Yesterday, my friend received a call from XXX Foundation at around 11:30 AM, asking her to go for a second round of interview to meet the CEO there, as it was supposed to be the final round. She had already completed the first two rounds earlier. Initially, the interview was scheduled for 4 PM, but it was rescheduled to 1:30 PM. Upon reaching the venue promptly at 1:30, she was asked to wait, with the excuse of a "MEETING" for the CEO's absence.
The meeting, which commenced at 1:30 PM, extended until 6:30 in the evening. Throughout this time, my friend waited patiently, with the HR visiting her cabin twice to assure her that the CEO would arrive in the next 5-10 minutes.
Finally, the CEO appeared at 6:30 PM and conducted her interview. She has a slight limp when she walks due to an accident. She had applied for the position of HR Executive, and the CEO began asking her personal questions regarding her limp, such as how long she has had it, whether it was due to a paralytic attack, if she was on medication, and several other questions.
After enduring a 5-hour wait, she was rejected simply because of her limp. Is it fair for the company to discuss a candidate's disability in such detail to their face? While one might understand if she were a fresher, she has accumulated over 7 years of work experience.
There are various other ways to communicate rejection, but is it ethical and appropriate to reject a candidate for a desk job based on the aforementioned reason?
Dear Seniors, I would appreciate your suggestions.
Thanks,
Shoba
From India
The meeting, which commenced at 1:30 PM, extended until 6:30 in the evening. Throughout this time, my friend waited patiently, with the HR visiting her cabin twice to assure her that the CEO would arrive in the next 5-10 minutes.
Finally, the CEO appeared at 6:30 PM and conducted her interview. She has a slight limp when she walks due to an accident. She had applied for the position of HR Executive, and the CEO began asking her personal questions regarding her limp, such as how long she has had it, whether it was due to a paralytic attack, if she was on medication, and several other questions.
After enduring a 5-hour wait, she was rejected simply because of her limp. Is it fair for the company to discuss a candidate's disability in such detail to their face? While one might understand if she were a fresher, she has accumulated over 7 years of work experience.
There are various other ways to communicate rejection, but is it ethical and appropriate to reject a candidate for a desk job based on the aforementioned reason?
Dear Seniors, I would appreciate your suggestions.
Thanks,
Shoba
From India
Hello Shoba,
There are multiple aspects to your thread.
1. Technically, this employer can be sued – in the days when even the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of blind joining IAS, the action of this CEO smacks of segregation against the disabled – if what you mentioned ['...rejected just because she limps...'] is correct. Was she informed of this formally by the CEO/HR, or is this her assumption?
2. Coming to your statement '...asking her personal questions related to her limp,' I think what the CEO was trying to ascertain was to gauge if and how the work could get affected due to this factor. Irrespective of her final selection status, abnormal medical history is usually checked out thoroughly. Also, he could be checking the possibility of a recurrence.
3. You are right when you mention 'Rejection could have been conveyed through various other modes as well.' Some persons have little concern for the effect of their words/actions on others. I am not sure what you mean by your last query 'please give me your suggestions.' What exactly are you expecting? Frankly, I think your friend should let this pass – for another reason. Where time isn't valued – whether it's ours or others' – isn't a place one can thrive in the long-term.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
1700There are multiple aspects to your thread.
1. Technically, this employer can be sued – in the days when even the Supreme Court has ruled in favor of blind joining IAS, the action of this CEO smacks of segregation against the disabled – if what you mentioned ['...rejected just because she limps...'] is correct. Was she informed of this formally by the CEO/HR, or is this her assumption?
2. Coming to your statement '...asking her personal questions related to her limp,' I think what the CEO was trying to ascertain was to gauge if and how the work could get affected due to this factor. Irrespective of her final selection status, abnormal medical history is usually checked out thoroughly. Also, he could be checking the possibility of a recurrence.
3. You are right when you mention 'Rejection could have been conveyed through various other modes as well.' Some persons have little concern for the effect of their words/actions on others. I am not sure what you mean by your last query 'please give me your suggestions.' What exactly are you expecting? Frankly, I think your friend should let this pass – for another reason. Where time isn't valued – whether it's ours or others' – isn't a place one can thrive in the long-term.
Regards,
TS
From India, Hyderabad
Dear Ms. Shoba,
I'm remorseful for the situation you explained. Besides, what is the idea of the CEO and the purpose behind the rejection is unclear. To elucidate, the hiring process in interviews should ignore such factors as gender, race, national origin, religion, ethnicity, or, in accordance with specific guidelines, age. The Americans with Disabilities Act also made it unlawful to discriminate against a qualified person with a disability, as long as the candidate can perform the essential duties of the job.
Interview questions have been standardized these days to mark the candidate with a fair basis of comparison. If the candidate is worth enough for the position, the candidate can brawl back. I still wonder if the CEO had been making notes or emphasizing on any kind of her appearance or background?
Please refer to this case study for your friend's benefit: http://medind.nic.in/maa/t05/i4/maat05i4p353.pdf
From India, Visakhapatnam
I'm remorseful for the situation you explained. Besides, what is the idea of the CEO and the purpose behind the rejection is unclear. To elucidate, the hiring process in interviews should ignore such factors as gender, race, national origin, religion, ethnicity, or, in accordance with specific guidelines, age. The Americans with Disabilities Act also made it unlawful to discriminate against a qualified person with a disability, as long as the candidate can perform the essential duties of the job.
Interview questions have been standardized these days to mark the candidate with a fair basis of comparison. If the candidate is worth enough for the position, the candidate can brawl back. I still wonder if the CEO had been making notes or emphasizing on any kind of her appearance or background?
Please refer to this case study for your friend's benefit: http://medind.nic.in/maa/t05/i4/maat05i4p353.pdf
From India, Visakhapatnam
Dear Mr. Tajsateesh,
First of all, let me thank you for your time and the patience in reading my post and replying to it.
Now coming to the aspects:
1) Yes, the CEO was discussing the matter with the HR's and the candidate was standing very next to the CEO. She overheard it. But later, the HR went to her and communicated her rejection formally. The HR also said, once she was fine after the medication, she could come and join the company, since she is a select.
2) Let's assume that the CEO was checking for any kind of a recurrence of the episode. But my friend has been working for the last 7+ years and she has had no problems at all. Why isn't the CEO considering her past employment experience or reference checks for that matter?
3) Rightly said... at times and when it comes to others, people become totally inhuman.
Through "Please give me your suggestions," I am just trying to gather facts about the industry and the way it works.
I have passed on your final message to her.
Thank you very much.
Regards,
Shoba
From India
First of all, let me thank you for your time and the patience in reading my post and replying to it.
Now coming to the aspects:
1) Yes, the CEO was discussing the matter with the HR's and the candidate was standing very next to the CEO. She overheard it. But later, the HR went to her and communicated her rejection formally. The HR also said, once she was fine after the medication, she could come and join the company, since she is a select.
2) Let's assume that the CEO was checking for any kind of a recurrence of the episode. But my friend has been working for the last 7+ years and she has had no problems at all. Why isn't the CEO considering her past employment experience or reference checks for that matter?
3) Rightly said... at times and when it comes to others, people become totally inhuman.
Through "Please give me your suggestions," I am just trying to gather facts about the industry and the way it works.
I have passed on your final message to her.
Thank you very much.
Regards,
Shoba
From India
Dear Ms. Sharmila,
Thank you very much for your time and patience in going through my lengthy post and responding. I have shared the link you provided with my friend.
I am puzzled by the situation. The law seems quite clear, so I am unsure what went wrong with the CEO. He seemed to focus on her walking alone. I am not certain what kind of inhibition he was experiencing.
Thank you once again.
Regards,
Shoba
From India
Thank you very much for your time and patience in going through my lengthy post and responding. I have shared the link you provided with my friend.
I am puzzled by the situation. The law seems quite clear, so I am unsure what went wrong with the CEO. He seemed to focus on her walking alone. I am not certain what kind of inhibition he was experiencing.
Thank you once again.
Regards,
Shoba
From India
Dear Ms. Shoba,
Whatever has happened is thought to be for our own good, which means if she had known in the later part (aftermath of joining) that he is emphasizing on her state, it would have been much more ridiculous.
In my analysis, she could take up this job and challenge with ease, proving herself on top and unsurpassed.
Wish her Good Luck...!!
From India, Visakhapatnam
Whatever has happened is thought to be for our own good, which means if she had known in the later part (aftermath of joining) that he is emphasizing on her state, it would have been much more ridiculous.
In my analysis, she could take up this job and challenge with ease, proving herself on top and unsurpassed.
Wish her Good Luck...!!
From India, Visakhapatnam
Engage with peers to discuss and resolve work and business challenges collaboratively - share and document your knowledge. Our AI-powered platform, features real-time fact-checking, peer reviews, and an extensive historical knowledge base. - Join & Be Part Of Our Community.
