The Student Room Group

Illegally refused volunteering role

Back when I was 16 I applied for a voluntary role with the Prince's Trust, which included a free Level 1 Health and Social care course, at the time I would have been doing my A Levels but encountered enormous difficulties and ended up in an unfit state to continue due to enormous stress, and having a nasty flare up Crohn's Disease, which wasn't helped by that. As a result I dropped out of sixth form. So I decided to apply for that role, and attempted to contact the Prince's Trust coordinator who I will call Jane. She didn't get back to me, so on the assumption that I could be accommodated nevertheless, I turned up smartly dressed which set me aside from everyone else, I was the smartest there by a country mile.

I was then called for interview and accommodated, things started off with the Serco manager, who I will call John very well, he was in the company of an NHS staff member who I'll call Emma. Then John asked me a completely illegal and wrong question, that being whether I had Autism. Not knowing my rights, I answered the question honestly in the affirmative i.e. I said yes. He then asked me if I did well at school. My response to that was to answer again in the affirmative i.e. say yes, but then say too much, and go onto explain that I found sixth form a struggle, and as a result I had dropped out of it.

His response was to refuse my application on that basis, and to suggest that I apply to Project SEARCH, which (with all due respect) caters only to the needs of those with learning disabilities i.e. low intelligence, and was unsuitable for me, because it would be way too boring for me, so I didn't even bother applying. It's unlikely that they would've accepted me anyway.

Could I have sued had I done so within the statute of limitations? What do you think? I think that this incident, which was 100% illegal, demonstrates that Serco are an immoral company whose death is inevitable at this rate, unless they get their act together, and that public bodies e.g. NHS need to stop using them ASAP. Hell, I should've called the Police on that manager for a hate incident in my opinion.

What if I had simply answered "no comment" to the Autism question? How do I deal with the same question next time? What about the question of whether I did well at school? Should I have simply answered with "Yes, I got 8 GCSEs", and nothing else? If not then how should I deal with it next time?

Scroll to see replies

Exactly what law was broken there? I think to employ someone you should know if a person has autism or not so you’re able to adapt for them and make their life easier. Also there is nothing wrong with asking a potential employee about their qualifications.
Reply 2
Original post by Jamie_1712
Exactly what law was broken there? I think to employ someone you should know if a person has autism or not so you’re able to adapt for them and make their life easier. Also there is nothing wrong with asking a potential employee about their qualifications.

1) Equality Act 2010, which requires that all people including those with a protected characteristic e.g. Autism, MUST be treated the same, and allowed equal access to opportunities.
2) OK you may well be right, but it was out of order for him to refuse on that basis right.
3) No there wasn't but it was out of order for him to refuse on the basis of my Autism.
Asking if you have autism might have been necessary depending on the nature of the job so they could help you. Were you refused on the basis that you have autism? And what was the actual volunteering position? Like what were you going to be doing?
Original post by Anonymous
Back when I was 16 I applied for a voluntary role with the Prince's Trust, which included a free Level 1 Health and Social care course, at the time I would have been doing my A Levels but encountered enormous difficulties and ended up in an unfit state to continue due to enormous stress, and having a nasty flare up Crohn's Disease, which wasn't helped by that. As a result I dropped out of sixth form. So I decided to apply for that role, and attempted to contact the Prince's Trust coordinator who I will call Jane. She didn't get back to me, so on the assumption that I could be accommodated nevertheless, I turned up smartly dressed which set me aside from everyone else, I was the smartest there by a country mile.

I was then called for interview and accommodated, things started off with the Serco manager, who I will call John very well, he was in the company of an NHS staff member who I'll call Emma. Then John asked me a completely illegal and wrong question, that being whether I had Autism. Not knowing my rights, I answered the question honestly in the affirmative i.e. I said yes. He then asked me if I did well at school. My response to that was to answer again in the affirmative i.e. say yes, but then say too much, and go onto explain that I found sixth form a struggle, and as a result I had dropped out of it.

His response was to refuse my application on that basis, and to suggest that I apply to Project SEARCH, which (with all due respect) caters only to the needs of those with learning disabilities i.e. low intelligence, and was unsuitable for me, because it would be way too boring for me, so I didn't even bother applying. It's unlikely that they would've accepted me anyway.

Could I have sued had I done so within the statute of limitations? What do you think? I think that this incident, which was 100% illegal, demonstrates that Serco are an immoral company whose death is inevitable at this rate, unless they get their act together, and that public bodies e.g. NHS need to stop using them ASAP. Hell, I should've called the Police on that manager for a hate incident in my opinion.

What if I had simply answered "no comment" to the Autism question? How do I deal with the same question next time? What about the question of whether I did well at school? Should I have simply answered with "Yes, I got 8 GCSEs", and nothing else? If not then how should I deal with it next time?

This thread sounds familiar. Aren't you the same anon who made a thread about being fired from a volunteering rule due to bullying? The names are the same as well. :redface:
Reply 5
Original post by Jamie_1712
Asking if you have autism might have been necessary depending on the nature of the job so they could help you. Were you refused on the basis that you have autism? And what was the actual volunteering position? Like what were you going to be doing?

1) Yes it might have been.
2) I was refused on that basis, yes.
3) Basically to work for Serco in Hospital Services at the local Hospital, the Norfolk and Norwich Uni Hospital.
Original post by Fermion.
This thread sounds familiar. Aren't you the same anon who made a thread about being fired from a volunteering rule due to bullying? The names are the same as well. :redface:

Yes that's correct.
Original post by Anonymous
Yes that's correct.


They explicitly told you you can’t have the job because you have autism? If so that’s definitely not on without a valid reason.

Oh damn, that’s where I do my placements for uni.
Reply 7
Original post by Jamie_1712
They explicitly told you you can’t have the job because you have autism? If so that’s definitely not on without a valid reason.

Oh damn, that’s where I do my placements for uni.


1) Correct, they said that for that reason that I would have to go to Project SEARCH instead. They gave no other reason.
It doesn't sound like anything illegal has occurred.
When there is an abundance of potential volunteers to choose from, those who offer the best interview performance and appear to be the best fit for the role/organisation will be chosen.
Original post by Anonymous
Back when I was 16 I applied for a voluntary role with the Prince's Trust, which included a free Level 1 Health and Social care course, at the time I would have been doing my A Levels but encountered enormous difficulties and ended up in an unfit state to continue due to enormous stress, and having a nasty flare up Crohn's Disease, which wasn't helped by that. As a result I dropped out of sixth form. So I decided to apply for that role, and attempted to contact the Prince's Trust coordinator who I will call Jane. She didn't get back to me, so on the assumption that I could be accommodated nevertheless, I turned up smartly dressed which set me aside from everyone else, I was the smartest there by a country mile.

I was then called for interview and accommodated, things started off with the Serco manager, who I will call John very well, he was in the company of an NHS staff member who I'll call Emma. Then John asked me a completely illegal and wrong question, that being whether I had Autism. Not knowing my rights, I answered the question honestly in the affirmative i.e. I said yes. He then asked me if I did well at school. My response to that was to answer again in the affirmative i.e. say yes, but then say too much, and go onto explain that I found sixth form a struggle, and as a result I had dropped out of it.

His response was to refuse my application on that basis, and to suggest that I apply to Project SEARCH, which (with all due respect) caters only to the needs of those with learning disabilities i.e. low intelligence, and was unsuitable for me, because it would be way too boring for me, so I didn't even bother applying. It's unlikely that they would've accepted me anyway.

Could I have sued had I done so within the statute of limitations? What do you think? I think that this incident, which was 100% illegal, demonstrates that Serco are an immoral company whose death is inevitable at this rate, unless they get their act together, and that public bodies e.g. NHS need to stop using them ASAP. Hell, I should've called the Police on that manager for a hate incident in my opinion.

What if I had simply answered "no comment" to the Autism question? How do I deal with the same question next time? What about the question of whether I did well at school? Should I have simply answered with "Yes, I got 8 GCSEs", and nothing else? If not then how should I deal with it next time?

From what I have understood from what you have read, I think your application was refused because you don't have a learning disability and are viewed as being relatively high functioning . Not because of your autism.

It would be ludicrous of them to put a blanket ban on autistic people because a significant proportion of people who have LD also have autism.
I am no expert, but I suspect that it wasn't ilegal to ask if you have autism as the program is aimed at people with 'special needs' so they need to be able to assess your suitability.
(edited 3 years ago)
But employees with autism cost more money and effort according to senior management and are less productive than other staff without developmental disorders, so I'm not surprised they rejected you.
Original post by Anonymous
Could I have sued had I done so within the statute of limitations?

No such thing exists in UK law. Time limits for civil cases, yes, but not the same thing.

But also, nothing illegal happened. Let it go.
Original post by Anonymous
1) Yes it might have been.
2) I was refused on that basis, yes.
3) Basically to work for Serco in Hospital Services at the local Hospital, the Norfolk and Norwich Uni Hospital.

Yes that's correct.

So you didn’t get fired. Your application basically got rejected.

I would suggest you let this go.
Original post by Fermion.
So you didn’t get fired. Your application basically got rejected.

I would suggest you let this go.

To be fair they were for different voluntary roles. And at different times. So what you're saying isn't true.

Back to topic please.
Original post by glassalice
From what I have understood from what you have read, I think your application was refused because you don't have a learning disability and are viewed as being relatively high functioning . Not because of your autism.

It would be ludicrous of them to put a blanket ban on autistic people because a significant proportion of people who have LD also have autism.
I am no expert, but I suspect that it wasn't ilegal to ask if you have autism as the program is aimed at people with 'special needs' so they need to be able to assess your suitability.

From what I was told the program was not aimed at Special Needs at all, but mainstream people who were out of work. Therefore I should have been accepted onto it.
Original post by Anonymous
To be fair they were for different voluntary roles. And at different times. So what you're saying isn't true.

Back to topic please.

That comment was on topic and relevant. You just don't like it.
Original post by Anonymous
From what I was told the program was not aimed at Special Needs at all, but mainstream people who were out of work. Therefore I should have been accepted onto it.

No, you should have been given chance to get onto it. And you were.
You don't have a divine right to the role, that's not what the equality act means.

None of what you have described is illegal. You just didn't get the position.
Move on, find something else.
Original post by Anonymous
From what I was told the program was not aimed at Special Needs at all, but mainstream people who were out of work. Therefore I should have been accepted onto it.

Ummm 'project search' is designed for people with learning disabilities
Original post by glassalice
Ummm 'project search' is designed for people with learning disabilities

That's irrelevant. What I applied to was not Project SEARCH. I applied to a program with the Prince's Trust first, then only after being rejected did the manager point me in the direction of Project SEARCH. I refused to take that path, and let myself be judged by the colour of my mind.
Original post by Drewski
That comment was on topic and relevant. You just don't like it.

No, you should have been given chance to get onto it. And you were.
You don't have a divine right to the role, that's not what the equality act means.

None of what you have described is illegal. You just didn't get the position.
Move on, find something else.

1) It was most certainly not on topic, nor was it relevant in the slightest.
2) No, my application was refused, which was to a Get Into Health and Social Care program with the Prince's Trust, nothing to do with the other thread. Therefore I was not given that chance.
3) No I don't but I have the right not to be discriminated against.
4) So now you admit that I didn't get the position. Thanks.
5) Yeah I guess that might be an idea. Especially with a criminal record like mine.
Original post by Anonymous
1) It was most certainly not on topic, nor was it relevant in the slightest.
2) No, my application was refused, which was to a Get Into Health and Social Care program with the Prince's Trust, nothing to do with the other thread. Therefore I was not given that chance.
3) No I don't but I have the right not to be discriminated against.
4) So now you admit that I didn't get the position. Thanks.
5) Yeah I guess that might be an idea. Especially with a criminal record like mine.


With all due respect, blaming everything that happens to you on autism isn’t going to get you very far in life. You need to work on making your applications stronger in future so you stand out.
Original post by Anonymous
1) It was most certainly not on topic, nor was it relevant in the slightest.
2) No, my application was refused, which was to a Get Into Health and Social Care program with the Prince's Trust, nothing to do with the other thread. Therefore I was not given that chance.
3) No I don't but I have the right not to be discriminated against.
4) So now you admit that I didn't get the position. Thanks.
5) Yeah I guess that might be an idea. Especially with a criminal record like mine.

Wrong,
Wrong,
You weren't,
Yes. Because that's the reality. That's also not illegal in the slightest.

Here's a free tip, when you have no idea what the law is, don't throw around words like illegal.

Your argumentative and belligerent nature that you're exhibiting on this thread is why you won't get many job openings. You don't come across as someone who'd be good to work with.
(edited 3 years ago)

Quick Reply

Latest