AIBU to see this accidental rejection email as a red flag?

[ElizabethReed]

What they do not want
Too senior
This is a major red flag.
They do not want:

• 15–20 year veteran
• people who have “done everything already”
• people who feel too established / too corporate
• someone who may be less hungry for a builder seat

G specifically said profiles like “I built xxx rm” are probably not the right fit.

I accidentally received this email along with my rejection today. The notes from the hiring manager.

I think you’ve shown a lot more red flags that the employer that rejected your application!

But how will I know if it is or it isn't? I'm hooked by the intrigue and mystery!

Stick around for the end results then, just 2 1/2 days to go

Mumsnet suggests thread titles?!

It is relevant, unfortunately. If she was in her 50s and rejected on that basis, that's one thing, but I think you'd have a hard time proving a 30something is the victim of ageism under the Equality Act.

It does !

Many years ago I interviewed for a trainee role in a small new company, run by a young couple. The woman partner was silent and had worked in HR but had little to do with the business. She recruited admin staff where necessary, and popped in once a week to restock paper etc. The male partner ran the business and had a few professionals with him who had joined his start up. Both attended my interview. She asked a few HR type questions then he got stuck into work specific stuff. I was recruited and on starting I was told to save word docs in a shared computer. I saw a folder with my name and clicked, believing it was set up for me to save my stuff, and my interview notes popped up, written I believe by the woman.

Every single line was about my presentation. Should wear more make up, any lipstick!! Hair pulled back, messy/unstyled? Poor choice outfit, lacks style? Unfit/heavy? Accent ok. Pleasant. Bit rural?

I said nothing but never could warm to her and got all clumsy and self conscious around her. I can imagine the conversation after. Him saying but she is perfect for the role and her arguing that i wasn't well groomed enough. Thing is, I thought I was! I wasnt flung together and had made an effort that day.

Exactly this, and it’s unlawful age discrimination even at recruitment stage

Red flag? that would indicate you still have some kind of involvement with the company. You don’t. You didn’t get the job. So Red flag, Green flag, pink flag - all irrelevant.

Well yes it is actually because your op doesn’t make it at all clear what you mean. And apparently you couldn’t even think of a title without using AI for support.
Given your replies on this thread you’ve got attitude issues.
I wouldn’t hire you.

This company…. Astute

Wow

You don't really understand it. Age discrimination can be any age at all

If you are discriminated against because you are 35 rather than 25 that's still discrimination.

I do understand it, thanks. I just don't think OP has got a provable case based on the email alone.

Is there really any need to be so nasty?

And what one do you feel.you 'fall' under?

At least you have honest feedback ??

I don't understand your OP at all, I hope you communicated more clearly in whatever application or interview process you had, or that might explain the rejection.

Anyway, while it's unfortunate that they sent you something that you weren't meant to see, I think they are perfectly entitled to have preferences about the type of person and the type of experience level that suits them best. I don't see any red flags.

Um…..nasty in what sense?
The op isn’t coherent.
AI was used to create the thread title.
Odd replies to comments

I don't understand how people are making the assumption that the thread title was AI generated - what's the giveaway?

Also, sorry OP but I don't understand your post.

Agreed.

You have pasted an email without setting the context in any way. Or even asking a coherent question. It's most odd and given (I think) you have 20 years corporate experience I'd expect you to be able to set a scene and write in a way that is clear and easy to follow. This really is not.

Extremely unprofessional and depending on your situation: possibly age discrimination. It’s quite common and we all think it won’t happen to us, until it does. At least you got clarity OP, which in some way, is better than the usual cliches …

Telling her she shouldn't be hired because she's not coherent enough on MN. So what? She's just been rejected for a job and writing might not be her forte. And before you say anything, the job could be something unrelated to writing!

It is not even vaguely relevant. You would not have a hard time proving a 30-something is a victim of ageism under the Equality Act. The protected characteristic is age, not old age. You can be discriminated on the basis of age at any age. Tribunals have found in favour of claimants as young as 14, as old as 88 and all ages in between.

No you don't understand it. You said the OP was in her 30's so 'not old' and therefore it couldn't be age discrimination. That's what you said. That shows you don't understand age discrimination. I explained it to you