I am sending this letter to the Student Development Services office because of severe difficulties with a company which solicited a position advertised on the UWO Internet Employment Café Web page. This position was that of LAN Administrator at CT, located on downtown London.
THE CONTRACT
The company interviewed me twice for this position, once during the week of July 22-27 and the second time on August 14. The following Monday, on August 19, ET, Q&A Officer, and the person who conducted my first interview, told me by phone the position was mine (something which he was not authorized to do.) He also told me that they were going to contact my references.
During that week the Human Resources Officer, MD contacted my references. The officer had difficulties contacting one of the three references, Dr. J. Michael Bennett, a UWO computer science professor, as he would not be available until September, and as there were few personnel in that department that week (and the following week) I substituted his reference with an additional work reference. Satisfied with the results, she offered me the full-time LAN Administrator contract on August 23, which I signed that day. My first work date was to be Tuesday, September 3.
I was presented with two documents - the company contract (30K per annum, 6 months probation), and a non-disclosure agreement, both prepared by the HR Officer and left at the front desk. When I asked about the empty spot for the president's signature, I was informed through the secretary that he would sign it later. Happy with the response, I affixed my signature on the two documents.
CONTRACT REVOKED
The next week being my last free week, I visited my brother in Toronto for a couple of days, starting on Sunday evening. On Tuesday, August 27, I received a disturbing phone call from the HR Officer. She told me that the president refused to sign the contract. She also told me that it was a difficult call for her because she never has had to do this before, where the president refuses to sign a contract after it had been prepared and signed by the prospective employee. The first question I asked was, "what happened?" She told me that the president noted that there were no academic references. He told her that he had made some phone calls and that after those calls, he refused to sign the contract. She said that she did not know herself what happened, but that if she did she would not tell my anyway. I then asked what I could do that would reverse that decision. She strongly suggested I get a written academic letter of reference. I tell her that I would like to contact ET. I left a message on his answering machine as he did not answer the call.
Just before 5 PM, ET contacts me by phone. He told me that all he was allowed to tell me is that the contract was revoked and that the President refused to sign it. He avoided all attempts at providing any more information. The next day (Wednesday), around 2PM I contacted ET, telling him that I believed I have been wronged, and that was examining my options, and that I was in the process of getting a letter of reference. I told him that I was going to try to persuade the president to signing the document.
THE UNIVERSITY CONNECTION
On both Tuesday and Wednesday, I placed several long distance phone calls to London from my brother's apartment, contacting personnel at the University (in addition to CT, and my parents.) On Wednesday evening, I prematurely returned to London from Toronto, and on Thursday, and the following Tuesday (September 3) I conducted several interviews with senior Computer Science personnel on campus. The purpose of my calls to the University were two-fold - to obtain an academic letter of reference, and to find out what if any phone calls were made to the University by CT, as intimated by the phone call from CT on Tuesday.
I contacted a dozen people on campus, including three secretaries in the Computer Science officer, the two academic councellors (Drs. Downing and Vancise), two systems administrators (Dave Martin, Bruce Richards), the former chairman (Mike Bauer), and several professors. None of them could confirm what the HR officer told me the previous Tuesday. I covered almost all the senior staff from the department that were there the week of August 25-31, and some additional staff that had returned the first week of September. I talked to additional personnel within ITS, Student Development Services and the University Ombudsman who also furnished me with valuable advice.
On September 5, I contacted Dr. Bennett, my principal academic reference, who had just returned for the fall session. I gave him the FAX number of CT and he faxed an academic letter of reference to them later that afternoon. I made a phone call on Thursdsay to CT, and was told the HR Officer had "left early". I instructed the secretary to insure that that Dr. Bennett's letter reached the president's desk.
THE PRESIDENT'S RUNAROUD
On Friday September 7, I go in person to CT. The secretary tells me that both the President, MD and ET were not there. She also instructed me that I was only to talk to these people, and none of the other staff. I tell the secretary that I definitely wanted to have a talk with the President. I then go home.
Convinced I was given the run-around, I had another individual place a phone call to CT, which resulted in me connecting to MD. She seemed very surprised to have heard from me, and told me she was in the middle of a meeting. She also confirms that the President has seen the letter of reference. I instruct her that I wanted to have a talk with the President to settle the matter. She responds that the President would be there next Monday and I could talk to him then.
This was my first conversation with her since the initial conversation from August 27. I had attempted several times to contact her since, but the reasons offered were either "she was in a meeting," or that "she left home early", or in once instance, she had taken the day off after organizing a company barbeque. It wasn't until September 7 that I became convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that she, and others, were being made unavailable to me on purpose. At 1 PM I receive a call from the President (who also was "not there" that day, according to the secretary).
I make a statement that he probably knows why I wanted to talk to him. He pretends that he has no idea what I am talking about, and for the next few minutes I go through the my history with CT, from the first interview to Dr. Bennett's letter of reference. He then recalls who I am, and tells me that he made calls to several people at the University and that he had concluded from those calls that I was an "unsuitable candidate" for the position in question.
When pressed, he refused to reveal either the identity of these references or the contents of their references. I tell him that those that I contacted could not confirm his statement (including senior CSD staff), but he was insistant that he got references from people on campus. He was very upset when I asserted that I had a right (moral and ethical, not necessarily legal) to know why he did not sign the contract, and told me I had no such right. At that point the conversation ends and I hang up the phone.
CONCLUSION
This ends my chronology of events, and the my complaint with CT. I am sending this letter two weeks after the phone call telling me the contract was revoked. To this day the identity and contents of the references the President contacted remain unknown to me.
I would appreciate if Student Development Services keep a copy of this complaint on file. The breach with myself and CT is now irreparable and all I can do now is examine my other options. Where it concerns the University, this means keeping a record of this affair available should any future complaints arise, and should this company advertise any future solicitations by CT on the UWO Employment Café Web Page. CT's actions, although they may have been within the bounds of the law, were unethical and unprofessional. As a place of employment I would not recomment anybody applying for work there.
John Larocque
View also my main page.