There was acute embarassment for a legal recuitment consultancy this week after it wrongly told a candidate for a job at Norton Rose that he shouldn't bother applying as he had been made redundant.
The associate, who until May was at a Magic Circle firm, was called by the recruiter with details of a vacancy. When the consultant heard that he had lost his job, he said that Norton Rose wasn't looking at redundant lawyers and tried to end the call. The candidate asked him to send over the spec anyway - which had "Do not want redundant lawyers" written smack in the middle of it.
A spokesman for Norton Rose said "we can categorically state that we do not and have not discouraged associates who have been made redundant from applying for positions. All candidates who meet the criteria for a role, irrespective of current employment status, are encouraged to apply when we have a vacancy. We currently have a number of candidates who have been made redundant who are at advanced stages in the recruitment process."
A spokeswoman for the consultancy said that the consultant had made a mistake as "he was in a hurry". Hmm. She added that the consultant subsequently twice confirmed that this was a mistake and that all candidates, employed or otherwise, would be considered for the vacancy.
The question is whether this is one off mistake - or whether it is an indication of more widespread discrimination against those who have been made redundant. If other readers have had similar experiences, then please let us know.
Tip Off ROF
The associate, who until May was at a Magic Circle firm, was called by the recruiter with details of a vacancy. When the consultant heard that he had lost his job, he said that Norton Rose wasn't looking at redundant lawyers and tried to end the call. The candidate asked him to send over the spec anyway - which had "Do not want redundant lawyers" written smack in the middle of it.
 |
A consultant yesterday |
A spokesman for Norton Rose said "we can categorically state that we do not and have not discouraged associates who have been made redundant from applying for positions. All candidates who meet the criteria for a role, irrespective of current employment status, are encouraged to apply when we have a vacancy. We currently have a number of candidates who have been made redundant who are at advanced stages in the recruitment process."
A spokeswoman for the consultancy said that the consultant had made a mistake as "he was in a hurry". Hmm. She added that the consultant subsequently twice confirmed that this was a mistake and that all candidates, employed or otherwise, would be considered for the vacancy.
The question is whether this is one off mistake - or whether it is an indication of more widespread discrimination against those who have been made redundant. If other readers have had similar experiences, then please let us know.