whats up with THIS
Here's the situation:
The candidate got a verbal offer from HR on Monday. The verbal offer contained a boatload of details involving the actual salary and some sort of gradual "phase-in" that would go into effect in 3 months, and other contingencies and terms pertaining to start date, etc. The candidate expressed interest in the offer, but neither accepted nor declined it over the phone -- after all, it's not in writing. The candidate thanked HR and said he looked forward to receiving the written offer. Now it's Friday, and there's still no written offer.
Whaddya think?
There are two distinct possibilities. The first is that this particular company isn't in the habit of sending out written offers and just makes them verbally. I don't know why so many people think that a job offer has to be in writing. A letter offering someone a job isn't any more binding than a verbal offer! Millions of people are successfully hired every year on the basis of verbal offers. The second is that whoever's responsible for getting offer letters out simply hasn't had time to do it yet. It is possible that other things have come up that simply rank higher on the priority scale then sending out a letter extending an offer of employment. What this person needs to do is call whoever made the offer and politely inquire about the letter, but I think it would be a mistake to assume that the offer isn't "real" until a piece of paper arrives in the mail. If this person accepted the offer and knows the start date and is pleased with the other aspects of the offer - I'd show up on the date specified - offer letter in-hand or not.
Paul W. Barada
The Negotiation Expert
The HR person only specified salary during the phone call. The HR person's next question to the candidate was: "Should we extend you an offer?" The candidate responded that he would be "interested" in receiving a written offer, adding that there are "many factors" to consider as he makes a decision. A specific starting date was not discussed by either party, although the HR person already has a general idea about the candidate's availability.
My take on what transpired between the HR person and the candidate is that HR was testing the waters over the phone to gauge the candidate's reaction to the proposed starting salary. But the candidate didn't let on that he thinks the salary is too low; he'll save that for negotiations after (or if) he receives the written offer.
I think a written offer is essential to starting out on the right foot and avoiding any misunderstandings. Like they say, GET IT IN WRITING. You wouldn't buy a house or a car on a handshake, would you? OK, maybe you would. But I don't think most people should..
Ignatz: With all due respect, it's not up to the job seeker to determine whether offers of employment are going to be made verbally or in writing. The employer gets to decide how offers will be presented. If, as may be the case here, it's not the practice of the prospective employer to send out offer letters, I think it would be totally inappropriate to insist on one. It's just possible that the prospective employer might say, "Look, if you can't take us at our word that these are the terms of the offer, we're not interested in somebody that suspicious of us. So, take a hike." I think it's appropriate to ask if the offer can be made in writing, but if the answer is, "that's not how we do it," then I think the job seeker should probably let it go at that - or "take a hike." Not every employer is a lying, deceitful SOB. P.S. I just sold a car on a handshake and, believe it or not, there were no problems...
Paul W. Barada
The Negotiation Expert
I'd love for tthe HR and employment law folks to get in on this discussion. I never thought of a formal job offer letter as being an unreasonable or unnecessary demand. If anything, a job offer letter prevents misunderstandings and false expectations. If an HR person calls up and expresses intent to offer a job but can't be too specific about much of anything -- salary, benefits, annual review schedule, start date, etc. -- I think the candidate is unwise to accept until everything is spelled out in writing. If the employer doesn't want to put anything in writing, I would view that as a red flag.
Well then Ignatz, YOU are free not to accept any offers that aren't made to you in writing. This candidate however, should do what they want and tell you to bug off. Thousands and thousands of job offers are made every day with no written documentation. Especially in smaller companies, especially in entry-level and non-professional positions. Do you think every retail store clerk has had a written offer? Do you think every construction worker has a written offer? Do you think most of those people get paid what they're supposed to?
Tess
Uh, thanks, but I think most people already know that written offers aren't the norm with burger-flipping, retail, construction work, etc., We're not talking about that here. This is a salaried middle management position with a large corporation. The candidate has a right to have the offer spelled out so that he knows exactly what he's agreeing to. End of story. And uh, tmsalley -- maybe YOU should bug off.
Ignatz, while I can understand the candidate wanting all the specifics before accepting the offer, it appears as if (at least to me) the company wanted to know--before spending the time of drafting up an offer letter--if the basic terms were acceptable. And, apparently, from what you said, a "boatload" of details regarding salary were provided. If there were items that were not addressed in those details, the candidate should then have asked about those points. Did he think the offer letter would contain details that the verbal conversation didn't? He could have asked for the benefits summary if that wasn't discussed, or for the complete list of benefits, etc.
Certainly someone needs to know what the entire compensation package & terms of employment are before accepting a position. However, in this case, if the candidate handled it exactly the way you state, I think it wasn't the right way to do so. If the terms of the offer--as presented verbally--were not acceptable, the the candidate could have said something to the effect: "I am very interested in your offer. However, the salary you are proposing is less than what I can accept. Is it negotiable?" and go from there. At this point, I'm going to assume that the companty either has been too busy to get the letter out, or they don't want to take the time to write & send a letter to someone who has given no indication whether or not the terms are acceptable. It seems your friend is doing this backwards.
It is not at all unusual to negotiate salary first, then get the offer letter. Very often an offer letter is extended after the terms are agreed upon (and yes, I know this to be true). In fact, in my years of experience, I have only been sent an offer letter prior to negotiations once. And my husband has never received the "official" offer letter until all the terms have been verbally agreed to.
Your candidate may very well have given the impression that he couldn't care less whether he got an offer or not. Why would he simply not open the salary issue up at that point" Why should the company waste its and his time writing an offer that isn't going to be accepted?