Conference turris::womannotes-v2

    Verbal offers are legally binding in California, as well, though I have
    no idea how one would go about seeking redress, other than via lawsuit.
    
    DougO

    I'd mention your basis for the discrimination call - i.e. his sudden
    change at your pronouncement of your desire for further education, and
    his reaction to your "desire to succeed".  If you don't tell them WHAT
    to look for, they probably won't find it.
    
    -Jody
    

    In Digital, all offers come thru Personnel.  An indication that one
    plans to make an offer or is strongly considering offering you the
    postiion does not constitute an offer.   Many times when a candidate is
    in the running for several positions, a hiring manager gets a bit
    over-loquacious in trying to win the candidate over.  Unless your
    verbal offer was from Personnel, it doesn't count for much, just talk.
    
    In my experience, the interview process proceeds and then a candidate
    it selected and then reference checks begin in earnest.  Up until the
    offer is made by Personnel, everything is just talk.
    
    good luck,
    Marge 

    
    	As an experience job hunter (literally hundreds while I was
    	unemployed) I agree that with most companies, personnel makes
    	the offers.  Sounds like Dr. John is just a jerk.
    
    	I had a similiar experience once. I interviewed with a programming
    	supervisor, who said I was "exactly what they were looking for".
    	She brought me to the manager and I interviewed with her. The manager
    	tells me they are interested and to call back in a week. I call back,
    	the manager denies I ever interviewed with her. I gave her the
    	date, time and even told her what she was wearing on that day.
    	She just kept on saying "No, I don't see it on my calender".
    	When I told her that I *saw* my name on her calender that day,
    	she told me all the jobs were taken, and hung up on me.
    
    	The supervisor refused to take my calls when I tried to find out
    	what was going on.
    
    	Guy
    

I find it hard to believe that a changed expression at some point during an
interview (especially as described) can be extrapolated to mean the interviewer
disapproves of ambitious women. Maybe it was, but based on the evidence, that
would seem to require a very lucky guess.

Suppose you're wrong. Suppose his hemorrhoids chose that moment to kick in. 
Or he'd had some bad recent experience with a PhD candidate, and was down on
students in general. Or he was remembering his quals. Any number of things 
could have led to that change in expression.

If you are wrong about this man, consider who benefits from claiming sex
discrimination? Suppose you win, and get the job. You're in his organization,
and he's just suffered through an unjust (in this scenario) accusation. Great
start to a job.

If you want this job (and want to succeed in it should you get it), it would
seem to me that you would be ill-advised to make accusations against the
management which cannot be substantiated. Rather, it would be better to pursue
the "verbal offer should be binding" approach. You have a lot more evidence
about that than you do about sex discrimination.

    I agree with Paul (.6).  You may be absolutely right about the reason
    for the offer beign withdrawn but you have no real evidence.  The real
    issue here is the fact that an offer was made and you, in good faith,
    took actions in accordance with that offer, not the reason that the
    offer was withdrawn.  Discrimination cases are extremely difficult to
    prove even with great evidence.  I'd push the company on the verbal
    offer issue.  I also think that "Mike" owed it to you to call you back
    or at least send you a letter when he knew that the written offer would
    not be forthcoming.
    
    By the way, is there any possibility that your references did not check
    as well as you expected them to?  If so, you need to know that so you
    can avoid the same thing happening in the future. 
    
    And I guess I don't have to tell you that in the future you really
    should make sure you have it in writing before you assume it's fact.
    
    Good luck!
    
     Polly

    While most companies have policies that only personnel can make an
    offer,  that  rule is binding on employees, and not applicants. It
    is  a  general  rule  that  if  an  employee of a corporation does
    something  (writes  a letter, tells you something) and you in good
    faith  act  on  it,  the  letter is binding on the company. People
    dealing with companies are not required to understand the internal
    rules  of  the  company.  They  must however, act in good faith. A
    engineer  would not be acting in good faith if he assumed that the
    parking  lot attendant's comments constituted a job offer. This is
    why  companies  have strict rules on who can talk to the public or
    make job offers and so forth.

--David

Can anyone here relate anecdotal information on successful (or failed)
discrimination suits? Kath has recently mentioned hers, and I've been dying for
a chance to ask her if she can share any data. I know of one other member of
the community, but I understand she is not allowed to share most information as
part of the settlement.
	Mez

    I agree with .7 and others...
    
    The reason for the job offer being withdrawn may be discrimination of
    some sort, but it would be hard to prove, particularly since you don't
    know for sure yourself.  It would be easier if they had said things
    straight to your face ... since they didn't, all you or anyone can do
    is guess the reason.
    
    However, since they DID make a verbal job offer and you DID take action
    based on what they said -- and they DIDN'T tell you that you wouldn't
    get the job after all, I think that's a better case to pursue than a
    discrimination suit speculating about their motivations for not giving
    you the job.  
    
    Good luck, whatever you decide.
    Pam

My suggestions would be to take all but the most subtle references to 
discrimination out of your letter.  Bring up factual data only:  his reaction
toward you about the PhD, the verbal offer, the the phone call to him
later.....etc.

The problem here is that you only BELEIVE there to be discrimination, you
have absolutely no proof beyond your evaluation of the situation.  Register
your complaint about them taking back the offer and ask for clarification.

Let their personnel department investigate and come up with their OWN findings.
By charging discrimination you're giving unfair bias to the investigation
especially considering the fact that you don't have proof.


My experience appears in the next reply.


kath

My experience really doesn't have a lot to do with your situation, but I've
had quite a few requests from people to enter the case in here.  Since it
was in newspapers all over Arizona, I'm pretty much free to say what I want.

When I was 16 I got a job at AJ Bayless Markets (a grocery store) in Arizona 
as a Service Clerk (bagger).  In the year and 1/2 that I worked there, the
first time, I never was promoted beyond bagger.  In the mean time, three
guys who were hired after me were promoted--one to produce, and the other
two to stock.  I was never considered for any of these positions.  I was
TOLD that I was not physically able to handle these positions, hence, I would
only be considered for a variety stock (aspirin, cards, sanitary napkins, etc)
or cashier.   

I, soon after that, quit to go to college.  After my freshmen year, I came
back home and again was employed as a bagger for the summer.  (BTW, as a 
bagger, I was only making $2.85 an hour.....well below minimum wage.  In 
Arizona at the time, unemployment was high, and I was not able to find 
any other summer employment to pay more...)

One day some of the cashiers and I were complaining...it seems that a few
of THEM had tried to get into the stocking and the produce jobs as well, but
were passed over by men baggers that had been working there less than a year
(all of them had been cashiers for over 3 years).

We called the head cashiers around the company (Bayless had many stores in 
Arizona) and found that we were not alone...it was "unwritten company 
policy".  

Two of the head cashiers in Tucson (I was in Sierra Vista....75 miles south)
contacted a law firm who was more than glad to take our case.  In 1984 
these women filed a sex discrimination suit against AJ Bayless on behalf
of all women that worked for Bayless.  We then had the chance to say
whether we wanted to be included in this suit or not.

Many women were threatened with anonymous phone calls promising violence if 
they became part of the suit.  At this point in time, I has quit Bayless
again to go back to school, so I was not really worried about it, so I 
thru my name in the hat.  

In June, 1986, Bayless had violated Arizona and Federal Civil Rights act by:

	>Failure to promote female employees
	>Keeping female employees in part-time positions (no health benies)
	>Paying certain female employees less than mail employees doing
	 the same or similar work.

Bayless was ordered to purchace an annuity in the sum of $7 million dollars
which would be held in trust for the next 5 years.  During those five years,
each woman named in the suit would be mailed a lump-sum of back wages each
year, during those five years.  Back wages were calculated based on length
of service, job description during that length of time, and other factors.

Since June of 1986, Bayless has gone bankrupt, and there was a brief period
of them when payments were "put off" for six months while it was determined
if the trust was part of Bayless' assests.  It was declared NOT to be.  
[In other words, if you are going to do this, be DAMN SURE that you get all
your money put in a trust in YOUR name, simple payments from the company 
means that if it goes under, you're outta luck]

My total back-wage payments for approximately two years of service came to 
$2,700 made in yearly payments of approximately $540.  I have received three
of those payments, and another should be forthcoming within the next month
or two.

So, as you see, although my name was on the suit, I was not a "part of 
the proceedings", I did not have to testify, I simply had to write a letter
stating my experiences.  My involvement in the proceedings was miniscule
as it was a class-action suit by over 300 women.


kath

    I'm going with the concensus of the last few replies.  Your case is
    based on speculation.  The warning signal to me was when you said,
    "Well, it couldn't be this and it couldn't be this, so it must be
    that."  I'd say that's a pretty dangerous assumption.
    
    Instead of complaining about discrimination, I'd emphasize the fact
    that a verbal offer was accepted and then withdrawn.  I'd push for an
    explanation, since Dr. John's sounds like an evasion.  Keep in mind
    that it's not in the company's interests to prove that you were
    discriminated against or treated unfairly; don't think that they're
    going to hand you grounds for a suit against them.  Depending on the
    response you get, you can then decide whether to submit a complaint
    about discrimination.

    Chelsea, nit.  I don't believe the basenoter said the verbal offer was
    accepted, only that it was made.  There was no indication that the
    basenoter was given a specific timeframe within which to respond, or
    any indication that the offer was accepted.
    
    An offer alone does not constitute a contract; there must be
    acceptance.
    
    Marge

    The evidence seems to me, too, to be rather thin, at least as
    described. You are speculating that Dr. John blocked the offer,
    speculating that he disapproved of your interest in a higher degree,
    and speculating that such disapproval (if any) arose from sex
    discrimination. Maybe two new hires had recently left after one year to
    return to grad school, and he had a moment's worry you would do the
    same.
    
    Clearly, suspicions that are understandable even if unfounded are also
    being reinforced by evasive answers to questions about what happened.
    But it is my experience that evasiveness is the norm whatever the 
    circumstances. Most people are very uncomfortable explaining this kind
    of "bad news." An example. Years back I was promised a transfer
    within my organization, to take effect a few months later (after
    completing a demanding assignment). As the time approched, things
    started getting vague; the "paperwork" wasn't complete; I couldn't
    get candid answers as to what was going on, and was never officially
    informed that it had fallen through. It turned out that an un-announced
    reorganization was in the works; almost all outstanding reqs had been
    cancelled or frozen; and the foul-up was beyond the control of those
    who promised me the transfer. Yet they were so embarassed about what
    was happening, they couldn't bring themselves to discuss it with me.
    
    Companies also often have policies of saying little if anything to
    those who are not given job offers, as explanations could be used as
    the basis of lawsuits (whether justified or not).
    
    Finally, it is not clear to me either from your draft or your
    introductory remarks just what you want to accomplish with this letter
    (get the job? punish Dr. John? get straight answers? prevent further
    discrimination?). It is natural to want to trespond when you have been
    hurt, but it is possible that this could hurt you without accomplishing
    anything positive, so I would urge caution.

    Dear Basenoter,
    
    Yes, I believe that you correctly interpreted the `look' that Dr.
    John gave you.
    
    Yes, I believe that he did what he could to prevent you from getting
    that job, because you are a woman.
    
    I am not sure that his negativity was the sole factor against you,
    at the bottom line.  No, I do not think that some failing on your
    part was a contributing factor.  Yes, I think it could have been a
    departmental or company screwup.  It could even be an unspoken company
    policy against hiring women into positions like the one you aimed
    for.
    
    No, I do not think that you will be able to prove discrimination
    at all.
    
    No, I do not think that you could successfully work at this company
    if you won your suit -- on any grounds.
    
    							Ann B.

    
    
    The following is a reply from the basenoter
    
    __________________________________________________________
    
As for discrimination, I am reasonably confident that is what it was, but as
I initially stated, and as everyone who responded here has pointed out, I
have not enough proof to do anything substantial.  

The letter was primarly to vent my frustration, to get an explanation, and
possibly (very slim chance) to get the job.  At a number of people's suggestion,
I removed the two references to discrimination.  (People's reponses concentrated
on that, even though I tried to make my letter concentrate on the evasiveness
of the people involved and the unfairness of the abrubt change, with
discrimination only mentioned as a possible reason.)

I also changed the letter to specifically request a written explanation for
the reasons my job offer was revoked.

As for accepting, I accepted verbally in the same manner that the offer was
given to me verbally.  As in, I told them I would send them my acceptance
letter when they sent me my offer letter.  If a verbal offer constitutes a
contract, it was most certainly accepted.

Could I work at the company now if someone forced them to give me the job?
Yes, and I would, becaue the specific nature of the program is such that
I would have very little contact with the people who are in the administration
of the program.  They wouldn't functionally be my "bosses", someone unrelated
to the program would.

Thanks for all the replies.