The interview went well and you know you’ve got the qualifications and experience the school is looking for. But when the selection panel finally makes up its mind, you find that the job has gone to someone else. Was it something you said or did? Or was the successful candidate better qualified than he made out while you were chatting over lunch?

In the past, most teachers would have had no way of finding out. But employees and job candidates now have the right to see practically all the information that employers keep about them - even the notes jotted down during interviews. If these include comments such as “His face won’t fit” or “She’s likely to take maternity leave soon”, recruiters could find themselves in hot water.

Even scribbles that interviewers might make to remind themselves what candidates look like could come back to haunt them, according to Anne Nicholson, an employment law specialist with Fox Williams in the City. “If the note refers to someone’s race or is derogatory about a woman’s looks, for example, that can give rise to potential inferences of discrimination,” she says.

Laws that ban employers from turning down job candidates because of their race, sex, disability or for belonging to a trade union have been around for a long time. Rules covering the information that employers are allowed to collect about employees and job candidates have also been in force for a couple of years. But a new code of practice published last month is likely to raise awareness of the new rules and bring a fresh transparency to recruitment and selection.

Graham Clayton, the seniorsolicitor at the the NUT, the biggest teacher union, believes the Employment Practices Data Protection Code will makeinterviewers more careful about what they ask and what they say about candidates, although it may have less impact on schools and local education authorities than other employers.

“A lot of work has gone into equal opportunities in education and that has tended to make processes reasonably fair - at least on the surface,” says Mr Clayton.

But occasionally teachers meet open prejudice. A couple of years ago, an NUT member who had been asked to apply for a job had his interview invitation withdrawn after he revealed in his application that he had a disability. His claim for discrimination was settled before it reached an employment tribunal.

Another case involved sexdiscrimination. A woman who applied for a deputy head’s post in a primary school was asked about her childcare arrangements and how she would be able to combine her responsibilities for two youngchildren with the demands of the job. Her claim was also settled out of court, with a confidentiality clause that ensured that details of the case would not be disclosed.

Teacher unions advise members that they don’t have to answer questions about their private lives, their trade union activities or anything else that isn’t directly related to the job, but it can be hard to follow such advice when you’re in the middle of a nerve-racking interview for a job you really want.

“It’s a split-second decision, and I would hope that they’d come straight to us if they were one of our members,” says Dick Boland, the NUT’s regional secretary for the South-east. “We would ensure that the question was asked and either answered or not answered and that it hadn’t compromised the candidate’s application. If there was any evidence that it had, we’d have a tribunal case on our hands.”

Many teachers would rather not make a fuss. Mary Howard, legal officer for the NASUWT, the second biggest union, says members rarely complain about unfair interview questions.

“But I have a feeling that there are far more cases out there than people tell us about,” she adds. “Mostly, people don’t want to rock the boat.”

What the new rules offer is the option to find out why you didn’t get that job, even if you decide not to do anything about it.

IT’S YOUR RIGHT TO KNOW

Q: What information are job candidates entitled to see?

A: Existing data protection laws and the new code of practice cover most paper and computerised records, including application forms and any notes made by recruiters when shortlisting and interviewing. But the records must be held in “a relevant filing system”. This means a system in which it is easy to find information about individuals, so a jumbled heap of papers containing personal data would not be covered.

Q: Are references covered?

A: This is a bit of a grey area. Confidential references do not have to be disclosed by the person who gave them. But people do have a right to see references once they are with the organisation that received them, although recruiters can take steps to conceal the writer’s identity. What all this means in practice will only become clear once the courts have considered some test cases.

Q: What questions can employers ask on application forms and in job interviews?

A: Employers should ask only for personal details relevant to a particular recruitment decision. For example, there is no obvious reason why they should ask whether candidates belong to a union.

Q: How do I get hold of my employment or interview records?

A: You need to write to the school or local education authority concerned. You can be charged up to pound;10 and you must be given the information within 40 days.

Q: What happens if an employer refuses to provide this information or destroys it?

A: You can complain to the Information Commissioner, who has powers to take action against employers.

For more details, go to www.dataprotection.gov.uk