The worst possible way to be rejected for a job

I don't think it's necessarily better or worse than email. As the hiring manager quoted in the article said, for candidates who made it to the final phases of the process it can seem more cordial. But I can see how it might be cruel to do it to new graduates, who are both potentially less ready for rejection and more busy with the job search process.

That said, it can be horribly executed. Last year after several interviews with a large company, I got an email from a recruiter who hadn't been involved in the process up to that point, telling me to expect a short call within a certain time window. I kept my calendar clear, but didn't get a call, so I sent a polite email offering a couple of times the next day to reschedule. After hearing nothing back for a few days, I got another email with another window. The recruiter also missed that window. This went on for a few more days until I suggested that they just get to the point over email, a few minutes later the recruiter called unscheduled to tell me I didn't get the job. At that point I feel like it was more awkward for the company (big one, name begins with "A"). I think I might have audibly laughed when the recruiter asked if I'd be interested in other positions there.

A rejection email with the option of requesting a phone or video call seems like the best balance. I can imagine there's a few scenarios where the hiring team can offer constructive feedback, but ... again, it's probably few. Giving people the option, and seeing how many people actual request it, would be instructive to the HR folks about whether to continue that approach or not.

Sounds pretty good compared to ghosting. At least there's closure.

If it becomes the norm again, people will come prepared knowing it could go either way.

> They at least don’t require candidates to get dressed up or to worry about controlling their facial expressions [...] Expecting candidates to remain in Professional Mode while experiencing what might be extreme disappointment is unkind.

If more of us flipped out a little at such treatment, maybe managers would stop doing it. Or in other words: give negative feedback to being treated negatively.

I don't mean anything unseemly, but indeed, maybe break that professional barrier a bit. "Oh, no. I'm so terribly disappointed, you know? Just to be clear this is a rejection? Wow. I've never had anyone call to reject my offer before. ...Well, gosh, this is awkward, isn't it? Oh wow, I really wasn't expecting this. Totally out of left field. Well, uh, thanks for taking the time to reject me, anyway. Take care."

(How are they to even know they just seriously distressed you, pointlessly, if you don't tell them?)

I still feel this is nothing. Last year, I got a rejection email with a link to calendly to book an appointment with the recruiter if I care for feedback. This was two weeks after all 7-10 interviews.

Real thing is - just like candidates employers too are taking chances with multiple candidates for a position. I don’t see a scalable way of running this. We shouldn’t be taking rejections personally.

Yes please just email these. Especially lately, every recruiter and manager has an annoyingly full schedule so your not even getting your rejection timely and I have to block out time in the day so you can tell me how sorry you are moving on with someone else. Plus I need to sit around for days wondering what the status is with this looming calendar invite, when you already have the decision.

Just send an email and if you can any feedback over email. Don't waste time with a call or make us pretend like we'll ever talk again.

I like getting a phone call. Zoom call would be OK, too. In fact, an e-mail would be good.

Even without feedback, the job hunter can scratch that opportunity off of the list, and move on looking for something else.

Yes, it stings. But the finality of it allows you to move forward with your life.

I didn't realize this was becoming more common. It seems far more uncomfortable for everyone involved, although based on the comments it does seem like some people appreciate a phone/Zoom call. I don't really understand why, though (please try to explain!). An email gives me more time to process difficult news, and prevents me from needing to act positively in an unambiguously negative situation.

I've been called for a rejection exactly once, less than an hour after I'd left the office where I was being interviewed. I was kind of shocked (the interviews went really well) and I didn't realize until later that the recruiter never said my name, and had previously claimed I would absolutely not get the result for at least 3 days. A week later, I got an offer, and I always felt a little bad for the candidate I unintentionally caused to get ghosted because the recruiter dialed the wrong number and I didn't figure it out.

A video call is excessive, but a phone call seems fine, even good. Far better than just being ghosted after many hours of interviewing.

This has happened to me twice now (and almost a third). The first time was with a certain tech darling with a hugging face emoji mascot, but I could at least sort of see that one coming, because the whole process was so poor that I had already written them off.

The almost a third time was the worst, though. I had a two hour interview with the CEO, who then didn't get back to me or reply to two follow ups. I then mentioned in passing two months later to the external recruiter what I had experienced, and the CEO emailed the next day offering a call. Dude, we both know what's happening, do we really need a face to face?

If this video call gives the interviewee a final opportunity to express their thoughts and has the potential to change the outcome, then I think it still has positive value. However, as mentioned in the article, most people feel very awkward and have nothing to say during this meeting, which is simply torturous. In that case, I think it would be better to replace the video conference with an email, after all, if you don't allow the possibility of changing the outcome, why not make it more comfortable for both parties?

> This person was invited to visit the employer’s office, only to be rejected in person once they got there

I wonder if this is actually meant to avoid leaving a record -- if any part of the rejection message was legally contentious, the candidate is less likely to have any tangible evidence to share.

I had similar thoughts regarding rejections via phone calls and video meetings, since some lawyers prefer those over written discussions for similar reasons, but it's conceivable that the candidate would be recording all calls if they were at home.

Another problem is that due to fear of lawsuits, you really are not allowed to talk to candidates afterwards.

Even innocuous things like "We all really thought you'resmart, and loved your projects, but in the end we thought you needed a bit more experience. Please, please reapply in a few years" - you may mean it to encourage the person and show them that the lack of an offer is just a time mismatch, they or their lawyers might reinterpret it as a type of age discrimination, or worse.

Basically as a company employee you are in a "live fire" environment when talking to candidates and you need to keep your head down and minimize exposure

The obvious answer is to make the average validity of successful suits against companies much higher, so that the feeling changed from "it's Very very easy to be sued and lose money+status+reputation wise, regardless of the merits of the case" to "it's a free country, if you do clear, overt, intentional wrong, you may be in trouble, but in general as long as you are honest you are in the clear"

> Hiring managers who want to make rejections feel less impersonal can do it by sharing the news in an email initially and then offering a phone call for feedback if the person wants one,

People are getting offers for feedback? Every time I have asked for feedback I get met with nothing. Like, how am I supposed to improve if I don't know what is missing?

I think both phone call and Zoom call are worse than an automated email because 1) I have to find the time to be available for both and 2) More often than not I want to process in private.

A short, but still personalized email would be my preference. An offer to do a phone call or Zoom would also be humanizing but not necessary.

There is no easy way to reject. But I think a phone call with talking points is the best way.

Some saying an email is better, but then you literally start to form a relationship with the company. You have several interviews, you are in constant communication with the recruiter, they text you. An email after all that is just as impersonal.

Candidates should have that expectation. No matter how well things are going, you might get rejected.

My recruiter from Amazon ghosted me for 6 months, then started talking to me like it was nothing. [1]. I treated it like I would in any relationship.

[1] https://idiallo.com/blog/dont-ghost-me

I doubt many people appreciate getting a call like this, but for people who find it to be suffering, it's a good exercise to practice stoicism / unattachment. Learning to handle calls like this will make you better at professional conversations. The article alludes to that but dismisses it without examination.

I have recently started having a video call with late stage candidates that we aren't going to hire.

But I send an email with the news first, then ask them if they want to get on a call for some feedback. Some folks do, some don't.

It's always hard as a candidate, but I feel like this treats them as best as can be.

Remember that your rejected applicants are the largest and cheapest part of your recruiting organization, and you can't fire them. You will do well to make them fans of your company and your hiring process.

Still better than telling you they want to hire you, then ghosting you for 2 weeks, and when you finally send a kind reminder, replying that "if you have other opportunities, feel free to go ahead"

Still slightly better than being ghosted by the company, which is what happened for one job I applied for. (Hey maybe they're still considering me 15 years later!)

I'll take it. Better than email rejection after email rejection. At least you can elicit some feedback on a phone/video call.

Email seems like the only option to me: It's a (virtual) paper trail, something that can be referred to later for whatever reason.

Since there’s no agreement as to what method is best it’s time to start asking what rejection method people prefer on their application

Stories like this confirm my opinion about how much bad management there is out there.

I think it's nice that some companies try to combat the common complaints of poor communication towards rejected candidates. Sounds like they swung too far in the other direction, I'd rather just get an email too.

Now, can we do something about whiteboarding? Pretty please?

When I read the title I thought this was going to be about the case when AI supposedly rejected an applicant for listing their date of birth as 4/20. I can think of many other worse ways than this, even though it's dumb.

Dear hiring managers,

Please disregard this journalist.

Thanks.