the guaranteed interview scheme is voluntary and all it means that if you meet the qualifying conditions in the job advert i.e. technical / educational qualifications you will get an interview not that you will get the job . This is to stop companies just refusing to even interview disabled people because they notify in their application that they are disabled. The reason for the scheme is the fact the bit highlighted in your post does not occur as has been demonstrated by studies both in disability and race job applications .
well not much point in signing up to the scheme and then reusing qualified people an interview is there. Just don't sign up to the scheme if you aren't even consider employing anyone who is disabled.Even if you do interview to look PC you can just decide not to appoint any disabled staff but at least it gives the applicant the chance to possibly sway you .
Well there's already discrimination. Always has been. A wee bit of quid pro quo cant be a bad thing Agent Starling.
I’m not saying I wouldn’t, I just don’t see how it helps if it’s voluntary. It’s a bit patronising no?
a bit yes and personally i never used it as the couple of times i applied i met the criteria & since i already had a job didn't see the point as i had already proved i was "employable". However as i said previously it at least stops 1 biased member of staff binning all applications from disabled jobseekers so at least giving them a chance . On an aside it always amuses me the number of people who don't like schemes like this but also moan that we are all lazy ****ers who could work but can't be arsed
Admittedly I don't know much about rule/law but to offer anyone a guaranteed interview is ridiculous imo. People need to get an interview from merit, and merit alone. Someone having a disability shouldn't matter one bit. If I was an employer disability wouldn't matter one bit. If someone could do the job I wouldn't care if they were disabled, foreign, female, old, etc. etc.
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a disability on a CV before. CV’s that I put in the bin without reading are generally those that look messy, the ones with about 3 or 4 different fonts or sizes and those that are 12 pages long. Straight in the bin. Next stage is location, I can’t be ****ed with people getting stuck in traffic every day and calling me at 7:30 with their boring excuses. The last filter is the hobbies, people who claim socialising with friends is worth putting on a CV, always straight in the bin. Well done you can talk to humans. Normally leaves us with a good selection. Disability wouldn’t cross my mind, if you can do the job and don’t live in Devon, brilliant.
I dunno why, but I thought it was against employment law now to ask about disability at initial stage. Also someone applying for a job shouldn't put it on their CV either. If they get offered an interview from their CV, only then is disability mentioned but more so in any requirements for the interview. Maybe I've got it wrong. I was once asked would I seriously consider employing a woman for a grafting job, all because i offered her an interview....my response, why not? I've seen women that are better grafters then men.
I think it depends on the environment, in a distribution (warehouse type thing) environment, certainly, in an office environment it can be very catty. That's why in the latter environment it's better to have at least so many men, because I believe women then tend to be less bitchy in the presence of male employee's. Normally a woman that applies for a distribution type job, generally know what they are getting themselves into and are likely to have had previous experience.
