In Chapter 6 respond to HRM Incident 2 â€œBut I Didnâ€™t Mean To!â€ and answer the question â€œHow should Amanda respond to Davidâ€™s question?â€ Your response should be a minimum of 200-250 words and use terminology, ideas and concepts from the appropriate chapters 4-6. Reply to the posting of two other colleagues and explain why you agree or disagree with their response. Your responses will be evaluated based on your ability to demonstrate the knowledge that you have learned in the chapters and to apply that knowledge in an analysis of the â€œIncident.â€
I think Amanda should respond in a very straight forward and professional manner. David should have known to keep all questions work related and her mentioning that she needed a child care service should have not been mentioned by her unless they were discussing benefits. He should have steered the conversation away from getting personal. Unfortunately , Amanda is not in a position where she can give David the clear. i think she should remind him that being too personal is not a good thing. The time since the interview may be so long that there might not be nothing to lawsuit, but this also falls on the company and makes them look like they are not training the staff members who are interviewing. The interview should have revolved around the position and what they companies goal is and if they align with what they are looking for. I understand that the woman felt comfortable during the interview and willing shared information about her children and divorce, which is why i think David probably did a good job at making her feel like she was in a safe space. I do not believe that he discriminated her because of her children and his questions were not to be malicious or sexist.
References: Mondy, Wayne R., and Martocchio, Joseph J., (2016) Human Resources Management, Fourteenth Edition, By Pearson Education, Inc.
Amanda should respond to David in the most professional manner as well and not steer him one way or another, if she tells him there is nothing to the lawsuit and later it turns out that their is, he may turn around and use that against her. She should have just told him how he should have and should handle that sort of situation in the future. It may have seems innocent but the candidate waited an entire year to take action against David. Amanda should point out what to do if a candidate “begins to volunteer personal information that is not job related, the interviewer should steer the conversation back on course.” (Mondy, pg. 148) Once he realized that she was talking about her personal life and in detail, he should have let her know that “However these factors are not job related and will not be considered in our decision.” (Mondy, pg. 148) There are ways to steer someone out of conversation that may not be appropriate for the moment. Even if it wasn’t Davids intention for this to happen, he should have realized during the interview that the candidate was getting too much into detail about her personal life when it should have been kept brief and professional. “Interviewers should be trained to have a job related purpose for asking each question.” (Mondy, pg. 149) When they realize the conversation is going off track the interviewer should be sure to catch it and change the subject to get back on track.
Mondy, Wayne R., and Martocchio, Joseph J., (2016) Human Resources Management, Fourteenth Edition