V-Flyer

Details

Tribunal

Looks like news hounds creating more of a story (again).
Reading the article not only a change of name, some pretty important points.
-Change of CV
-Wanted £55k, now when questioned, just wants "a job"

I might try this in my CTO application. I "just" want to be a CTO

Maybe the first time he applied, the vacancies had been filled!

Half the time recruiters don't even see the name on CV's. I have a foreign sounding name but am as English as they come.

And I don't understand why he still wants to work for them if he has been badly offended by them?

And looks like he did a bit if job inflation / exaggeration too.

I hope VS present both CVs to the tribunal to show they are not the same.


I think lord sugar would have a view on this!

tontybear wrote:case dismissed

In a written statement, employment judge Claire Sharp concluded: "The tribunal wishes to be absolutely clear, given the press coverage, in the hearing bundle that the Claimant did not merely change the names and ethnicity in the two applications; they were different applications and the false application was clearly designed to meet the respondent's criteria for the role."

She added: "The claimant's race played no part in the decision not to progress his application".

Seems like a dose of common sense has been applied here. Clearly there is no justification for genuine discrimination that takes place, and it is right that there are laws to enforce that.

But from my perspective, managing a large organisation of nearly a thousand people, I am all too frequently depressed by the minority that are intent on working the system to their advantage. In some cases, I suspect if they put the level of ingenuity and efffort into their actual jobs that they do into work avoidance measures, they would probably be CEO by now!

The other point here that often gets overlooked, especially when the tribunal case is against a big organisation (which is seen as the 'big bad corporate beast' and therefore on the back foot from the start) - managing these cases are hugely draining for the company involved and its employees, from a cost, time, resources, and even emotional standpoint. Being accused of something that you know you are not guilty of is not a very pleasant thing to have to deal with.

Anyway, rant over. I'm sure that few people would have much sympathy for a fatcat manager in a big US bank anyway

For anyone interested, you can find the full ruling here

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/media/judgm ... irways-ltd

Seems like a case of common sense prevailing to me and about time too !

Darren Wheeler wrote:For anyone interested, you can find the full ruling here

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/media/judgm ... irways-ltd

Interesting read - and yes it needs to be read - it's only 7 pages.

Para 25 is especially damming against him.

in other words...he was a lying scum bag trying to milk the system and got caught...............

flabound wrote:in other words...he was a lying scum bag trying to milk the system and got caught...............

y) y) y) y) y) y)

*HATE* people who use the race card! He needed to accept he wasn't the best candidate for the role!

I've worked in recruitment for the past 12 years for 3 of the big four banks, am glad to see that common sense did indeed prevail and that the claimant was completely exposed as a chancer trying to milk the system for all it's worth.

I think it's pretty fair to say , with increased use of recruitment systems and increased knowledge and tolerance of diversity matters I would have been very susprised indeed if there was a case to answer, in call centre recruitment environments now you have an automated process to go through and with the volumes that recruitment teams deal with they really would just be looking for the experience necessary!

There are always chancers, I remember reading a case did that did get upheld between a Bristol based law firm only able to offer to people who could work inthe UK versus an Indian student who didn't have the right to work in the country, didn't have a visa nor had an application for visa in process, but the court found that the law firm couldn't say for sure that he wouldn't have got one some time in the future and couldn't reject him on that basis!

And I bet not only VA have wasted time here proving as such but the recruiters in question to be put through a tribunal I have no doubt , even with the innocence clear, been through an ordeal trying to explain yourself to a court.

But glad indeed that sanity ruled here!