[LINK] Fwd: Govt cautioned against sole parent benefit changes

[Adam Todd]

At 15:11 8/03/2005 +1000, Ann Moffatt wrote:
>vic wrote
>"as someone who frequently looks at a lot of resumes I can tell you age
>isnt an issue compared to dull and undiferentiate boring resumes.'
>
>and, sitting on several selection committees i can tell you that bias of 
>all sorts is alive and well.

I'm amazed at how often I'm asked what can be done to bias or influence the 
personnel decision we make here each week.

>only a couple of weeks ago when interviewing a guy for his own it job that 
>he'd done very well, someone on the selection committee suggested we 
>shouldn't re appoint him cos he's 62!! i asked again  whether there was 
>any prob AT ALL with the way he was performing his job cos i'd heard 
>nothing but good reports. i was told 'no probs, its just that i like X 
>better'. X being a wet behind the ears smartie pants with a sycophantic 
>attitude, no quals but a big marketing oriented smile.

Yep.  One of the reasons we have a structured selection process.  It's not 
about what we think, it's about what meets the criteria.

>i asked why the guy thought X was better than a solid performer with 25 yr 
>career & a maths first degree plus a recent masters in ict. i was told it 
>was cos X wore a suit to the interview!!!

Oh gawd.


>i ALMOST gave up.

I'd have walked out.

>the incumbent was reappointed. had i not been there the panel (all with no 
>ict experience at all) would undoubtedly have appointed X & put the good 
>guy on the scrap heap!!

So damn typical.  What was the gender balance?

>i could tell similar tales about rejecting 'women' cos the panel thinks 
>they can't handle politics & indians cos "we don't want that sort here cos 
>they'll bring their relatives in & we'll be overrun!!"

<smile> We're 94% women around here, I'm one of only THREE males on the 
regular teams.  It gets pretty interesting at times :)

But I have Veto, so everyone behaves, sometimes too much :)