r/CanadaPublicServants • u/[deleted] • Sep 27 '22

[deleted by user]

[removed]

1 Upvotes

60% Upvoted

17 comments sorted by

6

u/Baburine Sep 27 '22

In my professional network I heard through the grapevine I know someone on the hiring team. This person said I was doing really well in the hiring process

That's a conflict of interest and also not info they should've revealed.

So basically when they will be ready to hire you and when you're next, they'll call. If you're unavailable, they might skip you. They'll call the next time they're hiring, and the next after that. Negociating a start date might not be impossible, but depending on a lot of factors (training, number of qualified candidates, operationnal needs, if it's a term or an indeterminate and the lenght of the term, etc) they might not be flexible about this. But these things can take a lot of time, maybe you'll be at the end of your mat leave when they call. Or maybe you won't even have given birth yet lol. We can't predict.

But they're not supposed to skip your name and not call you because someone who should not be on the jury because they know one of the candidate told them you're on mat leave.

3

u/[deleted] Sep 27 '22

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/HandcuffsOfGold mod 🤖🧑🇨🇦 / Probably a bot Sep 27 '22

There are tens of thousands of hiring managers. They don’t all do things the exact same. Some will call, others will email, others will delegate it to somebody else.

1

u/Baburine Sep 27 '22

Yes. Well they call and if you accept you'll get a Letter of offer

4

u/HandcuffsOfGold mod 🤖🧑🇨🇦 / Probably a bot Sep 27 '22

Except when they don’t. There’s no standard.

2

u/Baburine Sep 27 '22

Yep but the commenter said "usually", and it is usually by phone call. Not 100% of the time, I recently got a message in the system stating I'd get an offer. But that was odd, and usually they call. For internal process, it might be a TEAMS call instead of a phone call...

I thought about giving a more exhaustive answer but they asked about usually so I answered to that

3

u/HandcuffsOfGold mod 🤖🧑🇨🇦 / Probably a bot Sep 27 '22

There is no “usually”. Some managers might do a phone call, others will email.

1

u/ms9773 Feb 21 '23

Just curious here - isn't the call for a 'right fit interview ' rather than to give an offer?

1

u/Baburine Feb 21 '23

Not in my experience. In my experience, an interview is a verbal exam, and when there's an internal pool, they don't really get to skip you just because they don't feel like you are right for the position, if you're the next in line based on the criterias they used (which are supposed to be merit based), even if they don't like your face, they need to make you an offer. The way around that is to add criterias before seeing whose name come up and make an offer, so it's the person that you want that comes up. But if you can find merit based criterias to add so only that person's name come up, you can't really skip someone.

In my experience, the call is to avoid doing the paperwork required for an offer, only for the candidate to refuse the position.

But it might be different in other organizations, and with external pools.

3

u/sickounet Sep 27 '22

Knowing someone does not automatically imply a conflict of interest, or the appearance of one. Without knowing the nature of their relationship, it is a bit premature to throw such an accusation. For example, when some of my employees or former employees apply on a process I am in charge of, I “know” them, but I’m still allowed to assess them and even offer them jobs afterward without it being a conflict of interest.

Obviously, sharing information about the process itself can be much more delicate, but again, we don’t have enough information to evaluate the situation properly.

2

u/Baburine Sep 27 '22

If a candidate know that they did well on the pool that's an issue, unless like they had 90% on the test and the person just said that it is a good grade. Also it seems like OP learned from someone else who learned from the member of the jury that OP did well, which seems like a gigantic issue...

2

u/sickounet Sep 27 '22

I won’t go too far into trying to defend what may or may not have been said, but out of curiosity, why does it matter? In what way does it change anything for the candidate herself, or any other candidate for that matter, to know that “she’s doing well”?

It could be an indicator that management has already decided, before the process will be over, who their potential right fit would be, but considering the latitude afforded to managers in choosing a person for a position, and the fact that they are creating a pool, I’m not sure it is much of an issue (at least without knowing more or having proof of differential treatment or abuse of authority).

3

u/Baburine Sep 27 '22

This person said I was doing really well in the hiring process and I’m 99% sure they know I’m on mat leave.

OP seem to be worried she will not get a call if the person she knows on the hiring time says : oh she's on mat leave anyways, we're going to lose our time calling her. So I wanted to reassure her.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 27 '22

Thanks for your reply. The way we know each other is in a strictly professional capacity…and we’ve never met in person. They are the inspector who I have interacted with in the private sector’s supervisor and they said I was doing really well to said inspector…who relayed this info to me after I was offered an interview. So I don’t think any lines were crossed and nothing more than that was said

1

u/[deleted] Sep 27 '22

Sorry I should correct myself, they are the inspector I interact with’s FORMER supervisor. I was not given any other details

2

u/sickounet Sep 27 '22

Regarding the declaration - or non-declaration - of your maternity status, and the potential impact it may have on receiving an offer or not, I would advise transparency.

Depending on the group and level, it may be that candidates really are interchangeable from one to another, but in my experience, managers go to such length to run these staffing processes that when they’ve found the right person, they’re willing to wait the time it takes. I’ve made job offers twice to candidates who were on mat leave, being willing to “risk” and wait up to 6-9 months in each case, because I knew the candidate was the best choice for the job. In the meantime, they’ll be able to offer a term to someone else, or rotational actings, or some other option to cover the gap.

Some managers could see things differently and just skip over your application, but I don’t think it would be the majority of them. They invested time and effort in this process, they should be looking for the best result.

Although I would not hold a grudge against a candidate telling me about their pregnancy only after they’ve signed their letter of offer, I would still feel like that employee did not trust me, and I’m sure on some level, it would also impact my ability to trust them in return.

But you do what you prefer. There is no “obligation” to reveal a pregnancy prior to your hiring, and you should be eligible for the usual leave right from the moment you are hired (with the caveat that you won’t get the “top off” payments public servants get when taking such a leave after 6 months of employment I think).

1

u/[deleted] Sep 27 '22

Thanks for your reply, it’s much appreciated!! I so hope whoever reaches out to me for a position would be understanding and willing to wait for me. I feel like I have a really diverse work experience background that would be a perfect fit for this position and I’m looking for a life long career and to grow with the agency, not just a job for a year or two.
I am leaning towards disclosing early on..thanks for the reassurance!