I'm not impressed with the ITCRA grievance process.
As a mere 'candidate', they were happy to accept a 'grievance' from me, using that term, to communicate with me on the matter over many months and to put me to some trouble to provide them 'evidence'. When I raised concerns about maintaining the confidentiality of my private emails, they were brushed aside: Our Way or the Highway was the message.
After too many months, today I finally have a letter saying the matter is 'resolved' and now closed.
I am none the wiser about the facts of my complaints or if ITCRA viewed any/all/some of them as proven.
Did they think I was a reliable witness and weigh my evidence highly or not? I've No Idea.
ITCRA was also unhappy that I should dare to write-up a DEIDENTIFIED version of the story.
As an organisation they seem to have difficulty with the notions of Freedom of Speech, Open and Transparent Governance Processes and Natural Justice.
Nor did anyone have the decency to offer me an apology.
From that, do I infer they found NO FAULT on the part of the Agency and Agent? That I've been a jerk, wasting their time and making a nuisance of myself? I've No Idea.
If anyone has a problem with an ITCRA Member Company, my advice now is:
Don't waste your time.They'll only jerk you aroud, waste your time and leave you very unsatisfied.
Previous posts on the matter:
DRAFT Complaint: 10-Sept-2012.
Mr. AAA BBB,
ITCRA Member Company Representative
Melbourne VIC 3000
I am in receipt of a grievance lodged by a candidate Mr. Steve Jenkin, against a XXX consultant Mr. ZZZ ZZZ. He has certified that the information provided is correct to the best of his knowledge and that he has not provided any false or misleading claims against another company or individual and has provided additional email evidence to support the claims made. In summary the issues are:
Background (commencing in August)
• The issue is focused on a *permanent* position for a senior IT staffer and Mr Jenkin was required to move interstate.
• Agency approached Mr Jenkin, no job application ever made by Mr Jenkin.
• Job never advertised with a start date, no immediacy ever stated. Comment was made that it was expected to take 2 months to fill position [by October]
• Misleading statements:
1. Confused an email from consultant (ZZ) to work seeker (SJ) with a written offer from the Client. Insisted this was a "Job Offer ", implying a binding contract.
2. Promised help finding accommodation for relocating interstate and none was provided. Having local accommodation was always a condition of accepting the position.
• Harassment or cyber-stalking:
1. One incident of a dozen calls/texts in 30mins by (ZZ)
2. (SJ) asked, in an email, to desist. (ZZ) repeated again later with more very inappropriate and abusive statements.
• Privacy Act breach.
1. (ZZ) used referee contact details for purposes data not supplied for. When work seeker (SJ) would not answer consultant’s (ZZ) calls, consultant (ZZ) rang referee to complain and spoke inappropriately.
• Additional Issues
1. When SJ had failed to receive a contract 10 days from first proposed start date, informed ZZ of inability to start due to personal circumstances. ZZ then harassed and browbeat SJ and seriously overstepped by continuing to demand exactly what the personal circumstances were. This was justified by saying that there was a need to explain to the Client.
2. Misspelt SJ name on contract.
3. ZZ demanded a written apology from SJ to Client for pointing this out.
4. ZZ Sent 7 emails in 15 minute period informing work SJ of Job Offer. ZZ Kept issuing recall emails for incorrect offers sent.
5. ZZ commented that his manager was continually chasing him to comply with company requirements and document all communications.
6. SJ requested 3 times in email that ZZ ask Client if 9-day fortnight [with RDO] would be acceptable during first 3 months while transitioning to Sydney. ZZ never asked Client [confirmed]. Client was happy to comply when asked by SJ.
7. ZZ deliberately misled SJ by stating the job was full-time only and RDO’s were not possible.
Formal Letter of Response: 19-Dec-2012
Mr Steve Jenkin,
The ITCRA Board of Directors has asked me to write and thank you for raising the professional practice matter against ZZZ ZZZ of XXX Recruitment. The complaints process allows us, as an Association, to address issues and to ensure that recruitment practices achieve best practice benchmarks.
The Conduct Committee reviewed the evidence provided by both parties and asked further questions of XXX Recruitment, as the Member of ITCRA. The findings and recommendations of the Conduct Committee were discussed by the ITRCRA Directors and the following outcomes have resulted:
• XXX Recruitment were required to agree to a number of actions as a result of the Committee's recommendations and these have been committed to, with some already completed and assessed by an external quality auditor.
• The ITCRA Directors accepted the Committee's findings and the undertakings by XXX with respect to process review and consultant training.
• The ITCRA Directors raised concerns with respect to the discussions of this matter in the public domain via your blog as this could have jeopardized the process if the Member company felt the Committee had been unduly influenced prior to the matter being heard.
The purpose of the ITCR's Code of Conduct to provide a channel for complaints to be addressed and to provide improvement strategies for professional and business conduct of Members.
As explained to yo, the resolution of the matter was between ITRCA and the Member company and, as such, is confidential and cannot be made public - although the content can be used as a case study, with anonymity, for industry improvement. You would have the right to review any such case study as protection of your rights is also a priority.
The Directors wish you well in your future endeavours and hope that your experience with recruiters, in the future, is not as frustrating.
Have an excellent festive season,
Email to President of ITCRA on their unsatisfactory response.
To: Russell MacDonald, President ITCRA
Subject: ITRCA complaint against XXX
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 13:10:36 +1100
After many months of waiting, today I finally received a letter telling me my complaint against XXX Recruiting on multiple grounds had been resolved.
The letter is best described as "content free".
How was my complaint resolved? I've no idea, just that you've closed the book on it.
Nothing in this process has answered my complaints, nor told me what, if anything, XXX had done wrong, or if any of their malfeasance *I* perceived was supported or not.
All I can gather is they were given a good talking to and they promised not to get caught doing "it" again.
I'm a party to these proceedings, not a third party or 'the public':
these actions were visited *upon me* and were personally quite devastating and financially disastrous for me AND I personally raised the issue to get some satisfaction from you.
Releasing to me matters that *I* raised, even under a Confidentiality Agreement, doesn't involve any abuse of process or publicly exposes anyone. I already know the names of the players, I was one of them.
If you knew *all along* that I would never be told the outcome of my complaint WHY DIDN'T YOU JUST SAY THAT in September???
That would have been reasonable, but your organisation has jerked me around for months on end...
That's beyond inconsiderate: it's deliberate and intentional misleading behaviour.
At the very least, I would've expected a response to the complaint I raised that comprised two parts:
- the findings of fact on each individual issue/point raised.
i.e. "we found a breach of the privacy act, but not harassment"
Note: I am NOT party to the internal actions, remedies and disciplinary process.
- if the Agency, or their agent, was found to have acted in Bad Faith or outside acceptable limits in your Professional Code, then an apology to me, at least, is in order.
Where is a letter to me from the management of XXX Recruiting saying "We're sorry, we've looked to fixing things"?????
I'm not just disappointed in the process and this unsatisfactory result, but that you don't understand the concepts behind of Natural Justice. If you asked me to provide a *lot* of personal information as evidence as part of your process, so why cannot I know the determinations you made?
*That* is the reason I approached you with a complaint: to have you make a determination and tell me what it was.
I wish that you:
- write me a response detailed the determination, not actions taken, on each point of complaint I made.
- direct XXX Recruitment to write (or phone) an appropriate formal apology to me.