How would you feel if someone else read over your job application?

This is controversial stuff and raises some interesting discussion points.

The brief summary:

An individual worked for an employer for a number of years and left. Later on the employer recruited the same (or similar) roles - and the former employee applied and was unsuccessful.

Feeling his application was unsuccessful because of his age the applicant made an application to the Human Rights Tribunal. Stuff.co.nz reports...

The decision stated Mr XXXX should have full access to all documents as they might assist in, "establishing, albeit indirectly, that the record shows that persons of younger age, with lesser skills, lesser qualifications, lesser direct experience and lesser time engaged in similar work or in similar positions, were considered more favourably and were ultimately successful in being appointed to the two advertised positions."

Crikey that is a worrying ruling. In my 6+ years of recruitment - most of the job seekers I have personally worked with want their applications kept private - for many justifiable reasons. One really common concern for job-seekers is not wanting their current employer to treat them differently because they are considering / exploring a new career path.

I wonder if the ruling puts many employers in breach of the Fair Trading Act - if we are advertising a "confidential job application process" this ruling literally forces them to breach that confidentiality.

I am not privvy to all the in's and out's of the individual and the employer in this case - so let's assume nothing but ask what I consider fair "WHAT IF" questions.  

WHAT IF:

1. The company culture has changed for the positive and the past employee will not fit the new team?
2. The employee was simply hard to manage and they just don't want him back?
3. The employee was failing to meet standards and left before he was performance managed?
4. The employer has a policy of not hiring past employees?

One interesting aspect of this story is that the employer used an agency to manage the recruitment of one of two similar roles they wanted filled and the recruitment specialists did not have this individual on the shortlist.

As recruitment specialists we are tasked with finding the best person or people for our clients roles. We check skills, abilities, work history, training and attitudes / behaviours - and we do this with fresh impartial eyes.

It would appear to me that the employer has chosen to / taken the opportunity to hire fresh talent that brought something new to the role and their business.

Wearing a hypothetical employers hat - maybe I think unusually but, if I am wanting to employ a new person into a business I manage or own I want to hire people that meet my goal and vision for the company - and it may mean that some individuals have the skills and experience to do the job but just do not fit the wider brief from a behavioural perspective. As an employer surely I can hire the people I want to?

What's next?

Will employers have to give redundant employees access to current employee's HR files to justify why they are still working for the company?

I, for one, think this is a slippery slope!