4

Diana was invited to pre-employment test for a job. But it appeared that that the content of test was the same as last year, and she knew that content because of her friend who passed the same test last year for the same position (though she did not get the job in the end).

After the test there is an interview, and if Diana gets a job, is there any legal consequences as it is an unfair advantage for her because the company did not change the content of the test?

  • 1
    I don't think that "persecuted" is the word you mean, although I am not sure which word you actually mean. – ohwilleke Jan 18 '18 at 8:08
  • @ohwilleke: I suppose OP was thinking of "prosecuted". Though if I understand correctly, "prosecuted" would only be used in criminal (not civil) proceedings, wouldn't it? – sleske Jan 18 '18 at 8:32
  • @sleske Correct. – ohwilleke Jan 18 '18 at 8:34
  • Hi Victor, welcome to law.SE! Your question was a bit unclear, so I edited it to clarify what you probably intended. Please review my edit, and re-edit if I got something wrong. – sleske Jan 18 '18 at 8:35
  • Hi there. Thank you for your comments and editing my things. Indeed, I wanted to say ''prosecuted'', but i think it s not a proper legal term. I meant if it will have legal consequences. – Victor Jan 18 '18 at 9:59
3

No - there is no general requirement to be fair to all applicants when selecting someone for a job. It's not even clear how this would work - you would need to define what "fair" means in this context, and there would be many competing definitions. Is it fair to prefer an applicant who has more experience because they received help from their parents with landing their first job? Is it fair to prefer someone with a certain look for an acting job? Is it fair to prefer someone who happens to have a similar personality to the person hiring?

So if the employer finds it more convenient to use the same test every year, and if they do not mind that this gives some applicants an advantage, they are free to do that.

The only exception is that discrimination based on certain, specific factors (often called "protected characteristics") is usually outlawed. The list depends on jurisdictions, but usually includes things like gender, race and age. However, even in that case discrimination is allowed if the business can demonstrate a genuine need - for example, when looking for an actor, it is allowed to hire based on gender.

  • Thank you @sleske so much for answering the question. If I may just follow up on that. So if Diana then passes the interview well and gets a job and later the company or anybody finds out that the she was one of the best candidates and did well the test because she knew what would be there during the test (as they used the same tast). Is there any consequences for her? Can they end the contract or something like that? – Victor Jan 18 '18 at 11:42
  • @Victor: Hm,there are always ways to fire someone, but legally I don't think it would make a difference - they knowingly took the risk when they reused the test. Feel free to ask a new question about this! – sleske Jan 19 '18 at 8:50

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.