Amazon, corporate policies VS equal opportunities.
I am a skilled immigrant from Russia, ethnic Russian. On the day I arrived in Australia I have got University degree, MCSE Data Platform and MCSE Server Infrastructure certification, and 12 year experience in IT as Systems Administrator, Database Administrator and Database Developer.
I have slight disabilities which have never been obstacles in Russia.
Australia granted me Permanent Resident visa as well full working rights in Australia. Australia declares equal opportunities regardless race, ethnic origin, disability, age and so on. Further, I represent you some emails among Amazon Web Services, Australia Human Rights Commission and me.
I replied and asked Amazon Web Services about interview opportunity.
Amazon Web Services disregarded my argument about hearing disability.
Then, I referred to 'A step-by-step guide to preventing discrimination in recruitment' by Australian Human Rights Commission, page 3, paragraph 6, read the link above.
Amazon Web Services refused interview in their office in Sydney in July 2016 referring to Corporate Rules. Unfortunately, I did not save previous emails.
Finally, Amazon Web Services agreed for an offline interview in their office in Brisbane.
After the interview I received this email.
Skills and experience are absolutely worthless in Australia.
While you bring relevant experience and passion for the role, however, after thoughtful consideration, the hiring team has decided not to pursue with your candidature at this time.
No one and never provides you with truth, although the truth is obvious.
Please note, it is Amazon's Privacy policy not to provide specific or detailed feedback.
Here below, I extracted some core statements of 3 page document which explicitly describe Australian Human Rights Commission essential. They accept only convenient proofs and arguments and never accept evidences which prove discrimination.
Australian Human Rights Commission as is.
To support a claim of disability discrimination a complainant is required to provide or point to information to support that they have been treated less favourably because of their disability (or because they require reasonable adjustments to alleviate the effects of their disability), than a person in the same or similar circumstances without a disability.
So cute. Are they able to read in English?
However, the information currently before the Commission tends to support that Amazon was unaware of your hearing impairment during the recruitment process.
See email from Amazon Web Services above. Within the first interview with Amazon Web Services in July 2016 their sysadmin disclosed that he does not know about FSMO roles. Awareness about FSMO roles on Active Directory environment is essential knowledge for any Wintel sysadmin.
I further note that Amazon states the reason you were unsuccessful for the role was due to its assessment during the recruitment process that you were unsuitable for the role based on an objective evaluation of your technical knowledge and experience rather than because of any disability.
To conclude. There is Russian proverb for this case, but it cannot be translated in English to completely express all essence.
Overall, I am of the view that there is insufficient information before me to support your claim that you were treated less favourably because of your disability or that Amazon failed to make reasonable adjustments to accommodate your disability. Therefore, I have decided to terminate your complaint on the grounds that I am satisfied the complaint is lacking in substance and/or misconceived.
Is it worth to immigrate in Australia for people with disabilities?
P.S. After this case I applied for similar positions of Amazon two times. Amazon blacklisted me due to my hearing disability. Amazon declares equal opportunities, but actually Amazon is fascist corporation like the Third Reich.
