PANKAJ SHET
B.Sc.(I.T.), S.C.J.P., S.C.W.C.D., PGDAC(CDAC)
Pankaj Shet wrote:
Why do HR's and other interviewers say
"We will get back to you.." or "Your profile is on hold"
When they already know that a candidate is already rejected.
Why do they give such false hopes?
Doesn't it it sound frustrating?
Pankaj Shet wrote:
Why they don't politely reject by saying "Sorry, you are not selected for further rounds"?
Why don't they reveal the reason behind the rejection if the candidate is rejected?
Henry Wong wrote:I agree that rejections does seem less common these days, and being placed "on hold" seem more common. It is almost like HR doesn't want to deliver the bad news. Weird.
No more Blub for me, thank you, Vicar.
Unfortunate trend. In the days when I had the misfortune to interview candidates, it was customary to take them aside and tell them why, at lest if the reason wasn't too serious.Henry Wong wrote: . . . it is unlikely you are ever going to get a reason . . .
PANKAJ SHET
B.Sc.(I.T.), S.C.J.P., S.C.W.C.D., PGDAC(CDAC)
PANKAJ SHET
B.Sc.(I.T.), S.C.J.P., S.C.W.C.D., PGDAC(CDAC)
Unless there are four or more jobs available, 10 candidates is far too many and it suggests the CVs/resumés have not been analysed properly before shortlisting.Pankaj Shet wrote: . . . suppose, there are 10 candidates for interview . . .
Pankaj Shet wrote:Most of the Interviewers find me weak in communication skills which is not actually a problem. I have a problem in Speech and not communication.
Am I not eligible to work in IT industry if I have speech problems?
Please let me know about this. Because till now I have reached the final round in atleast 6 companies and have got the same feedback.
Campbell Ritchie wrote:In this country (UK) that might be unlawful discrimination on the grounds of disability, but the law will differ from place to place, and it is always difficult to prove such discrimination.
Pankaj Shet wrote:For whatever reasons, I am sorry for being adamant here, but still I have a strong opinion about this..
Campbell Ritchie wrote:
Unless there are four or more jobs available, 10 candidates is far too many and it suggests the CVs/resumés have not been analysed properly before shortlisting.Pankaj Shet wrote: . . . suppose, there are 10 candidates for interview . . .
[OCP 17 book] | [OCP 11 book] | [OCA 8 book] [OCP 8 book] [Practice tests book] [Blog] [JavaRanch FAQ] [How To Ask Questions] [Book Promos]
Other Certs: SCEA Part 1, Part 2 & 3, Core Spring 3, TOGAF part 1 and part 2
Jeanne Boyarsky wrote:
Are you saying you typically hire one out of every 2-3 people you interview? I consider myself very lucky when that ratio happens. And even then, it would only be on onsite interviews. On phone screens, the ratio is worse. Too many people lie on their resume so it isn't just how well you analyze resumes.
Henry Wong wrote:
Campbell Ritchie wrote:In this country (UK) that might be unlawful discrimination on the grounds of disability, but the law will differ from place to place, and it is always difficult to prove such discrimination.
In the US, I believe that discrimination laws are more for employees (than job candidates). And even if you are a newly hired employee, you will likely be in a probation period, which puts the microscope on you -- meaning they will have their "ducks in a row" upon your termination. It will be very difficult to prove discrimination.
Regardless, technically, you can file a lawsuit for anything, so you can do it for a "bad interview", but we are stretching it here.*
Henry
* BTW, I am not a lawyer, and recommend that you consult a lawyer if you want to pursue the legal route.
Henry Wong wrote:It could simply be related to the point in the process for your involvement.
[OCP 17 book] | [OCP 11 book] | [OCA 8 book] [OCP 8 book] [Practice tests book] [Blog] [JavaRanch FAQ] [How To Ask Questions] [Book Promos]
Other Certs: SCEA Part 1, Part 2 & 3, Core Spring 3, TOGAF part 1 and part 2
… in the adverts.Previous applicants need not apply again.
Sounds exactly like what I said about having to carry things in one's job.Jayesh A Lalwani wrote: . . . for a particular job, the employee needs to be standing on his/her feet for 4 hours straight. . . . You just can't discriminate someone who, let's say, stutters if it doesn't impede his ability to do the job.
Henry Wong wrote:
I think it is a tough call, particularly for a junior position. Yes, it is possible for a developer to have minimal communications with others, but what about unusual cases? Fires happen, and developers do have to sometimes do fire fighting, which means communications with customers (mainly irate customers). And what about growth? Isn't a developer expected to become senior? to lead? to mentor?
Henry
No more Blub for me, thank you, Vicar.
[OCP 17 book] | [OCP 11 book] | [OCA 8 book] [OCP 8 book] [Practice tests book] [Blog] [JavaRanch FAQ] [How To Ask Questions] [Book Promos]
Other Certs: SCEA Part 1, Part 2 & 3, Core Spring 3, TOGAF part 1 and part 2
chris webster wrote:
I think this approach risks creating an implicit ban on employing people who might possibly have a problem in future. If they've got the ability to do the job you're recruiting for, why not give them a chance now and worry about the future when it happens?
Consider Paul's rocket mass heater. |