Background:
The Claimant, a long-standing hospital employee with a good record, interviewed for a Trainee Plaster Technician post in January 2022, ranking third out of three candidates. He appealed the interview process, citing a perceived conflict of interest: a consultant involved in a separate dispute with the Claimant was on the interview panel. This dispute involved several employees, including the Claimant, who were challenging the Hospital Management’s refusal to allow the use of a limb-lifting aid in the orthopaedic theatre. The appeal was successful, leading to a re-interview, but the Claimant again placed third. Despite further appeals, management quickly appointed the top candidate.  The Claimant argued that interview panel members were biased, featuring consultants opposed to the disputed limb lifter, thereby unfairly disadvantaged him. Despite completing hospital-sponsored training in 2022, the Claimant believed management’s attitude shifted negatively after he expressed his intention to use the limb lifter, a tool at the centre of ongoing disputes. His appeals were largely ignored, leading to lost future earnings of at least €3,500 annually. The union sought compensation, citing continuous procedural breaches by the hospital.

The Respondent detailed the recruitment process for a permanent PT position, noting that the Claimant was ranked third after two rounds of interviews. Initially, the Claimant objected to the interview panel's composition, leading to a re-run with a new board. Despite the changes, the Claimant again placed third and filed another complaint regarding the new panel. The Respondent stated that all panel members signed conflict of interest forms, confirming no conflicts. Although the Claimant's initial complaint was submitted late, HR still reviewed it, and interviews were re-run with different panel members. The Claimant raised further concerns, but the Respondent maintained that the process was fair, transparent, and competency based. Despite efforts to accommodate the Claimant's concerns, the Respondent argued there was no legislative basis to support the union's claim, and they stood by the fairness of the process. Ultimately, the Claimant's complaint was closed by the CPSA in September 2022.

Finding:
The Adjudicating Officer’s Recommendation on the dispute under Industrial Relations Act 1969 held that the Claimant lodged a timely complaint within three days of the second interview, contrary to the Respondent's claims of delayed submission. The delay in addressing the complaint was attributed to the Respondent, as their campaign lead was on leave, and no investigation was conducted despite promises. The core issue involved the participation of consultants in the interview panels, who were previously involved in a contentious dispute over the limb lifter theatre equipment with the Claimant and his colleagues. The Claimant's concerns about bias were validated when the first interview process was nullified, but the Respondent failed to address similar concerns in the second interview. The lack of a satisfactory explanation for this inconsistency led to the conclusion that the Claimant was unfairly treated, and the Respondent did not follow proper procedures. Consequently, a recommendation was made in favour of the Claimant.

Practical Guidance for Employers:
Employers should:

• Ensure Impartial Interview Panels: Avoid assigning interview panel members who have been involved in disputes or conflicts with candidates. This helps prevent perceived or actual bias.
• Timely Complaint Handling: Address any complaints or concerns from candidates promptly, even if key personnel are unavailable, to maintain trust and transparency.
• Document Fair Processes: Ensure all interview processes are well-documented, including any appeals or objections raised by candidates, and demonstrate how these were resolved fairly.
• Review Conflict of Interest Declarations: Regularly review and update conflict of interest declarations from panel members to ensure impartiality in recruitment processes.
• Respect Employee Training Efforts: Acknowledge and fairly assess the qualifications and certifications employees have earned, particularly if supported by the employer.
• Follow Procedural Guidelines: Adhere strictly to established procedural guidelines, especially when dealing with appeals or complaints, to avoid legal challenges.
• Communicate Outcomes Clearly: Clearly communicate the outcomes of interview processes and complaints, providing detailed explanations for decisions to ensure transparency.

The full case can be found here:
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2024/august/ir-sc-00001399.html