I dont have to give a reasonWow, I found out an HR person actually confronted an applicant. Apparently, the applicant had been trying to follow-up on her application...she wasn't able to get a hold of anyone, then the head of HR answers....and tells her, with a snooty attitude...."I'm not hiring you?" And the applicant said, "Well, why not?" And she said, "I don't have to give a reason." And that was that....apparently, there doesn't have to be a reason. Heck, you figured she'd say, "I don't feel your qualified enough for the position" But she copped a real attitude with the applicant I'm getting the feeling that being an applicant for a job position is an equivelant to a bum begging for money. Applicants = Bum HR or Hiring Manager = the person who decides wether to give you a hand out or not. Monster - I'm afraid I don't see anything wrong with the HR person's response. She's right. She doesn't have to give a reason. As a matter of fact, it's probably best that she doesn't give a reason, in order to make SURE she doesn't give an illegal reason (i.e. somehow hint that it was because of race, marital status, religion, age, or some other protected class). There's no obligation for a hiring manager to hire the best qualified applicant. What if the best qualified applicant was an absolute ass who the manager knew wouldn't get along with the other people in the department? The hiring manager has to take many factors into consideration. "Snooty" is in the eye of the beholder, and you are way too gullible. This applicant probably enhanced the story to make for a better story. It's so much more fun to say, "Hey, Monster Reader, this snooty HR person got on her high horse and told me I didn't get the job." That sounds more sympathetic than "I stalked HR because they didn't contact me when I thought they should, and they told me thanks but not thanks." And you believe her because you want to believe her, and because you mistakenly believe HR people report to the job seeker. Hate to burst your bubble, but no reason needs to be given for declining a candidate. It's nice and even a good idea to do so. In my experience, however, JOB SEEKERS CAN NOT HANDLE THE TRUTH. They have this child-like, overly simplistic view of the job search process. And when they do not get what they expect, it is OBVIOUSLY not their fault, it's HR's. I am, again, amazed at the lack of knowledge and business savvy shown by the venters on this board. Even on the rare occasion when someone has a legitimate gripe, it's blown waaaaay out of proportion. Most states are "at will" employment. I believe just as they can fire you for any reason or no reason, they can do the same with hiring. "I'm getting the feeling that being an applicant for a job position is an equivelant to a bum begging for money." Yeah, that's right, you ARE begging for a job. You come in with a note asking for a job. The company doesn't have to give you a job, or even answer your request. They don't owe you anything. Stop expecting the world to revolve around you.
Naldoman, I think I could love you.
<"I'm getting the feeling that being an applicant for a job position is an equivelant to a bum begging for money." Yeah, that's right, you ARE begging for a job. You come in with a note asking for a job. The company doesn't have to give you a job, or even answer your request. They don't owe you anything. Stop expecting the world to revolve around you.> And why exactly do people 'come in with a note asking for a job?' Yeah, that's right, companies ARE begging for an employee. Candidates don't have to offer their services, or even answer their requests. They don't owe them anything. Stop expecting the world to revolve around your company. "Candidates don't have to offer their services, or even answer their requests. They don't owe them anything. Stop expecting the world to revolve around your company." Oh, but candidates DO keep offering their services because they don't want to work for themselves. They keep on expecting things - lots of things - so they DO owe the prospective company something. And that puts the company right at the center of it all. Candidates want, no, EXPECT and DEMAND benefits. Lots of them. They want a salary that THEY think is appropriate. They want vacation, sick, personal, and for-the-heck-of-it paid time off. They want free training. They want to play on the Internet while they work. IF they work, I mean, because studies show Americans waste more time online than anyone with access to the Internet. They expect the company to pay for EVERYTHING and will scream if the company can't or won't give them memberships to Sam's Club or whatever. Employees cost a lot of money. You better believe a company is going to be choosy and you would be, too, if it was your company. And if you don't like playing the employment game, then go work for yourself. "But recruiterperson!" you say. "Who would pay for my health insurance?! I can't afford to do that! And my 401k! I need the matching funds! Besides, I can't pay all my bills as it is." Yeah, well, maybe if you didn't "need" all the cable/sattelite channels available, iPods or new cell phones every year, you could. And Mary Kay Ash didn't have any money when she started her business, and I don't believe the SBA existed then. She did all right. So I don't give any weight to your view, Cleats. Employers owe you courtesy, but they still define what that is. You don't. And if you don't like it, start your own business and run it exactly like you say everyone else should. Let's see how far you get.
"And why exactly do people 'come in with a note asking for a job?" Because people are looking for work. Arguing semantics doesn't change the fact that this applicant pestered the company and they were brushed off. If the company was begging it would have made an offer. In this instance, the company has the advantage....it can wait until the RIGHT candidate applies. The rest are just beggars and will be ordered off the property. It's OK to be mad about it. The applicant didn't get the job, or even get an interview. They probably feel they didn't get a chance to plead their case. But they DID GET A CHANCE. The initial resume and cover letter did the talking. That's why people need to research the companies they apply to. They need to study the job description and tailor their resume AND cover letter to emphasize that they possess the requisite skills and other factors. Bottom line is that it's the company's call. Fair has nothing to do with it unless they broke the law. They can hire a major doofus if they want. You just have to be the right doofus. Can you convince a company that you're the doofus they need? If you don't want to be that person, you shouldn't be angry if you are told to get lost. Naldoman, Your comments and your apparent attitude toward employees and job applicants--yes, those "little people" who, far more than any number of all too many pampered, overpaid, and out-of-touch execuscum, management "people," and, yes, recruiters, make employers successful and profitable--do a great job of showing exactly why we working people need not only stronger legal protections in every aspect of the employment world, but strong labor unions as well. The backlash from us workers is coming and, as one poster noted on Monster.com's boards several years ago, the payback will be of "biblical proportions." Are you and are employers generally ready to start treating us (and paying us) with true respect? lmem | |
|
Career Tips
|