IMO the guy torpedoed his own case by asking for $100K, $20K more than the $80K being offered (the winning candidate asked for $78K). He also interviewed poorly - talked too much and came across as arrogant.
I've been in similar situations where a candidate is good on paper, but they don't interview well or their expectations are outside of what the role offers. This typically means they make it past the first interview mainly on the strength of their resume, but will be quickly dismissed if other candidates fit within the parameters of what's being offered.
$20K in salary is a huge difference at this level - I would take someone with less experience, but who I thought could be molded into the role with time, over someone asking for way more than the salary offered and who already has a couple of red flags.
TLDR - guy could have had a case if he had been smarter about it.
Of course it's a possibility the guy wasn't the actual best candidate for the job, but that's immaterial compared to the conclusions of the government that barring white men from jobs isn't discrimination.
OP's article's is a bit shit and leaves out a few key details, better article here: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12880681/jobseeker-lose-race-sex-discrimination-white-men.html
IMO the guy torpedoed his own case by asking for $100K, $20K more than the $80K being offered (the winning candidate asked for $78K). He also interviewed poorly - talked too much and came across as arrogant.
I've been in similar situations where a candidate is good on paper, but they don't interview well or their expectations are outside of what the role offers. This typically means they make it past the first interview mainly on the strength of their resume, but will be quickly dismissed if other candidates fit within the parameters of what's being offered.
$20K in salary is a huge difference at this level - I would take someone with less experience, but who I thought could be molded into the role with time, over someone asking for way more than the salary offered and who already has a couple of red flags.
TLDR - guy could have had a case if he had been smarter about it.
Of course it's a possibility the guy wasn't the actual best candidate for the job, but that's immaterial compared to the conclusions of the government that barring white men from jobs isn't discrimination.