Should Employers Pay to Interview You?

[Minnie]

Ask the Headhunter, Nick Corcodilos, says yes.

Trying to figure out how that would go over in any industry.

Question: The rudeness of employers seems to be pervasive out there. I had interviews with a company recently. The second round involved four finalists meeting 12 employees over eight grueling hours. In mid-March, they said that they would make a choice by April 1. On April 7, I called the HR person and got her voice mail. I said that, based on the timetable she had provided, I wanted to know their decision and asked her to call me. On April 17, I emailed the hiring manager to reinforce my interest and asked if they had made a decision.

The next day the HR manager responded that they had hired a candidate who had started work the last week of March. She said that a formal notice would be sent to other applicants within the week.

April is over. There's been no notice. One of the other three finalists told me she has heard nothing at all. Are manners and simple courtesy totally dead?

Headhunter Nick Corcodilos says that when employers ignore deadlines for hiring decisions, job seekers have a right to be compensated for their time.

More at the link.

[TurnedTheCorner]

Only if it's for a union job.

[Minnie]

[Northendzone]

My lovely and knowledge wife, an HR professional, says you should be happy not to get a job at a place that treats prospective ee's like that

[Cowperson]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

My lovely and knowledge wife, an HR professional, says you should be happy not to get a job at a place that treats prospective ee's like that

That's the right answer.

Cowperson

[CaptainCrunch]

Overall manners are gone when it comes to any kind of business to business or business to personal relationships.

People have become incredibly crappy at keeping timelines and promises and communication has gone out the window as people cower behind voice mails and emails.

But good luck getting someone to pay you for your time to interview unless you are highly sought after.

[Flames in 07]

Title is a little misleading.

That's a pretty extreme case.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by Flames in 07

Title is a little misleading.

That's a pretty extreme case.

When I interviewed at Shaw it took 6 weeks for them to get back to me. At all.. And I got the job!

I knew the interview went well, and I sent the hiring manager my references, and waited. They said 2 weeks until they made a decision. So after 2 weeks, I hadn't heard anything, so I followed up. Silence..

I contacted my references.. they hadn't be contacted. I waited another 2 weeks. Still nothing. I contacted both the hiring manager and the HR contact.. still nothing. After 5 weeks, I gave up hope and started my search over again. After sending out a couple more resumes and setting up another interview, Shaw finally contacted me with an offer.

Very frustrating.

[Minnie]

You want a long interview process before even getting a conditional offer? I began the application and interviewing process for a clerk position at the American Consulate a few years ago - the end of January. I didn't get the conditional offer until May, and the position wouldn't have even started until the fall. Granted, that process is more on the extreme side too but holy balls, what a rigamarole it was.

[kermitology]

What bothered me is when someone provides you with a timeline and then blows it by 3 times their commitment.

[Wormius]

I would be happy if prospective employers were as responsive after the interview process as they were trying to get you in...

[RedMileDJ]

Oh the stories I could tell you.

As someone that is currently career hunting, I have to say that I've had to continually followup with HR personal that have given me a date...but then did not followup with me.

And Kermitology is right. I used to work for Shaw and they take forever to followup.

[RedMileDJ]

I take comfort in the fact that I have a really good recruitment company gunning for me, and it looks like an offer might be coming my way.

Just had my 3rd interview today. <fingers crossed>

[t0rrent98]

Wouldn't the guy just assume he didn't get the job if he waited an "X" amount of days after their day they said they would make the decision? He would have expected that somebody more qualified had been hired instead of him.

He must be pretty desperate if he's complaining about this..

[CaptainCrunch]

I've had interviewers phone me up to offer me a job a month later only to be told that I had tried to contact them heard nothing and ended up with their competition. And then get yelled at about my lack of integrity.

Sorry I phoned and emailed, they were quicker.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

I've had interviewers phone me up to offer me a job a month later only to be told that I had tried to contact them heard nothing and ended up with their competition. And then get yelled at about my lack of integrity.

Sorry I phoned and emailed, they were quicker.

Bingo... if they want to dick around that's their deal, because really who loses here? They do. And as mentioned why would you want to work with them anyway.

[TurdFerguson]

Generally, respect for each others time seems to be slowly disappearing. If a job applicant is no longer in consideration then they should be told so...unfortunately a lot of people prefer to not say anything at all then to say no. Figuring if they let it go long enough then the message will get sent and they will be spared what can be, but shouldn't be, an uncomfortable conversation. Pretty poor but I run into a couple times a week - even from close friends.

If an employer takes a "long" time to make you an offer, keep in mind that there may be other circumstances out of there control...you may not have been the 1st choice. Perhaps you were #3 on the list and they had to work through the offer process a couple times before getting to you. Maybe a key decision maker was out of the office or on emergency leave etc. Maybe they couldn't get a hold of a key reference...Not always the best scenario to imagine but sometimes that is the case. All that said, there is a lot to be said for good communication and I've found that people are generally understanding as long as they are kept in the loop. Both employers and applicants should be working to ensure that happens...clearly that isn't always the case though.

Some companies, just like some applicants, are a total #### show though...so.

[Kavvy]

Supply and demand.

If you are in a position that a potential employer will pay to interview you, good for you.


Should it be a mandatory fee - No? It could cripple a hiring market and only hurt people trying to find roles.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Kavy

Supply and demand.

If you are in a position that a potential employer will pay to interview you, good for you.


Should it be a mandatory fee - No? It could cripple a hiring market and only hurt people trying to find roles.

It would also lead to a specialized field of applicants that can stay unemployed and make a nice living by being a counterfeit candidate who's sole goal is to get to a paid interview stage but have no interest in actually getting offers.

Lets say that you could set an interview cost at $100.00, all you'd need to do is set up 2 interviews a day and you would basically make at least $4000.00 per month and it would literally be nontaxable and untraceable.

.

[GP_Matt]

My wife hires for retail and has found that if she doesn't make an offer within an hour or two of the interview then there is a good chance that the prospective employee has accepted a different job.
We hire labourers and have found that as well to some extent. I have made a ton of calls 2-3 days after an interview to hear that the applicant has already taken a job.

I couldn't imagine taking a month to get back to someone though. I don't hire professionals but, in my industry there is no way they would wait patiently for a month without a follow-up phone call. If there was a delay in the process our company would likely get the candidate out for lunch to inform them of the situation.