Shortlisting candidates who cannot be appointed

M

MandM

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
910
Reaction score
64
Location
Western Cape
I was recently on an interview panel. The advertisement did state that the company would apply employment equity measures. I was surprised to see that white applicants were also shortlisted. When I asked HR about it, they made it clear that if one of the previously disadvantaged candidates could not be appointed the post would have to be readvertised, even if the white candidates were suitable.

I thought this was quite disrespectful - to shortlist the applicants and interview them when you know very well that they can't be appointed. They had to take leave and go through the interview process for no reason. Personally I would prefer not to be invited for an interview in such a case.

Opinions? Is the shortlist meant to be diverse even if the appointee's ethnicity is predetermined by the company's EE policy?

PS: this thread is not meant to discuss the merits (or not) of EE. I am just interested to see if you would like to be interviewed if you had no chance of getting the job.
 
It's unacceptable, but I think said company wants to give the pretence of taking skill into account, no? Personally I'm waiting for the day where some company puts "black candidates only" on an advert.

At the end of the day, they're wasting their time, and the time of the candidates.
 
would you still want to work for them even if they offered you a job?
 
Idiosyncratic said:
It's unacceptable, but I think said company wants to give the pretence of taking skill into account, no? Personally I'm waiting for the day where some company puts "black candidates only" on an advert.

At the end of the day, they're wasting their time, and the time of the candidates.
Click to expand...

Check the site for government jobs,it says coloured males or females are encouraged to apply
 
MandM said:
This thread is not meant to discuss the merits (or not) of EE. I am just interested to see if you would like to be interviewed if you had no chance of getting the job.
Click to expand...
Well, if it wasn't for the racist laws then the 'getting interviewed for a job you won't get' won't happen. Going for that interview is just another way of telling the person of unwanted colour in his/her face 'you are screwed'. I'm sure if someone knew they are not welcome, there will be no reason to go, unless of course you see some potential to stir things a bit.
 
Which company is this in the interest of not wasting peoples time?
 
It's blerrie unethical and immoral. How dare they play a double game with other people's hopes, time and money. I'm appalled.
 
Racism that's all it is and no one can argue that. The anc is racist full stop.
 
Sorry, but the only reason they do this is to ensure that if anyone questions the hiring process, they can claim that they were not biased as they did interview white candidates and then they were not deemed to be suitable. Its purely to cover their backsides. Load of nonsense.
Don't waste people's time. I've experienced this before, and things like arriving for an interview only to be told they have actually already picked someone it was just a formality that they had to interview 3 people.
I blasted the recruiting agent and told them never to contact me again.
 
Yep some recruiters and HR managers just need a quick good old punch in the face.
 
Wonder how negatively it would affect an applicant if he actually states in his CV - "If this is a BEE position ONLY, please do not contact me". This would not make you an ass, you are just trying to not have your time wasted
 
Idiosyncratic said:
It's unacceptable, but I think said company wants to give the pretence of taking skill into account, no? Personally I'm waiting for the day where some company puts "black candidates only" on an advert.

At the end of the day, they're wasting their time, and the time of the candidates.
Click to expand...
They have been putting that for ages.

"aa only."

Doesn't mean recovering alcoholics....
 
I think this post is not necessarily about race but about how HR and hiring committees waste peoples' time when they are applicants that won't be considered.

Also, i've seen it go in the other direction in a department at an un-named major research university in South Africa. In this case, there were super qualified, black applicants who were invited to the interview only to make sure the university covered itself in the hiring process. Meanwhile, they actually had a white applicant that they already knew they wanted to hire. I'm not saying that white person wasn't qualified...but that white person happened to be connected to the right people who made the decisions, so they didn't even really care about who the other candidates were and whether they were qualified or not.

In my opinion, either way, it's awful to waste a person's time.
 
wolverine_dcp said:
Check the site for government jobs,it says coloured males or females are encouraged to apply
Click to expand...

And when coloureds do apply who are more than competent and qualified they are not even invited for an interview, and two months later the post is filled by a comrade. ;)
 
terencej said:
Wonder how negatively it would affect an applicant if he actually states in his CV - "If this is a BEE position ONLY, please do not contact me". This would not make you an ass, you are just trying to not have your time wasted
Click to expand...

As true as this is, it will be frowned upon.
 
silverfoxrox said:
I think this post is not necessarily about race but about how HR and hiring committees waste peoples' time when they are applicants that won't be considered.

Also, i've seen it go in the other direction in a department at an un-named major research university in South Africa. In this case, there were super qualified, black applicants who were invited to the interview only to make sure the university covered itself in the hiring process. Meanwhile, they actually had a white applicant that they already knew they wanted to hire. I'm not saying that white person wasn't qualified...but that white person happened to be connected to the right people who made the decisions, so they didn't even really care about who the other candidates were and whether they were qualified or not.

In my opinion, either way, it's awful to waste a person's time.
Click to expand...

It has everything to do with race. Even in the situation you mentioned. The OP has also stated.
When I asked HR about it, they made it clear that if one of the previously disadvantaged candidates could not be appointed the post would have to be readvertised, even if the white candidates were suitable.
Click to expand...
Inviting people for the interview is just a different way of showing them the middle finger.

I must also add, this does not justify any kind of racism within companies. Whether it is a 'white' company only wanting to employ 'blacks' or a 'black' company only wanting to employ whites, the difference now is just that racism has now been legalised.
 
Last edited:
silverfoxrox said:
I think this post is not necessarily about race but about how HR and hiring committees waste peoples' time when they are applicants that won't be considered.

Also, i've seen it go in the other direction in a department at an un-named major research university in South Africa. In this case, there were super qualified, black applicants who were invited to the interview only to make sure the university covered itself in the hiring process. Meanwhile, they actually had a white applicant that they already knew they wanted to hire. I'm not saying that white person wasn't qualified...but that white person happened to be connected to the right people who made the decisions, so they didn't even really care about who the other candidates were and whether they were qualified or not.

In my opinion, either way, it's awful to waste a person's time.
Click to expand...

It has everything to do with race, perhaps you should try and read it slowly and understand before posting.
 
I don't want to sound racist but I find black candidates more educated and employable these days.
 
Bulldog /(' said:
I don't want to sound racist but I find black candidates more educated and employable these days.
Click to expand...
Irrelevant to the discussion. And having been on the "employing" side of the table myself recently, I beg to differ. Your mileage will vary though. It shouldn't be about race though, rather, one should employ the best candidate for the particular job.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X