The public company Navantia has been firmly condemned for arbitrarily excluding a candidate from a selection process for 42 senior technicians in Ferrol. The worker was discarded during the tests for having “too much” maturity for the position, in an interview process in which the worker stood out for her “leadership” and “deep knowledge” of her work.
A few weeks ago, the Supreme Court rejected Navantia’s appeal against the sentence of the Superior Court of Justice of Galicia, so the ruling of this body is now final. Thus, the public company must include the candidate in the selection process.
“Navantia abides by the court ruling, as it could not be otherwise, and now the most appropriate steps are being assessed to comply with the ruling, with the criteria that govern us as a commercial company,” the public company responds.
Among the 13 best out of one hundred candidates
The case dates back to 2020, when the candidate was rejected during the selection process despite her good feelings during the tests, which resulted in good grades and evaluations from her interviewers, as published by El País.
The worker appealed her exclusion and received the evaluations received by email. It obtained a total of twenty points, with the maximum score (three points) in almost all the evaluable sections, among which were “maturity”, “teamwork”, “initiative”, “perseverance” and “resolution capacity”, among others.
In this phase of the evaluations, a group dynamic, “of more than one hundred candidates, the plaintiff was among the thirteen with the highest score.” The affected person was among the 13 best, when it must be remembered that there were 45 positions available. But he stayed out.
Not only did he obtain good numerical grades, but the evaluative grades on his tests were also very positive. “His level of conversation and the way he describes the functions he has performed in his previous jobs indicate clear signs of leadership and of having assumed the coordination and/or management of work teams.” Also: [Es] “mentally faster during the dynamic, he reaches conclusions sooner than the rest of his classmates.”
Or “your qualification belongs to another branch that is not naval but you have performed reliably naval tasks in some of your jobs, which implies a level of maturity and in-depth knowledge of your work much higher than expected for a junior profile.”
Navantia acted “arbitrarily”
However, all these good grades and evaluations left her out of the process, as Navantia argued that her characteristics made her a better fit for a senior position.
“It is concluded that the candidate has a profile that does not fit the competencies required for these 42 junior profiles. There are profiles among the 225 called for dynamics whose skills best fit these 42 junior profiles,” the public company argued and includes the ruling. “It has been proven that his profile is too mature for these 42 junior positions,” Navantia noted.
“It is not reasonable to understand that the appellant should not pass the phase at hand, given the group dynamics test that he carried out,” highlights the ruling, which emphasizes that maturity, leadership or deep knowledge of his work cannot be understood in any case as a “demerit”.
“That the company prefers that the plaintiff apply for other positions is not, in itself considered, a criterion of demerit that could reduce” his chances of accessing the position on equal terms with the rest of the candidates, the court argued.
Furthermore, the judges recalled that these qualities were assessed in the test and are consistent with what is required for the position of senior technician in the collective agreement. For example, “the group to which the positions called corresponded are characterized, according to article 9 of the company’s inter-center collective agreement, among other notes, by “exercising high levels of responsibility and management,” the judicial resolution points out.
Therefore, the magistrates concluded that the conduct of the public company was “arbitrary and contradictory” and that “the principles of equality, merit and capacity” of access to public employment were violated.
The ruling thus obliges Navantia to summon the worker “for the last phase of the selection process, with cancellation of everything carried out in said process, from the assessment of the group dynamics phase and personal interview.” “And without this having to directly affect the employment contracts that may have already been concluded with the selected people,” the judges add.
#Navantia #condemned #excluding #position #worker #maturity #qualifications #leadership
