Tweet
Hi forum members,
I feel a little cheeky that my first post is a query, rather than helping someone, but I'm really not qualified or confident to start offering other members advice - I hope you don't hold it against me!
Coming to the point, my manager resigned 3 months ago (with a 3 month notice period). Initially they said they would go out to recruit for the post, but instead prevaricated for 3 months about whether they needed to or not. With a week left before my manager leaves they promoted the person I job share with to take the post. However, she only works 3 days a week when the manager role is full time, and they are not replacing her current role on the project, even though the need for the resource is still there.
The main point of contention is that they have clearly violated their own recruitment policy, which states all posts will go out to external recruitment unless it is less than 3 months (the job is for 5 months); there is risk of redundancy (their isn't); there is enough talent for an internal recruitment process (there was no process); or interviews had been held for the post in the last 3 months and they appoint one of those candidates (there were no interviews). They also have no policy on promotions, so this is the only policy they have which applies here.
In addition the role has materially changed in terms of responsibility, so it is actually a new post, which definitely means they should have gone out to recruit according to their policy.
There are other issues, but that is the core of it. I have given them time to justify their reasoning in the context of their policy, but if they stick to their guns, what should my course of action be? I understand I could bring some sort of discriminatory case against them, i.e. I and other interested candidates were excluded from consideration for the post without any justification, and excluded from even being able to express an interest. This interest was legitimately held given that it was announced at an all staff meeting (minuted), that they would be going out to recruit for the post.
Grateful for any advice or opinions.
Thanks!
N
I feel a little cheeky that my first post is a query, rather than helping someone, but I'm really not qualified or confident to start offering other members advice - I hope you don't hold it against me!
Coming to the point, my manager resigned 3 months ago (with a 3 month notice period). Initially they said they would go out to recruit for the post, but instead prevaricated for 3 months about whether they needed to or not. With a week left before my manager leaves they promoted the person I job share with to take the post. However, she only works 3 days a week when the manager role is full time, and they are not replacing her current role on the project, even though the need for the resource is still there.
The main point of contention is that they have clearly violated their own recruitment policy, which states all posts will go out to external recruitment unless it is less than 3 months (the job is for 5 months); there is risk of redundancy (their isn't); there is enough talent for an internal recruitment process (there was no process); or interviews had been held for the post in the last 3 months and they appoint one of those candidates (there were no interviews). They also have no policy on promotions, so this is the only policy they have which applies here.
In addition the role has materially changed in terms of responsibility, so it is actually a new post, which definitely means they should have gone out to recruit according to their policy.
There are other issues, but that is the core of it. I have given them time to justify their reasoning in the context of their policy, but if they stick to their guns, what should my course of action be? I understand I could bring some sort of discriminatory case against them, i.e. I and other interested candidates were excluded from consideration for the post without any justification, and excluded from even being able to express an interest. This interest was legitimately held given that it was announced at an all staff meeting (minuted), that they would be going out to recruit for the post.
Grateful for any advice or opinions.
Thanks!
N
Comment