Crown and Bull Public House Case Study
Jessica Eagles worked as the day manager of Crown and Bull Public House. The pub was seeking to hire a new daytime server and two new night servers in anticipation of a busy summer patio season and summer vacations by current staff. To advertise the position, Jessica posted signs at the front entrance of the pub, added the openings to the pub’s Facebook page, and posted the openings on Indeed.ca.
At the closing date for applications, they had received 20 applications and résumés. From her first review of the applicants, 6 could be immediately rejected for various reasons: The application was incomplete, the applicant was not local, the applicant was in high school and not old enough to serve alcohol, or the applicant’s preferred start date was not until the fall.
With the remaining 14 applications, Jessica made a scoring guide based on the qualities and experience required for the position. She and the night manager, Ryder Dawson, planned to review the applications and identify the six to eight candidates they wanted to interview. After the interviews, their plan was to make the hiring decisions for both the daytime and night positions jointly.
Jessica thoroughly reviewed all 14 applications and used the scoring guide. She made some notes for each candidate to justify her ratings. When Jessica and Ryder met to discuss the applications, Ryder said that he had already identified whom they should interview. He revealed that he had rejected all of the male applicants, stating that the bar needed only “hot females” as servers and that males should stay behind the bar. He had met three of the female candidates previously and stated that Jessica should trust him that two of the candidates would not be people they would want to work with but that one would be terrific. For the candidates he didn’t know, he had gone onto Facebook and looked at their profiles. He was excited to note that most of the applicants had open profiles so he was able to readily see lots of pictures of them and read their posts, but that for the ones with private profiles, he had just befriended them and all but one (now on his rejected list) had accepted his friend requests.
According to Ryder, there were four candidates who were “super hot,” and he dismissed others for being overweight, not pretty, or not the type of person they would want to work at the bar. Jessica was shocked at Ryder’s approach to hiring new staff.
1. What potential problems do you foresee with Ryder’s approach to hiring?
2. Is it reasonable to use information from previous personal interactions during screening? Why or why not?
3. Should male candidates automatically be rejected from the server positions? Why or why not?
4. Are assessments of candidate attractiveness relevant? Discuss.
5. What would you do if you were in Jessica’s place? How would you approach the conversation with Ryder about the screening process? How might you bring the scoring criteria into the conversation?
6. Would you use the information that Ryder has found on social media to supplement the applications, or ignore it? Justify your decision.