License required, she doesn't drive

The top candidate for our posted position, which requires access to a car and ability to drive to various work-related appointments. does not have a license or a car. She said in the interview (I’m told) that she’s been putting off getting her license, and would be willing to get it and get a car.

The runners-up have cars and ability to use it, but don’t measure up in other criteria.

This sounds problematic to me on several levels, but as I say, she’s the superior candidate in all other essential functions of the job. So let’s ask the obvious question. Can I, should I, make her an offer with continued employment, say after 3 or 6 months, contingent on getting a license? Commuting by other means is possible, just takes longer and we don’t want to do it over the long haul.


Comments

  • 9 Comments sorted by Votes Date Added
  • My gut tells me that if commuting by other means is possible, having a car & license is not a BFOQ for the position, and therefore, shouldn't be required.

    However, if you can find a reason why having your own vehicle is necessary to the position, and the reason is not simply convenience, you may be able to work it into the job offer.

    My guess is that this is a tricky situation you may not want to put yourself into. Remember, you are effectively requiring a person to spend a rather large amount of money just to come work there. That's quite a big request!

    Maybe you could go about it like this: consider going back to the top applicant, and explain that while a vehicle is not required, it would help them do their job better. If their compensation is tied to performance (appts kept, quotas, etc) they will see the advantage that having their own vehicle gets them. Leave it up to THEM to make the decision to get a car. In the mean time, document performance, and let them know that not having a vehicle is no excuse for not making quotas, etc.

    Good luck!
  • Since there doesn't appear to be any problems other than the fact that she does not have a driver's license (by that I mean that she is not disabled, etc.) and she is the top candidate, I would go ahead and offer her the position but make it very clear that the company will NOT provide a chauffer for her, nor will it provide any additional compensation for taxis, etc. If she cannot figure a way to get to where she needs to get without a car, then you have a performance issue and I would deal with that accordingly. Let HER figure out how she is going to do that - don't do it for her.

    I am hearing of more and more people, young people, who are choosing NOT to get their license and therefore they are VERY limited in their choice of jobs. Is this just a manifestation of the younger generation being "taken care of"? I remember turning 16 and I couldn't WAIT to get my license!!
  • If the car and license are truly job requirements, I would not let her start until she has met the requirements.

    If you required a controller to be a CPA, would you let them start without having the certificate?
  • I have to agree with Marc...
    "Is it is or is it ain't" a requirement?
    Appears on the surface that you must decide if having a valid driver's license and their own vehicle is a requirement of the position.
  • She may be the top candidate but she does not have the ability to drive, no license, no car. Did the posting for the position state "valid MA driver's license required" or travel required?

    I would not offer her the position if she applied knowing that she needed to drive.
  • I am curious as to how the job was advertised. If the job announcement listed a driver's license and owning (or access to) a vehicle as a requirement, you can assume that there were potential applicants who screened themselves out because they didn't meet the qualifications. Had they known that a driver's license was not really a requirement, you may have had a different applicant pool. This does leave you open to complaints from those potential applicants.

    You are also open to complaints from the protected class applicant who does meet the qualifications and believes that he/she was discriminated against because of their protected class status. How will you respond to that complaint when you hired someone who does not meet the qualifications?

    If you hire the (technically) unqualified applicant, how will you rate her performance when you are acknowledging that she cannot perform up to your timliness expectations. Will she later claim that she was set up for failure by being hired into a position for which she didn't meet the qualifications?

    Lastly, what if she is unable to obtain the license? How will you justify terminating her when she has been performing the job satisfactorily (although, perhaps, a bit slow)?

    I think the prudent course of action is to not hire her.


  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 08-21-07 AT 12:09PM (CST)[/font][br][br]I agree with Linda, I would give the applicant a call offering her the job provided she can meet the license and vehicle requirement. Then negotiate a report to work date. Just because she doesn't have a current license doesn't mean that she doesn't know how to drive and gettng a license and buying vehicle doesn't take that long.
  • Getting a license should not take long - but there is both a written and a skills test associated with earning the privelige to have a license.

    Some folks have had there license taken away/revoked for excessive points, driving under the influence, etc. Does your company require a clean dmv report?

    As to buying a car, it is very easy if you have the cash, if not, then good credit helps. Your candidate might have credit issues that have prevented her from getting a car and license in the past.

    I am just speculating on other issues that could be thought about.
  • [font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 08-22-07 AT 01:24PM (CST)[/font][br][br]You all raised a number of excellent points, thanks. To close the loop on one of your questions, the posted job description says :” Must be able to attend -- the types of meetings-- by car.” Not as specific as one would hope, my lesson learned there.

    We do not have any requirements for people who use their car as part of their job. Not a clean RMV report, or anything like. I don’t want to be in the business of micromanaging whether and when someone is able to drive, and this kind of hire would set me on that path. You all have outlined a host of other issues I don’t want to take on.

    I have advised the hiring supervisor to keep looking. Being able to drive oneself is required as far as I'm concerned, and there are too many uncertainties and risks in hiring someone who can meet the qualifications, even if we would like to. If the position is still open when the applicant gets her license and car, we would certainly consider her.

    Thanks for all your input.

Sign In or Register to comment.