"We'd love to employ you, but ......."

[Zkribbler]

Some gave you an actual reason.

The standard excuse is "we've received so many applications" followed by "we are confident that someone with your qualifications will have no trouble finding work elsewhere. We will keep your application on file for one year . . ." and blah, blah, blah.

As for your next step, I recommend you storm into the interviewer's office, pull open the top of his pants and shoot a stream of seltzer down the front of them. Then hit him over the top of the head with a rubber chicken and run away laughing madly.

[Boris Godunov]

I've beens swamped all week and haven't had a chance to get on here, but since I work in HR, I thought I'd chime in.

If I have a pool of 5-6 candidates for a job that are all qualified for it, then I will hire the person who is the best overall fit for the company, not necessarily the one of that group who has the "best" qualifications. If you're at the interview stage, then you've met a base level of qualifications needed for the job, and you can be assured everyone else interviewing has as well. Companies are often willing to take on less-qualified people whom they think are overall better for the company.

Beyond qualifications for the job, I have to assess several things:

-Will they be a personality fit with their supervisor
-Will they get along well with their colleagues and fit in easily
-Will they be a long-termer, or will the jump ship the moment a better/higher paying job comes along

The last is critical. I want people who will stick with the company for a while, who have potential to grow in their roles and become a real asset. If s/he's looks like she's going to jump to a new job in 6 months-1 year, then it's a waste of my time. The easiest way to assess this is look at their resume and see if they are a job hopper. Job hoppers have tons of experience, but it's usually all a matter of a few months here and there at any one company. That never looks good.

I'd echo rah in that you should never adjust your style of interviewing based on one rejection. The most important thing to be in an interview is yourself. If a company decides you're not the right personality fit, they're probably right, in which case they're doing you a favor. Who'd want to work in a company culture that isn't right for them? That just leads to trouble.

[Japher]

bah!

If I was myself I'd be all "will I have lots of down time? because if I can't post at poly while at work they'd probably all think I'd died and have a party!@"

[child of Thor]

A friend of mine from school days got turned down by Cambridge University twice.
He was one of those child genius types - all science and maths(which was his main subject). He used to teach some of the lessons in the schools top maths group because he just knew it better than the teacher.

It was a shame, because he'd set himself up for cambridge for a long time, even wanting to become a proffessor there.

Still i remember after his first failed interview, he was really gutted, became distant from most of his school friends and just recently i heard he had tried again a couple of years after his first attempt, but didnt pass the interview, even though his skills were way over the requirements.

Ok he could speak in 1+0's , but i never found him incapable of normal communication? I keep meaning to try to catch up with him and see where hes at.

Sometimes i guess we never really know exactly the reasons that we don't get what we are expecting to get?

[Dauphin]

The worst interview I ever went to started with them asking me how much I wanted in remuneration.

If you can't see why that is a bad interview....

[JimmyCracksCorn]

"We'd love to employ you, but... we decided to not get back to you or return any of your phone calls/e-mails"

Thats the one that pisses me off.

[Japher]

Thats the one that pisses me off.

I'm getting that one right now!

Don't really piss me off as I don't really want to work there.

Just got a message that a company in Louisville wants to lead me on... Well they'll just have to wait until Monday because I can't get to a private phone until then! So, HA!

[Ben Kenobi]

Job hoppers have tons of experience, but it's usually all a matter of a few months here and there at any one company. That never looks good.

I guess I count as a job hopper, but the problem with that assessment is that the jobs have left me, rather than me leaving the jobs. I have the time put in with a variety of different companies, but each time work dried up and I had to look elsewhere for work.

Just because a person has the time put in with many different companies, is not necessarily an indication of job hopping on the part of the employee.

I've struggled with that perception, and I said up front, tell me what you want in terms of commitment, whether a year or more. If you are willing to commit to hiring me for that time, I am more than willing to work for you. The problem with this is that many companies are not willing to commit for that period of time until you have had a chance to work for them. It's a vicious cycle.

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Japher


Just got a message that a company in Louisville wants to lead me on... Well they'll just have to wait until Monday because I can't get to a private phone until then! So, HA!

You might want to call, email, whatever ASAP.

Why?

They're telling you this on a Friday afternoon. It's a test. They want to see how responsive you are on Friday afternoons. If you wait 'til Monday, they might say "**** 'im."

That is, if you want the job. If you don't, don't worry about it.

[JohnT]

I guess I count as a job hopper, but the problem with that assessment is that the jobs have left me, rather than me leaving the jobs. I have the time put in with a variety of different companies, but each time work dried up and I had to look elsewhere for work.

Any reasonable HR or interviewee will note why you left as well. If you jumped from Lucent to Enron to Global Crossing as those went in the toilet back in '2000, 2001, nobody would blame you for "job hopping."

Though, if superstitious, they might not hire you anyway with a track record like that. I probably wouldn't.

[Japher]

The problem with this is that many companies are not willing to commit for that period of time until you have had a chance to work for them. It's a vicious cycle.

I have been in the job market for 6 years now, and I have been with 2 companies. The first company told me that after 2 years I would be elgible for promotion. After 20 months of working for them they raised the 2 year standard to 5 years. That ticked me off. So I applied for the promotion anyway, and was denied it for lack of tenure, stated by "you didn't want it enough". So, I left.

I have been with this company 4 years. When I started I was given a specific compensation with a specific timeline for promotions and pay raises. 2 years ago the company got bought out, and all those promises thrown to the wind. I had to fight for my promotion, and I am now looking because the job growth in this company, in this area, looks really bad. Staying for the last 2 years has been tough, but I did so because I didn't want to be labled a job hopper. Needless to say I am being very picky on the next job I take and want to stay there for at least 5 years.

[JohnT]

I've struggled with that perception, and I said up front, tell me what you want in terms of commitment, whether a year or more. If you are willing to commit to hiring me for that time, I am more than willing to work for you. The problem with this is that many companies are not willing to commit for that period of time until you have had a chance to work for them. It's a vicious cycle.

No, the problem with this is that the person across the table from you is thinking:

Hey, he just said that he's gonna "give" us one year. I want somebody for the long-haul, somebody who wants a career not a job. I'll go through the motions, but cut this one short.

That "David" guy sounded promising... I think he's at 3:00. Let me check...

Time to wrap this one up and get the short-timer out of here. I've spent a "reasonable" amount of time with him, regardless of vague HR rules...

Capice?

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Japher




I have been in the job market for 6 years now, and I have been with 2 companies. The first company told me that after 2 years I would be elgible for promotion. After 20 months of working for them they raised the 2 year standard to 5 years. That ticked me off. So I applied for the promotion anyway, and was denied it for lack of tenure, stated by "you didn't want it enough". So, I left.

So you applied for a promotion that you weren't even eligible for by the original rules, got turned down, and then quit out of irritation?

I have been with this company 4 years. When I started I was given a specific compensation with a specific timeline for promotions and pay raises. 2 years ago the company got bought out, and all those promises thrown to the wind. I had to fight for my promotion, and I am now looking because the job growth in this company, in this area, looks really bad. Staying for the last 2 years has been tough, but I did so because I didn't want to be labled a job hopper. Needless to say I am being very picky on the next job I take and want to stay there for at least 5 years.

Sounds like a more reasonable plan of action than in the first scenario.

Yeah, buyouts suck 'cause the rules can change on you. I feel for ya.

[Japher]

So you applied for a promotion that you weren't even eligible for by the original rules, got turned down, and then quit out of irritation?

By the time the interview process was over it was 24 months. I applied at the appropriate time to receive the promotion on schedule with the intial plan. It was either apply then, or wait another year or so until another position opened up.

My boss at the time even told me it was f'd up, and was happy that I got what I wanted in the end.

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Japher


By the time the interview process was over it was 24 months. I applied at the appropriate time to receive the promotion on schedule with the intial plan. It was either apply then, or wait another year or so until another position opened up.

My boss at the time even told me it was f'd up, and was happy that I got what I wanted in the end.

Ahhh. That part (that you played by the original rules the entire process) was unclear. Thanks.