A completely biased opinion on a "recruitment" "scandal".

I'll start this one with a disclaimer, just in case you didn't read the title. This article is 100% biased (as are the opposing articles) so if you'd like to see an objective stance on this then you're in the wrong place.

Here are 3 other places you wont get an objective stance (and the reason for me writing this article in the first place):

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4206284/Teenager-devastated-turned-job-text.html

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2819220/devastated-teen-blasts-restaurant-chain-after-interviewer-mocks-her-one-minute-after-leaving-with-laughing-emoji-for-failing-to-get-job

https://www.recruitmentgrapevine.com/article/news-2017-02-09-candidate-rejected-via-mocking-text-and-crying-with-laughter-emoji

The first two I can forgive. As we all know, these 2 papers are written by morons, for morons. The third, not so much, my comment on recruitment grapevine was also deleted (thanks for that one!). To be fair, I expected the headline from the DMG to be a lot worse, something along the lines of "Single mum with brown skin (obviously immigrant) denies young white beauty a job".

So why am I biased? Well, Shantel happens to be my next door neighbour, her kids go to my kids school and I even let her park on my drive occasionally if I'm in a really good mood. She hasn't asked me to write this, and even might be a bit pissed off if she knew I had as it's really none of my business, however, after learning of the stories above I really think that this incident deserves a bit of opposing press.

Before I give my opinion on the actual incident, I'd like to tell you how I came to hear about it in the first place. Two reporters knocked on my door a couple of weeks ago and my wife answered, in her words these guys were "extremely aggressive and intimidating". They didn't say where they were from, they were big lads, it was dark and they were pushing a mobile phone into my wifes face with Shantels Facebook profile open and asking if she knew where she was. Bloody hell! And we recruiters get stick for sending the odd unsolicited message on LI!.

After this we were both genuinely worried about our neighbour, she was gone for 2 weeks. It turned out she literally had to "disappear" due to all the bad press and reporters stalking her, this is a young mum with 2 kids that gets off her arse and works hard that was forced out of her own home due to a mistake.

Ok, now I've written 1000 words of disclaimers and given the back story, let's actually discuss the "scandal". I'll reference the Daily Mail (never thought I'd say that in my life) for the purpose of this article. Please bear in mind that this is an interview for a job in a pub, pulling pints, held by an assistant manager in a pub, not an experienced recruiter.

I'll start with some of the less important comments:

"Megan also claimed the assistant manager had behaved poorly during the interview, by not having a copy of the teen's CV to hand and drinking coffee throughout."

Umm, OK. Hands up if you've never drank a coffee whilst holding an interview. Anyone? Oh you at the back? You don't drink coffee? Ah OK.

With regards to the CV issue, what could a CV possibly state that would need delving into for an 18 year old (who is literally just old enough to pull a pint). I'm assuming that even if relevant experience was on here that it would have been extremely short term and almost ignored by even an experienced recruiter.

'Shantel was asking about my proudest moment but I'm only 18 so it's not like I can say my kid or my marriage.'

What questions were expected here? This is a job working in a pub, pulling pints, carrying trays and taking orders. I'd struggle myself, with my experience as a recruiter to come up with relevant questions beyond "do your arms work" and "can you string a sentence together". The obvious point of an interview like this is to judge as a recruiter , if this person a) can engage customers at an appropriate level and b) if this person will fit in with the rest of the staff. I'm starting to agree with the "basic" comment at this point, and I'm not just referring to the answers that were given.

"Megan, said she 'couldn't believe' how unprofessional the steakhouse chain were."

I shouldn't even have to comment on this one to show how ridiculous it is. Yes, let's judge a whole restaurant chain by one mistake made by an assistant manager who was in the position less than 6 months with no prior/existing recruitment experience.

Now I've covered the smaller details, let's move on to the reason this made the headlines:

Ok, on first glance this does look pretty fucking terrible, I admit myself that when I first read this that my reaction was a bit of a face-palm.

The candidate in question received the messages above within a couple of minutes of leaving her interview, an unfortunate mistake made by the hiring manager and the message was meant to be sent to her boss, not to the candidate.

Shit.

But is it really that bad? Is it news worthy? Is it bad enough to drive a hard working woman and her 2 children out of their home? I think not.

If I had a list of all the negative things I've said that are a hell of a lot worse than this about my candidates to my bosses and peers I assume I'd make the news every day for the next 30 years. The fact is that some candidates are shit and we as humans will instantly relay this information to anyone who will listen, excluding the candidate who always gets a PG version because we don't want to hurt their feelings.

How many times, as a recruiter have you relayed the exact information your client has given you to your candidate? I bet it's not that often. We're there to spin the feedback into something constructive and we'll often tone it down a bit as to not destroy your interview confidence for the rest of time. Is this the right approach? Maybe not. But as you can see above, candidates don't often like being told that they turned up stinking like shit in a suit made from their grannies curtains and stuttered through every answer like a 30 year old rusty Mustang.

Shantel here, had the unfortunate and quite probably embarrassing experience of what happens if you do relay 100% honest feedback to a candidate (albeit accidently) and look what happened, she was fucking crucified for it.

Actually breaking the message down. What is the offensive part? 99.9% of people I imagine would say it's the "crying with laughter" emoji. The rest of the information is actually very solid feedback. "just not engaging" - 100% relevant for the type of job she is trying to apply for. "answers were "like" basic" - again, food for thought at the next interview.

The crying with laughter emoji at the end is obviously the part that caused offence and it's obviously not the best way to inform a candidate that they're not going to be starting on Monday but this was meant for her boss, it was never meant to be feedback relayed directly to the candidate.

The whole thing is a huge sob story told from the point of an 18 year old that was "mistreated" but no one thinks of the effects this has on the hard working mum with 2 kids destroyed by the media for a mistake that honestly wasn't even that bad, especially not worthy of any kind of coverage by the whole worlds media. 

My thoughts on this are, if you're told by a bar manager that you're too "basic" to work in a bar, you're probably too "basic". Stick that in your fucking papers.

JH