Applicant sues after manager told her why she wasn’t hired
January 9, 2009 by Sam NarisiPosted in: In This Week's E-Newsletter, Interviewing, Latest News & Views, Law
Here’s an example of a company that got in big legal trouble after a hiring manager gave an applicant an inconsistent explanation of why she didn’t get the job.
A 53-year-old woman applied for a job at a Starbucks store. During her interview, the hiring manager mentioned a concern with the availability listed on her application. The applicant then explained she would be flexible and could be available more frequently than the hours she listed.
Still, the woman wasn’t hired because of the availability listed on the application, as well as “disrespectful body language” during the interview and her conduct afterward.
The applicant called the manager and visited the store to ask why she wasn’t hired. Each time, the manager gave the same answer — the availability listed on her application– without mentioning the other factors. She sued, claiming her age was the real reason.
Starbucks tried to get the case thrown out, but the judge wouldn’t buy it. Why not?
The main factor was the inconsistency in the manager’s explanations. She said one thing in court, and another to the applicant — which, according to the woman, shouldn’t have been a valid reason after she explained her flexibility in the interview.
Also, the court examined the store’s recent hiring records. Of the 19 employees hired by the manager, none of them was older than 30.
That gave the judge enough suspicion to send the case to a jury trial.
Cite: Boyajian v. Starbucks
January 13th, 2009 at 9:09 am
I’m not doubting that there may have been some age discrimination. But having worked in retail years ago, I’ve been bitten by those who claim that they are “more flexible than I wrote on my application”.
If Starbucks needs people during the evening, and she states on her application that she’s only available days, I would be hesitant as well. I’ve heard my fair share of pre-employment lies and I’m suspicious of someone who writes what they really want on a resume, only to backtrack during the interview.
Again, since no one over 30 has been hired, there may be a problem. But I certainly would have had second thoughts over her availability.
January 16th, 2009 at 11:42 am
I agree with Brian. There are enough semi- or untruths to wade through in the interview process…….at least if the hiring manager said he/she didn’t care for the interviewee’s personality, it would’ve been easier for Starbucks. No law protecting lousy personalities and given the customer-centric nature of the job, should be reason enough not to hire someone in this capacity.