Don’t give in if managers ask HR to change the hiring criteria because they think they have already found the perfect candidate—who just happens to lack one of the job requirements. Courts often view such ad hoc changes as serious flaws in the hiring process.
Stick with the posted requirements unless managers have good and compelling reasons to change the job description. If they do, start over. Changing the job description may prompt applications from candidates who didn’t initially apply because they lacked one of the original job requirements.
Recent case: Terry Moore applied for a job in an HR department and was rejected in favor of two female applicants. He sued for reverse discrimination.
But the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals threw out his case. The court looked carefully at the applicant pool and determined that the employer had a solid hiring and promotions process, and hadn’t suspiciously bent the rules when it made the hiring decision. Instead, it found Moore was simply the least qualified candidate. Unless he could show he was clearly more qualified than the hired applicants, he didn’t have a case. (Moore v. Jefferson County Department of Human Resources, No. 07-14372, 11th Cir., 2008)
- How to Fire an Employee the Legal Way: 6 Termination Guidelines
- Case against Schwan's heats up as court backs EEOC
- Interview performance can be the hiring tiebreaker
- Good news: No personal liability for age discrimination claims
- ADA warning for bosses: You're not qualified to diagnose employees' mental illness