Tweet
I represent a group of people who use services provided by our local authority. The LA has recently restructured and, as a result, the manager who has transformed the department into a vibrant, effective service over the last few years is faced with the option of demotion or leaving. We feel that the recruitment process was deliberately skewed in favour of a 'systems' oriented candidate (who has no knowledge or experience in the relevant field) since that orientation is more in keeping with that of the managers & executives who formed the recruitment panel. Do we have any rights under FOI to access the questions put to candidates? If the current (soon to be ousted) post-holder were to issue a SAR, would they be granted access to the questions and notes...and would they be allowed to share any documentation received with us?
Also - not sure whether it's relevant at all, but best practice in this field is that those who use services and their families should be represented on interview panels. The panel in fact consisted only of local authority officers: there was no input from any other stakeholder group.
Or is there any other way we might scrutinise the recruitment process? We are not exercised because of any personal connections with the outgoing post holder - we are exercised because we have grave concerns for the services we receive. We fear the erosion of the progress that has been made, & the consequent erosion of effective, best value services which have transformed people's lives.
I'm not at all familiar with legal processes or acronyms, so if anyone is kind enough to reply, I'd really appreciate it being jargon-free! Many thanks
Also - not sure whether it's relevant at all, but best practice in this field is that those who use services and their families should be represented on interview panels. The panel in fact consisted only of local authority officers: there was no input from any other stakeholder group.
Or is there any other way we might scrutinise the recruitment process? We are not exercised because of any personal connections with the outgoing post holder - we are exercised because we have grave concerns for the services we receive. We fear the erosion of the progress that has been made, & the consequent erosion of effective, best value services which have transformed people's lives.
I'm not at all familiar with legal processes or acronyms, so if anyone is kind enough to reply, I'd really appreciate it being jargon-free! Many thanks
Comment