To think ignoring candidates after two interviews is fucking rude?

[Dinosforall]

Had two interviews a few weeks ago with a huge multinational, at their request, all fine, then complete radio silence. Not via a recruiter. I have chased politely for feedback (once via email and once via voice message) and nothing, not even a form email. I get that people are busy, I get that decisions take time. But AIBU to think even if you're short on time, or courtesy, you must realise it give a terrible impression of your company?

The main reasons why you haven't got any news is not rudeness but

-disorganisation. Waiting for hiring managers to make up their mind (if they are even in the office). Too busy so they should recruit someone to lighten the work load? Well... quite....

-You are in too much of a rush. You might think a week or 2 is too much, but when everybody involves has full time job, it's nothing.

-you are number 2 or 3, and they are waiting to secure number 1.
Once you have told someone "thanks but no thanks" you can't go back.

I think it's crap too. But in my 25 odd years in the job market I have only ever had two rejection letters out of hundreds of applications I have submitted. One was from the civil service and I believe the other was probably issued to me specifically to run salt in the wounds (HR officer who issued the letter was an acquaintance who took great delight in it. I only realised a few years later when she let slip that the company don't issue rejection letters, they just ignore).

And I have only once been able to get feedback on an interview.

Like with FurrySlipperBoots this is the story of my life.

When an advert says that only shortlisted candidates will be contacted it's sub-optimal but understandable. When you've turned up in person, twice, and looked them in the eyes during interviews it's downright inexcusable. Some employers don't give feedback because they're scared of the consequences, but that has absolutely nothing to do with telling someone as a matter of courtesy that they're no longer in the running.

For those who think it's because they're second or third choice and are still in with a shout if the first choice doesn't bite you can grasp at that straw if you want, but in my extensive experience of job-hunting I've never known it to be the case.

It's soul-destroying for the job-seeker, and it portrays the employer as someone who treats human assets with utter contempt. Nobody emerges with any credit from this practice of refusing to communicate during the recruitment process; rather, it's a lose-lose situation and, frankly, it's a wonder that anyone still does it.

I've found through bitter experience that the best thing for my mental health is to pick a cut-off date for each stage of the process (a month after closing date for applications, 48 hours or one week after interviews, depending on what noises they make about timescales when I ask them) and then just make a clean break and move professionally on. And go back to listening to your family and friends saying "just get any old job".

the best thing for your mental health is not to move on and keep searching until you have been contacted again! You don't stop searching because you had 2 or even 3 interviews in one place.

*is TO move on (not sure why the "not' got in there)

Yanbu

Not surprising, although it IS fucking rude.

I went for an interview which I was invited to by the company (as opposed to applying for a vacancy) and I was there for nearly two hours. I still haven’t heard back from them and, since the interview was in May 2018, I’m guessing I didn’t get it. A “thank you for your time” would have been appreciated, and I hope whoever did get the job was a pain in the arse to them.

I remember after I graduated and was applying to grad schemes and my parents just couldn't get their heads around the idea that I would spend 2/3 full working days producing an application for somewhere and that they wouldn't bother to send a standard rejection letter if they weren't progressing my application. They just couldn't get their heads around it. I can smile now but at the time their lack of understanding was supremely irritating

@Dollywilde My parents are like yours, but worse - they still can't get their head around the idea that you can't just walk into a senior six-figure job just by asking for it.

It’s not something anyone should have to get their head around, tbh. There are very few reasons it could ever be considered acceptable.

I have been in the workplace for 15 years now so like to think I am used to employers' 'little ways'. However I think this is the first time I have been both approached for a role and then ignored afterwards.

It shouldn't be acceptable, but the only way around it is the usual

"thank you... if you haven't heard from us within xxx you haven't been successful".
It doesn't work if a candidate hasn't been employed within that timeframe and you need to keep the door opened for those who are not a straight "no".

And if you say "no" to some and nothing to others, you are opening the door to discrimination nonsense....

It's definitely become a lot more common in my experience.

For the last six months I've been job hunting for the first time in ten years and it's been soul destroying.

Application forms that take hours to complete with every detail under the sun that are ignored.

Attending interviews and not even getting an email to say thanks but no thanks.

An abundance of jobs that are now offered as "apprenticeships" so that the employer can pay half the minimum wage.

Job advertisements that are copied from the original source that get you to send your CV to the ad agency (I'm looking at you Indeed) and then you track down the original advert and see that they don't actually accept CVs and want a 30 page application form completed instead.

Thankfully I got offered a job last week so I can stop with all this nonsense but the process has significantly changed since the last time I had to go through it ten years ago. More and more companies are seeing applicants as "fodder" to get through and not human beings.

More and more companies are seeing applicants as "fodder" to get through and not human beings.

not untrue.
Another beautiful consequence of going against "discrimination" and ticking boxes instead of employing real people. No one is wining.

@FurrySlipperBoots I could have written your post myself....my thoughts are with you...:we can only persist with our efforts.

The last role I applied for was via a headhunter who approached me. Two long interviews with a lot of preparation and travel. I was so excited ... finally my years of applying for a new job would pay off! I’d done it!

Their Head of HR followed up afterwards with psychometric testing. They then said this was successful and wanted to discuss salary and start date. Told me to expect a formal offer in the next few days. I was so so happy. The salary was life changing for me and the DC.

But then ...nothing. After two weeks - I chased the headhunter and he said the formal offer was still coming.

I was then ghosted .

The ghosting is one thing in OLD - it’s common and means nothing, but it is very unprofessional in a work environment where you move in similar industry circles.

I had this! The second interview had gone great so I was v puzzled... Until I read a few weeks later that they were in financial trouble and having a hiring freeze and layoffs. Which obviously they couldn’t tell me until it was announced formally.

Something is probably wrong on their side.

It won't make you feel better, but it goes both ways.

People don't turn up for interviews
People accept jobs and don't turn up on the day
People accept jobs and change their mind after accepting

@Skysblue I've just checked their results, which came out last week, and I think you might have hit the nail on the head!

Out of curiosity, I responded to a job advert that stated 'Due to the high level of interest we anticipate for this role, we cannot guarantee that we will contact applicants whether they are successful or not.'

How exactly were they proposing to arrange interviews or make a job offer if they weren't intending to contact successful candiates?

If numbers 3/4 start getting uppity and pressurising our HR for a decision, they will get instantly rejected. Not because they weren’t Initially thought to be great for the job, but because when they start putting pressure on HR (who are only trying to do the best by everybody), it doesn’t bode well for their general attitude.

This attitude will ultimately prove counterproductive for your company. If you dismiss someone expecting a decision as ‘getting uppity’, you are making the all-too-common mistake of forgetting that hiring is a two-way process. Don’t fall into the trap of assuming candidates will be so thrilled to be offered a job that they’ll put up with being kept hanging on a string. Just as they may be your third choice for the role, you may be their third choice of company. You have to sell yourself to the candidate as well as vice versa - and if someone else gets in and makes a concrete offer first, don’t be surprised if your back-up plan decides he or she needs a back-up of their own and takes the other job.

How bizarre that someone who’s considered a great fit for the job could be struck off the list for the offence of being uppity in asking for a decision.
Did you type that nonsense with a straight face, BlessedCheesemaker?

From a recruiters point of view (i.e mine)

Every application that is submitted I have an auto response thanking them for applying, advising we have a high volume of applications and that it will take some time to come back to them. Yesterday I put up two adverts and have had over 400 applications!

Every rejected candidate is sent an email thanking them again but advising they aren’t suitable. However, in direct relation to this incident that the OP is talking about is what I’m dealing with at the moment.

We have had a position open since November and just haven’t been able to find the right candidate. One candidate had his second stage interview two and a half weeks ago and hadn’t heard back from us - the reason why is because the Hiring Managers want candidates to benchmark against. It’s taken until today and four more first stage interviews for them to realise that there isn’t anyone as good as this candidate from two weeks ago.

I’ve spoke to him every couple of days, emailed him yesterday to say I should have a decision by the end of the week and kept him warm. Because I just knew he was the right candidate. Every other one was sent a decline email a day after their first stage interview with them being unsuitable with two lines of personalised feedback for future.

This is how things should be done. The candidate above has had to wait but I’ve made sure we stay in contact with him so he doesn’t think we’ve forgot or gone elsewhere. And it’s disappointing that other HR Departments don’t act in the same manner. Please bear in mind though I’m an Internal Recruiter, my job is to find, interview and induct candidates. Most companies don’t have a Recruiter and they rely on HR and recruitment is only a tiny part of their job.

If someone says they will let you know by Friday,they should let you know by Friday it's not uppity to ask, is there is a delay people know a email costs nothing at all it's a 2 minute task, don't advertise for jobs if you don't want the admin, if HR are waiting on a decision let the candidates know.

So someone takes time off work to go for a interview spends money transporting themselves there and they don't deserve a response that's really terrible HR.

I wonder how many brilliant candidates company's lose and get other jobs whilst they are pissing around.

It's pretty much the norm these days though, isn't it? I used to keep looking regardless of whether I had been for a first or second interview or not. An employer who keeps you dangling for weeks on end would definitely not be selling the role/company.

I work for the NHS now. Amazingly, they advertise jobs that actually exist. If you go for interview, you generally get a phonecall on the same day with their decision. Heck, you even know how much they are paying for the role from the advert. There's none of this 'how much are you earning now' bollocks. It's a complete revelation. Highly recommended!

If numbers 3/4 start getting uppity and pressurising our HR for a decision, they will get instantly rejected. Not because they weren’t Initially thought to be great for the job, but because when they start putting pressure on HR (who are only trying to do the best by everybody), it doesn’t bode well for their general attitude.

Seriously? And do you genuinely believe you’re a good recruiter for having this sort of attitude towards candidates.

Candidates are people. People with commitments, people who have devoted time to attending interviews and it’s your job to make sure that they are aware of the process. If they are properly advised by the recruiter about timescales there is no reason for them to be ‘uppity’.

It’s the most ridiculous reason for disregarding a good candidate ever. And massively rude and passive aggressive, I can’t imagine a hiring managers response when asking for a particular candidate and you saying ‘no I’ve disregarded them as they kept emailing asking for when they’d know by’. Ridiculous, and this attitude and entitlement towards people is absolutely what gives recruiters a bad name.