To
The candidate we have offered
Thank you, that you have found the notification. Thank you, that you have attended and cleared the interview.
Thank you that you agree for offered salary after mutual negotiation
Finally Thank you that you have wasted my time without joining after providing the time you have requested on releasing the offer.
It is great that you have knowledge, but it would have been much better if you have some sense that time is precious to others too.
If you are not interested you should have informed us as early as possible after making the decision not to join, so that we can find someone else. What makes you people happy on wasting our time after accepting offer. some are too worst that they say there are comming on the day they have mentioned at the time of offer and not responding after due date. Due to your commitment we are not able to decide whether we need to source profile or wait for your reply which is hampering our works. What if an organisation has provided more than one offer for single position and cancel the remaining offers whenever a person gets on-board that's injustice and we should play with candidates career, then how can candidates waste our time.
Ofcourse the market is open and candidates is having more opportunities, it is not mandatory that we gave you offer and should get onboarded. But how come you waste our months time.
Our request is that Time is more valuable for us that an unwilling candidate.
Regards
Frustrated Recruiter
From India, Tuni
2The candidate we have offered
Thank you, that you have found the notification. Thank you, that you have attended and cleared the interview.
Thank you that you agree for offered salary after mutual negotiation
Finally Thank you that you have wasted my time without joining after providing the time you have requested on releasing the offer.
It is great that you have knowledge, but it would have been much better if you have some sense that time is precious to others too.
If you are not interested you should have informed us as early as possible after making the decision not to join, so that we can find someone else. What makes you people happy on wasting our time after accepting offer. some are too worst that they say there are comming on the day they have mentioned at the time of offer and not responding after due date. Due to your commitment we are not able to decide whether we need to source profile or wait for your reply which is hampering our works. What if an organisation has provided more than one offer for single position and cancel the remaining offers whenever a person gets on-board that's injustice and we should play with candidates career, then how can candidates waste our time.
Ofcourse the market is open and candidates is having more opportunities, it is not mandatory that we gave you offer and should get onboarded. But how come you waste our months time.
Our request is that Time is more valuable for us that an unwilling candidate.
Regards
Frustrated Recruiter
From India, Tuni
I agree your point, moreover backouts happening before the expected joining date is more frustrating one. Many candidates won't pick our call, they will block us....
Other than working for backup, we need to do something to avoid this...
From India, Madras
Other than working for backup, we need to do something to avoid this...
From India, Madras
Hi,
As a frustrated recruiter you had expressed your anguish on " No Show " candidates on joining date. Well it is part and parcel of hiring process across all industries. Unlike old days today options are more for candidates and as a matter of courtesy candidates are supposed to inform the Recruiter about their inability to join even if not in advance at least on joining date but most candidates don't follow that ethics. I personally feel that in most of the cases candidates were not offered the expected numbers (CTC) directly but after much bargaining arriving at some package which will be bit less than what was expected by the candidates. While I agree the Recruiter too have limitations in fixing the salary based budget of the Organization, the expectation of the candidates were based on their personal commitments and also based on prevailing salary in the market for that position in companies doing similar business. So most of the times candidates accept the offer though not happy just as a backup and use it as a trump card with other Competitive companies to get the desired CTC.
Also other reason being while big Organization follow some standardized process for fixing salary matching the experience, some new comers in the market fix abnormal salary based on their Project /work requirement due to which candidates witness massive gap in offered salary between companies doing similar business and obviously candidates tend to choose the best offer but do not apply their mind on the lack of job security behind such offers.
Also nowadays hourly based salary were also offered for fixed period wherein candidates are paid more compared to other companies which are offering permanent job for the same role with mediocre salary.
Unless otherwise companies doing similar business form a forum and fix salary range based on experience levels there will be no end for this issue.
From India, Madras
As a frustrated recruiter you had expressed your anguish on " No Show " candidates on joining date. Well it is part and parcel of hiring process across all industries. Unlike old days today options are more for candidates and as a matter of courtesy candidates are supposed to inform the Recruiter about their inability to join even if not in advance at least on joining date but most candidates don't follow that ethics. I personally feel that in most of the cases candidates were not offered the expected numbers (CTC) directly but after much bargaining arriving at some package which will be bit less than what was expected by the candidates. While I agree the Recruiter too have limitations in fixing the salary based budget of the Organization, the expectation of the candidates were based on their personal commitments and also based on prevailing salary in the market for that position in companies doing similar business. So most of the times candidates accept the offer though not happy just as a backup and use it as a trump card with other Competitive companies to get the desired CTC.
Also other reason being while big Organization follow some standardized process for fixing salary matching the experience, some new comers in the market fix abnormal salary based on their Project /work requirement due to which candidates witness massive gap in offered salary between companies doing similar business and obviously candidates tend to choose the best offer but do not apply their mind on the lack of job security behind such offers.
Also nowadays hourly based salary were also offered for fixed period wherein candidates are paid more compared to other companies which are offering permanent job for the same role with mediocre salary.
Unless otherwise companies doing similar business form a forum and fix salary range based on experience levels there will be no end for this issue.
From India, Madras
A perennial topic which comes up on CiteHR with monotonous regularity.
Accept the fact that there are candidates out there in the big wide world who are ONLY INTERESTED in money, not a job, not a career. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to weed out those candidates.
For 16 years now on CiteHR I have been railing against your poor recruitment processes. Quite frankly, I am now sick and tired of telling you to fix these problems.
Every week, there are complaints about selected candidates not turning up on day 1, absconders, people who leave within a very short time, etc, etc, etc. And who's fault is that? YOURS of course. You chose these people for whatever reasons I cannot fathom. And then there are the endless questions from people who have been appointed to a job and HAVE NO IDEA how to do that job. Honestly, you couldn't make up this rubbish if you tried.
Whenever there are posts about interview questions etc, I just sit here in disbelief at some of the rubbish that gets said. Most of you seem to have lost sight of the fact that you are recruiting a person to do a job. What you need to know is simply does that person have the skills, knowledge and experience to do that job. Whether he/she comes from a good family and has nice hobbies is totally irrelevant. CAN HE DO THE JOB??? Nothing else matters. Most of you have no proper job descriptions, no proper person specifications, no staff properly trained in interview techniques, and no idea about a proper recruitment process.
BUT, and there is always a BUT, you need to look at your own organisation. Ask yourself why anyone would want to work for you. Do you have poor senior management, micro managers, poor working conditions, lack of advancement opportunities, poor salary and benefits, etc, etc.
Now, you have two choices, you can choose to be offended by my post, OR you can get off your backside and start working to effect radical change and DO THINGS DIFFERENTLY.
From Australia, Melbourne
Accept the fact that there are candidates out there in the big wide world who are ONLY INTERESTED in money, not a job, not a career. Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to weed out those candidates.
For 16 years now on CiteHR I have been railing against your poor recruitment processes. Quite frankly, I am now sick and tired of telling you to fix these problems.
Every week, there are complaints about selected candidates not turning up on day 1, absconders, people who leave within a very short time, etc, etc, etc. And who's fault is that? YOURS of course. You chose these people for whatever reasons I cannot fathom. And then there are the endless questions from people who have been appointed to a job and HAVE NO IDEA how to do that job. Honestly, you couldn't make up this rubbish if you tried.
Whenever there are posts about interview questions etc, I just sit here in disbelief at some of the rubbish that gets said. Most of you seem to have lost sight of the fact that you are recruiting a person to do a job. What you need to know is simply does that person have the skills, knowledge and experience to do that job. Whether he/she comes from a good family and has nice hobbies is totally irrelevant. CAN HE DO THE JOB??? Nothing else matters. Most of you have no proper job descriptions, no proper person specifications, no staff properly trained in interview techniques, and no idea about a proper recruitment process.
BUT, and there is always a BUT, you need to look at your own organisation. Ask yourself why anyone would want to work for you. Do you have poor senior management, micro managers, poor working conditions, lack of advancement opportunities, poor salary and benefits, etc, etc.
Now, you have two choices, you can choose to be offended by my post, OR you can get off your backside and start working to effect radical change and DO THINGS DIFFERENTLY.
From Australia, Melbourne
Thank you seniors for your response, we do accept all the facts which were mentioned. Organization has concern that candidates are not turning up or leaving at short period it is accepted. The concept that organization feels uncomfortable is commitments given by the candidate even though Candidate has decided not to. This is causing lag in the filling process. Concern is to give information that you are not interested in offer.
From India, Tuni
From India, Tuni
Community Support and Knowledge-base on business, career and organisational prospects and issues - Register and Log In to CiteHR and post your query, download formats and be part of a fostered community of professionals.
HR Concern for Employer n Employee.doc