The public company Navantia was strongly condemned for having arbitrarily excluded a candidate from a selection process of 42 senior technicians in Ferrol. The worker was rejected during testing for being “too” mature for the position, during an interview process during which the worker stood out for her “leadership” and “in-depth 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 that the decision of this body is now final. Thus, the public company must include the candidate in the selection process.
“Navantia complies with the court decision, as it could not be otherwise, and now the most appropriate measures are being evaluated to comply with the decision, with the criteria that govern us as a commercial company” , replies the public company.
Among the 13 best out of a 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. He obtained a total of twenty points, with the maximum score (three points) in almost all assessable sections, including “maturity”, “teamwork”, “initiative”, “perseverance” and “resolution ability” , among others.
In this evaluation phase, a group dynamic, “of more than a hundred candidates, the complainant was among the thirteen having obtained the highest score”. The person concerned was among the 13 best, although it should be remembered that there were 45 positions available. But he stayed out.
Not only did he achieve good numerical grades, but the evaluative grades on his tests were also very positive. “His level of conversation and the manner in which he describes the functions he 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 dynamics, he comes to conclusions earlier than the rest of his classmates.”
Or “your qualification is in another branch that is not naval but you have performed naval tasks reliably in some of your jobs, which implies a level of maturity and in-depth knowledge of your job much higher than that expected for a junior profile.”
Navantia acted “arbitrarily”
However, all those good grades and evaluations left her out of the process, as Navantia argued that her characteristics made her better suited for a management position.
“It is concluded that the candidate presents a profile which does not correspond to the skills required for these 42 junior profiles. Among the 225 dynamics requested, there are profiles whose skills best correspond to these 42 junior profiles,” argues the public company and repeats the judgment. “It has been proven that his profile is too mature for these 42 junior positions,” noted Navantia.
“It is not reasonable to understand that the applicant should not pass the current stage, taking into account the group dynamics test that he carried out,” underlines the judgment, which emphasizes that maturity, leadership or the in-depth knowledge of his work cannot be understood in any way. case as a “demerit”.
“The fact that the company prefers that the complainant apply for other positions is not, in itself, considered a criterion of unsuitability which could reduce” his chances of accessing the position on an equal footing with the rest of the candidates , the court argued.
Furthermore, the judges point out that these qualities were evaluated during 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 called positions corresponded is characterized, according to article 9 of the company’s intercenter collective agreement, among other notes, by “the exercise of high levels of responsibility and management”, underlines the judicial resolution.
Thus, the magistrates concluded that the behavior 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 judgment thus obliges Navantia to summon the worker “for the last phase of the selection process, with cancellation of everything that has been carried out in this process, from the evaluation of the group dynamic phase and the personal interview”. “And without this having to directly affect any employment contracts that may have already been concluded with the persons selected,” the judges added.
The CGT union considers that “the last phase of any selection process” is “the medical examination”. “This is what the company must do: call the excluded woman for a medical examination,” the union said in a statement, in which it demanded that Navantia not “insist on the crime” and comply with the law .
