Mfrhtyj

While I admit I'd be skeptical that employing this person would be tenable (for either of you really) it's not impossible. Married couples aren't one entity and the spouse may be a thorough professional and able to compartmentalize the situation. So I'd say it's worth interviewing them (assuming that you would if the spousal connection didn't exist).

I would say that it's worth addressing the point in the interview though:

I'm sure you're aware that [name of fired employee] is no longer with the company. Do you anticipate that causing any issues were you to be employed here?

And see what their response is.

One person in a couple loses a job, another becomes more active in seeking a job. I don't see anything suspicious about that. For all we know he could be pursuing opportunities with several companies.

Also, the idea in an earlier edit that he may be getting in contact with the company to vent out his anger or take revenge is a very long way from being established. We don't know his motives - it might just be to find work.

The approach you're taking seems reasonable - if he appears to fit the job description, I would arrange an interview. It would be fair to ask how he would handle his wife's history with the company, but asking directly if he bears a grudge would be unlikely to be useful - anyone with vindictive motives will not be inclined to answer honestly.

It's something to bear in mind during recruitment, but a company whose recruitment process didn't weed out those who intended to do the company harm would have a bigger problem than with one specific couple.

Cancel the interview and don't have anything more to do with this candidate, nothing good can come from it!

(Edit: I agree with @reirab you should immediately contact a lawyer and ensure the way you terminate this process complies with local legal requirements.)

Given the circumstances there is no way this relationship can succeed - even if the applicant is genuine there will be immense suspicion over every mistake, especially if it's a big one. If they're not genuine then they can do incredible harm to your company.

There is no question or interview technique that will properly allow you to discern their motives for continuing with the process.

Obviously, some of this depends on the reason for termination.

As with any interview, there's no obligation on either side to continue with the job offer, so use the interview to gauge whether it's a real candidate or a bunny-boiler. People who have an axe to grind will usually have the wheel turning.

Even then, you're covered by the probation period should he interview well and then turn nasty.

Step 1: Talk to a Lawyer

I'm a bit surprised that I haven't already seen this in another answer, but the very first thing I would recommend doing in this situation is have whoever is in charge of this situation talk to an employment lawyer in your jurisdiction immediately in order to understand what sorts of employment laws might affect your options in this case. I would do this before proceeding with anything else, including the interview. Certain interview questions might be banned. Taking certain factors into account when making an employment decision might be banned. Only a lawyer in your jurisdiction can competently answer this for you.

I'm not one who is normally quick to encourage lawyering up, but this is a situation where I would absolutely want to do that before anything else if I were in your company's shoes.

Personally, I would be extremely hesitant to hire someone in this situation. It just really does not seem like it would end well for the company and also likely wouldn't be good for the couple. But before I made this decision, I would absolutely want to talk to a local employment lawyer about it and make sure I know exactly what the legal restrictions on my options for handling the case were.

Inviting the spouse of a fired employee invites drama. Don't do it.

There are a couple of basic ethical precepts that apply here:

• When we make hiring decisions, they're based on the candidate's qualifications, not on irrelevant personal characteristics such as who they're related to.




• People shouldn't suffer the consequences of other people's actions.

Examples of this kind of thing are that people frown on nepotism, and the US constitution prohibits corruption of blood as a punishment for treason.

Based on these principles, I think the default should clearly be to interview the guy and seriously consider his application just as you would anyone else's. If you're thinking of deviating from this default, then (a) make sure you have an articulable reason that addresses the ethical issues (not just some utilitarian justification) and (b) talk to a lawyer. People can sue you if you discriminate against them in hiring, and only a lawyer can tell you whether this discrimination is illegal under your locality's laws. (E.g., I believe in California this type of discrimination would not be illegal, because the guy isn't a member of a protected class, but I could be wrong, so don't trust my opinion, ask a lawyer.)

Should we be prepared for the possibility that he is persisting about the interview now to vent his anger or "take revenge" in some twisted way?

To me, this does not constitute an articulable reason that addresses the ethical issues. It's not reasonable to hypothesize that this guy is going to leave his current job so that he can come to work for you on some kind of kamikaze mission of revenge. All of this would clearly not be in his own best interests, and it's not reasonable to attribute irrational, self-destructive motivations to someone who is simply applying for a job. People generally apply for a job because they want the job.

Go through with the interview and let that team decide if they want to hire him. If there are other applicants as qualified as he is then maybe hire one of them if they would be a better fit.

I don't know what country this is happening in, but in America a singular person can't get revenge on a company in a way that will have a serious effect on the company at all. Even if he does something illegal, the business will win in the end. There's no real reason to be apprehensive about this.

If you interview him, don't hire him, and if he can't prove that he wasn't hired due to discrimination there's really nothing he can do about it. There are no downsides to just letting the natural process happen here.