plus for office work…

Good to hear things have improved

Well,
I’m assuming the Oxford one went and got something else. Wouldn’t be something I would lose much sleep worrying about…

Recruitment isn't a straightforward decision - candidates are complex people with strengths and weaknesses, potential, interests...making a decision to recruit someone can be very difficult, especially in a small team - their impact can be hard to predict and the results can be explosive. 50% of hires are regretted 6 months down the line, anyone who thinks it's simply a case of assessing a candidate - shouldn't be in recruiting.

Which illustrates OP's point!!

This thread illustrates perfectly why the UK has such a problem with being a fair society.
Brits love a spiteful tit for tat class warfare, they're not interested in the root causes and not willing to address them.
Sorry for interrupting, carry on.

Recruitment isn't a straightforward decision - candidates are complex people with strengths and weaknesses, potential, interests...making a decision to recruit someone can be very difficult, especially in a small team - their impact can be hard to predict and the results can be explosive. 50% of hires are regretted 6 months down the line, anyone who thinks it's simply a case of assessing a candidate - shouldn't be in recruiting.

I agree that it's complex. I've said throughout the thread it's complex.

I've also said that widening access is complex and requires complex solutions, and given countless examples.

In that response I was pointing out the absurdity of justifying binning CVs based on someone's school because even after talking about things that could be done earlier in the process, people were still going 'but what about if you still had 2/3 candidates...'
If after all the improvements in access there were still 2/3 candidates, then I'd aim to make the best judgement possible with the information in front of me, the candidates in front of me, my knowledge of the current team, and make a decision. Recruitment isn't a science and it's complex.

But, it's also absurd to suggest that after all the (much overdue) social improvements, 2/3 candidates would be totally identical, have nothing different about them other than their place of secondary education, have no difference in skills or aptitude or interest, and that the person hiring simply couldn't possibly find any other way to decide who to employ other than the sector they were educated.

That's why I'm laughing because if they genuinely believe all of that, how on earth would they decide from a final 2 or 3 who were all state educated? They'd be totally overwhelmed with the weight of an impossible decision because all 3 state educated applicants would obviously be identical in every way.😂

This thread illustrates perfectly why the UK has such a problem with being a fair society.
Brits love a spiteful tit for tat class warfare, they're not interested in the root causes and not willing to address them.

I'm inclined to agree with you. It comes back to routes of improvement being simple but wrong, vs complex but right.

It's much easier to do simple, superficial things, preferably that make the person feel like they're amazing than it is to do difficult things. In the case of the OP it's binning CVs because she doesn't like where an adult was educated as a child. In my line of work it's tokenistic initiatives that don't address educational inequality.

I agree in a perfect world ops actions are not right but I can empathise with the frustration of seeing how slowly changes are being made and how a particular group have for such a long time kept a strong hold on the plum jobs. So individuals end up “taking matters into their own hands”.

If the disparity had been resolved properly as you advocate with your “complex reasons” then individuals like the op wouldn’t be driven to direct action..

binning CVs because she
It's MN and we pretend everyone's a woman until they say they're not, but we all know the OP is man, right?🤔

TheaBrandt
We're further on than we were on many issues but have a long way to go.
Systemic change on complex issues doesn't get fixed rapidly.

It's a shame that in a 25+ year career in an area the OP is so senior and respected in, the best they've got is patting themselves on the back for binning CVs because they don't like the fact the applicant's parents made an education decision the OP is ideologically against.

But you've no interest in 'spiteful tit-for-tat' (your 11.25 post of today).

More ad hominem shite from people who have nothing useful to add.

It's a shame that in a 25+ year career in an area the OP is so senior and respected in, the best they've got is patting themselves on the back for binning CVs because they don't like the fact the applicant's parents made an education decision the OP is ideologically against.

And then post on Mumsnet about their great 'achievement'

I agree - working in hospitality much more useful than a fancy internship imo - for most jobs

I agree - working in hospitality much more useful than a fancy internship imo - for most jobs

I would encourage ANY student, regardless of what schools they attended, to get a Saturday job or a part time job at Uni working in hospitality or retail. It teaches a lot of useful life skills and earns some money.

And - hypothetically speaking, how would you feel if a recruiter, deliberately chose someone else, even though they admitted that your child/children were the best candidate for the job, simply based on the fact that your child was white, spoke with a 'posh' accent, lived in a nice area, played the violin, did nice hobbies?
How would you feel if they didn't even look at your child's CV and binned it based on the assumption that your children were wealthy and privileged based on the fact that they had done these activities and come from this background, and therefore had an 'unfair advantage' over the other candidates?
Would you be ok with that? Honestly? Genuinely curious!

I would encourage ANY student, regardless of what schools they attended, to get a Saturday job or a part time job at Uni working in hospitality or retail. It teaches a lot of useful life skills and earns some money
Agree with this.

If the other candidate had the odds stacked against them and had still got to the same place on their own merit - you know what - yes. I would want them to get the place over my own (coddled) child. I would prefer that to my child not being chosen because the other candidate went to the same school as the interviewer. Which is probably the more likely scenario…