Ombuds’ corner: Confidentiality concerning boards

In this series, the Bulletin aims to explain the role of the Ombuds at CERN by presenting practical examples of misunderstandings that could have been resolved by the Ombuds if he had been contacted earlier. Please note that, in all the situations we present, the names are fictitious and used only to improve clarity.

Phil* was a candidate for a position in a different group from the one he had been working for. After his board had taken place, Phil asked for an appointment with the Ombuds.

In his opinion, the interview went reasonably well. However Phil had some concerns as he had heard that there was no point in him applying as another candidate will get the position. He had decided to apply anyway, encouraged by other people, with the hope that he would get a good rating that could help him get a position in the future, if he didn't get present one. During the interview he was asked some questions that could only have been answered by candidates with  experience related to this specific group; he had missed these points, although he had a different concern.

After the board, Phil did not appreciate having to hear that the position had been given to someone else from one of his colleagues, who had in turn gotten the information from another colleague. In addition, he heard rumors that comments were made about him during the discussions leading to the decision. This came as a shock to Phil, who began thinking about the possible negative influence of some of his history, and imagined that some unknown considerations could have influenced the board's decision. He could not stop these thoughts, even the unrealistic ones, from invading his waking mind.

The mandate of the Ombuds forbids him to challenge managerial decisions, especially when these decisions are taken after several discussions, as in the case of a board. Although Phil understood and accepted that he could not change the situation as he had no knowledge of what really happened, he could not lose his bad feelings nor his vague impression that the decision could have been twisted in his disfavor (even though it might not have been the case).

Conclusion:
Such a situation is annoying and can leave unselected candidates with a bad feeling. It is very important that the confidentiality of the debates concerning the decisions leading to grant a position, whether a Limited Duration or Indefinite Contract, be respected. Only the Human Resources Adviser present in the board should be the first to forward information to the candidates who ask for it.

* Names and story are purely imaginary.

by Vincent Vuillemin