Rejected Candidate showing up to the office
We do interviews then send selected candidates to panel interviews.
Considering the following scenario:
If an applicant comes into the building after they receive a rejection letter, and asks you in person why they were not selected to continue on in the interviewing process.
What would be a suitable response or course of action if this happens?
employer
edited yesterday
solarflare
5,66721333
asked Jan 11 at 17:09
christenchristen
9613
New contributor
christen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
We do interviews then send selected candidates to panel interviews.
Considering the following scenario:
If an applicant comes into the building after they receive a rejection letter, and asks you in person why they were not selected to continue on in the interviewing process.
What would be a suitable response or course of action if this happens?
employer
edited yesterday
solarflare
5,66721333
asked Jan 11 at 17:09
christenchristen
9613
New contributor
christen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
17
Is this a thing that happened?
– TheSoundDefense
Jan 11 at 17:11
2
This seems awfully vague. Depends on details, how the applicant is behaving and their age and sex, location, what is the office like and who are present... Any answer can't be anything but speculation.
– hyde
2 days ago
add a comment |
We do interviews then send selected candidates to panel interviews.
Considering the following scenario:
If an applicant comes into the building after they receive a rejection letter, and asks you in person why they were not selected to continue on in the interviewing process.
What would be a suitable response or course of action if this happens?
employer
edited yesterday
solarflare
5,66721333
asked Jan 11 at 17:09
christenchristen
9613
New contributor
christen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
We do interviews then send selected candidates to panel interviews.
Considering the following scenario:
If an applicant comes into the building after they receive a rejection letter, and asks you in person why they were not selected to continue on in the interviewing process.
What would be a suitable response or course of action if this happens?
employer
employer
edited yesterday
solarflare
5,66721333
asked Jan 11 at 17:09
christenchristen
9613
New contributor
christen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited yesterday
solarflare
5,66721333
asked Jan 11 at 17:09
christenchristen
9613
New contributor
christen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited yesterday
solarflare
5,66721333
edited yesterday
solarflare
5,66721333
edited yesterday
solarflare
5,66721333
5,66721333
asked Jan 11 at 17:09
christenchristen
9613
New contributor
christen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked Jan 11 at 17:09
christenchristen
9613
asked Jan 11 at 17:09
christenchristen
9613
9613
New contributor
christen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
christen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
christen is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
17
Is this a thing that happened?
– TheSoundDefense
Jan 11 at 17:11
2
This seems awfully vague. Depends on details, how the applicant is behaving and their age and sex, location, what is the office like and who are present... Any answer can't be anything but speculation.
– hyde
2 days ago
add a comment |
17
Is this a thing that happened?
– TheSoundDefense
Jan 11 at 17:11
2
This seems awfully vague. Depends on details, how the applicant is behaving and their age and sex, location, what is the office like and who are present... Any answer can't be anything but speculation.
– hyde
2 days ago
17
17
Is this a thing that happened?
– TheSoundDefense
Jan 11 at 17:11
Is this a thing that happened?
– TheSoundDefense
Jan 11 at 17:11
2
2
This seems awfully vague. Depends on details, how the applicant is behaving and their age and sex, location, what is the office like and who are present... Any answer can't be anything but speculation.
– hyde
2 days ago
This seems awfully vague. Depends on details, how the applicant is behaving and their age and sex, location, what is the office like and who are present... Any answer can't be anything but speculation.
– hyde
2 days ago
add a comment |
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
First, the person would actually have to get into the building. To do this, they typically need to pass the front desk, and there is no reason for the front desk to let them in. That's neither rude nor inappropriate, but perfectly normal when someone shows up without an appointment for whatever reason (interview related or not). "Sorry, the people you want to see are busy".
If they try to force their way in, call security or the police.
answered Jan 11 at 17:49
HilmarHilmar
26.9k66481
4
Ask them to leave. If they don't, call security or the police.
– Caleb Jay
Jan 11 at 22:25
1
You can't know how hard it is to get into the particular building or office premises, so this answer appears to be just speculative.
– hyde
2 days ago
3
@DavidThornley: then they are trespassing. If someone would show up at my desk unannounced I'd escort them out of the building and have charges filed. Hasn't happened once in my 30+ years. Most front desks know how to do their jobs
– Hilmar
2 days ago
add a comment |
Give them no information. If they press, refer them to the information in the rejection letter or refer them to contact the recruiter they were working with at your company (assuming it wasn't you). If there are signs that make you uncomfortable, do not hesitate to call your building security or the local police or law enforcement.
Giving ANY information is not going to benefit you personally or your employer. Your employer has already covered all the bases they care about in the rejection letter. That process exists for a purpose, you should respect that. Giving the candidate info likely won't benefit the candidate, either - if they're not fit for the job, giving them info on why won't suddenly get them hired. And if they want to "improve for the future" they certainly can, and should, focus on getting employment support elsewhere (ie a third party recruiter, job training, etc), not from an employer who has rejected them. Your obligation to interact with this individual ended when they got the rejection letter.
Job interviews and hiring processes can be stressful on candidates, and can bring out the worst in people who aren't equipped to handle the stress. You don't know their mental state or how they handle negative feedback, and in a situation where they've just randomly shown up and confronted you, they're already showing signs that they may not be the most stable, by-the-book person. Think of your own personal safety first and do what you can to de-escalate, end the discussion, and get outside help from security or police as needed.
answered Jan 11 at 21:20
dwizumdwizum
12.2k52747
And this is just one reason why interviewers generally do not give out their contact information to the interviewee. (Though sometimes it is easily guessable or discoverable, like an email address.) The interviewer is not the one on the hook for the legal elements that must be considered, nor is he typically trained on it - but if he volunteers something to the rejected candidate then he may become so, and there's no upside to him for that!
– davidbak
2 days ago
add a comment |
Provide feedback if you feel comfortable doing so. If you don't simply say you can't divulge that information or give them some sort of canned answer like "we felt other candidates were better suited for this position" and usher them out the door. If you're worried this candidate might get angry and come back with a machine gun or something then alert the appropriate authorities.
answered Jan 11 at 17:18
Lee AbrahamLee Abraham
1,67811321
This answer seems the best. Even though it is not a typical behaviour for companies, every candidate should have the right to know why they were rejected -- ideally in their rejection letter. I wouldn't think upfront that such person is a threat or in a bad mental state or talking about weapons... Major words. I would say: try to address its request if you can and be polite to that person while doing so. Then, when leaving, apologise and make sure s/he leaves.
– Kiddo
Jan 11 at 19:31
15
@Kiddo "every candidate should have the right to know why they were rejected" Companies tend not to elaborate because it opens them up to all kinds of legal liability if the candidate doesn't like the answer.
– Blrfl
Jan 11 at 20:49
@Blrfl: allowing them to know that they failed the interview because they were deemed not fit because of X (e.g., one of the requisites of the offer) or they failed an assignment because of Y (they did wrong this or that). These are objective replies that I fail to see how they could be used legally to claim anything like damage or abuse. Instead, it provides clarity on the process. They (should) have some KPIs, the candidate did not meet some of them. I know that in some kind of countries they love tending to legal matters, but even so I fail to see how they could "corrupt" such replies.
– Kiddo
Jan 11 at 20:58
5
Providing specific feedback is a dangerous, slippery slope, which is why many (most?) employers won't do so, directly to a candidate. There's nothing for the employer to gain, and by saying anything specific, you're opening yourself up for potential backlash (ie you unintentionally give them ammo for a discrimination lawsuit).
– dwizum
Jan 11 at 21:13
5
Agree with @Blrfl on this, the company has zero upside and only potential downsides to even having this conversation. A rejected candidate randomly showing up at the office is very abnormal behavior, and is not the type of person you want to give any possible legal fodder to.
– Nuclear Wang
Jan 11 at 21:31
|
show 2 more comments
Your organisation should have a process for this. Usually the information they can be given is exactly the same as that they would have received in the letter turning them down, or also quite commonly they will be turned away unless they have an appointment.
In the UK we have a requirement to provide interview notes to the interviewer if they ask, but typically that is all.
answered Jan 11 at 17:15
Rory AlsopRory Alsop
5,79312442
add a comment |
I think it goes without saying that this kind of behaviour is unusual and probably inappropriate in most cultures, but I don't think that needs to preclude giving the person the information that they're seeking. Perhaps even more so in this situation as the individual might not be aware that they're breaching social norms - in all likelihood their blind spots didn't help them during the interview process either.
You'd be well within your rights to turn them away, but I don't think there is any harm in having a conversation with them either, and using the time to explain your decision and what the can do to improve their chances in future. Who knows, they might impress you down the road and the positive conversation might lead them to succeed at getting a job at your organisation in the future.
This would also be a good time to point out how inappropriate it is for them to show up like this, and that they would have improved their chances by simply calling or sending an email for further clarification.
I think the other answers are needlessly paranoid; there are plenty of completely innocent explanations for this behaviour and while a cursory assessment of their mental state wouldn't be a bad idea I also think the premise that some kind of violent derangement is a likely outcomes is a bit silly.
answered 2 days ago
quantquant
973
New contributor
quant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
6
-1 Someone who things turning up in this fashion after already being rejected, shouldn't be indulged
– motosubatsu
2 days ago
1
@motosubatsu I fail to see why this is a big deal. Obviously it's not appropriate or socially acceptable, but I don't think that should necessitate being rude to them or locking them out of the building.
– quant
2 days ago
3
Why reward rude and entitled behaviour? All that will do is encourage it. I'm not saying you should be rude to them or lock them out, but politely and firmly turn them away.
– motosubatsu
2 days ago
@motosubatsu locking someone out of a building and refusing to talk to them on the basis that their behaviour is outside of social norms strikes me as more "rude and entitled" than what the candidate is doing.
– quant
yesterday
I think this is the right answer, but I think my explanation wasn't particularly good, so I've tried to clarify the rationale a bit. @motosubatsu I think your response is a bit arbitrary. Can you point to something other than social norms that would justify the way you're proposing to behave in this scenario?
– quant
yesterday
|
show 5 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "423"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: false,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
christen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f126307%2frejected-candidate-showing-up-to-the-office%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(function () {
$("#show-editor-button input, #show-editor-button button").click(function () {
var showEditor = function() {
$("#show-editor-button").hide();
$("#post-form").removeClass("dno");
StackExchange.editor.finallyInit();
};
var useFancy = $(this).data('confirm-use-fancy');
if(useFancy == 'True') {
var popupTitle = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-title');
var popupBody = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-body');
var popupAccept = $(this).data('confirm-fancy-accept-button');
$(this).loadPopup({
url: '/post/self-answer-popup',
loaded: function(popup) {
var pTitle = $(popup).find('h2');
var pBody = $(popup).find('.popup-body');
var pSubmit = $(popup).find('.popup-submit');
pTitle.text(popupTitle);
pBody.html(popupBody);
pSubmit.val(popupAccept).click(showEditor);
}
})
} else{
var confirmText = $(this).data('confirm-text');
if (confirmText ? confirm(confirmText) : true) {
showEditor();
}
}
});
});
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
First, the person would actually have to get into the building. To do this, they typically need to pass the front desk, and there is no reason for the front desk to let them in. That's neither rude nor inappropriate, but perfectly normal when someone shows up without an appointment for whatever reason (interview related or not). "Sorry, the people you want to see are busy".
If they try to force their way in, call security or the police.
answered Jan 11 at 17:49
HilmarHilmar
26.9k66481
4
Ask them to leave. If they don't, call security or the police.
– Caleb Jay
Jan 11 at 22:25
1
You can't know how hard it is to get into the particular building or office premises, so this answer appears to be just speculative.
– hyde
2 days ago
3
@DavidThornley: then they are trespassing. If someone would show up at my desk unannounced I'd escort them out of the building and have charges filed. Hasn't happened once in my 30+ years. Most front desks know how to do their jobs
– Hilmar
2 days ago
add a comment |
First, the person would actually have to get into the building. To do this, they typically need to pass the front desk, and there is no reason for the front desk to let them in. That's neither rude nor inappropriate, but perfectly normal when someone shows up without an appointment for whatever reason (interview related or not). "Sorry, the people you want to see are busy".
If they try to force their way in, call security or the police.
answered Jan 11 at 17:49
HilmarHilmar
26.9k66481
4
Ask them to leave. If they don't, call security or the police.
– Caleb Jay
Jan 11 at 22:25
1
You can't know how hard it is to get into the particular building or office premises, so this answer appears to be just speculative.
– hyde
2 days ago
3
@DavidThornley: then they are trespassing. If someone would show up at my desk unannounced I'd escort them out of the building and have charges filed. Hasn't happened once in my 30+ years. Most front desks know how to do their jobs
– Hilmar
2 days ago
add a comment |
First, the person would actually have to get into the building. To do this, they typically need to pass the front desk, and there is no reason for the front desk to let them in. That's neither rude nor inappropriate, but perfectly normal when someone shows up without an appointment for whatever reason (interview related or not). "Sorry, the people you want to see are busy".
If they try to force their way in, call security or the police.
answered Jan 11 at 17:49
HilmarHilmar
26.9k66481
First, the person would actually have to get into the building. To do this, they typically need to pass the front desk, and there is no reason for the front desk to let them in. That's neither rude nor inappropriate, but perfectly normal when someone shows up without an appointment for whatever reason (interview related or not). "Sorry, the people you want to see are busy".
If they try to force their way in, call security or the police.
answered Jan 11 at 17:49
HilmarHilmar
26.9k66481
answered Jan 11 at 17:49
HilmarHilmar
26.9k66481
answered Jan 11 at 17:49
HilmarHilmar
26.9k66481
answered Jan 11 at 17:49
HilmarHilmar
26.9k66481
26.9k66481
4
Ask them to leave. If they don't, call security or the police.
– Caleb Jay
Jan 11 at 22:25
1
You can't know how hard it is to get into the particular building or office premises, so this answer appears to be just speculative.
– hyde
2 days ago
3
@DavidThornley: then they are trespassing. If someone would show up at my desk unannounced I'd escort them out of the building and have charges filed. Hasn't happened once in my 30+ years. Most front desks know how to do their jobs
– Hilmar
2 days ago
add a comment |
4
Ask them to leave. If they don't, call security or the police.
– Caleb Jay
Jan 11 at 22:25
1
You can't know how hard it is to get into the particular building or office premises, so this answer appears to be just speculative.
– hyde
2 days ago
3
@DavidThornley: then they are trespassing. If someone would show up at my desk unannounced I'd escort them out of the building and have charges filed. Hasn't happened once in my 30+ years. Most front desks know how to do their jobs
– Hilmar
2 days ago
4
4
Ask them to leave. If they don't, call security or the police.
– Caleb Jay
Jan 11 at 22:25
Ask them to leave. If they don't, call security or the police.
– Caleb Jay
Jan 11 at 22:25
1
1
You can't know how hard it is to get into the particular building or office premises, so this answer appears to be just speculative.
– hyde
2 days ago
You can't know how hard it is to get into the particular building or office premises, so this answer appears to be just speculative.
– hyde
2 days ago
3
3
@DavidThornley: then they are trespassing. If someone would show up at my desk unannounced I'd escort them out of the building and have charges filed. Hasn't happened once in my 30+ years. Most front desks know how to do their jobs
– Hilmar
2 days ago
@DavidThornley: then they are trespassing. If someone would show up at my desk unannounced I'd escort them out of the building and have charges filed. Hasn't happened once in my 30+ years. Most front desks know how to do their jobs
– Hilmar
2 days ago
add a comment |
Give them no information. If they press, refer them to the information in the rejection letter or refer them to contact the recruiter they were working with at your company (assuming it wasn't you). If there are signs that make you uncomfortable, do not hesitate to call your building security or the local police or law enforcement.
Giving ANY information is not going to benefit you personally or your employer. Your employer has already covered all the bases they care about in the rejection letter. That process exists for a purpose, you should respect that. Giving the candidate info likely won't benefit the candidate, either - if they're not fit for the job, giving them info on why won't suddenly get them hired. And if they want to "improve for the future" they certainly can, and should, focus on getting employment support elsewhere (ie a third party recruiter, job training, etc), not from an employer who has rejected them. Your obligation to interact with this individual ended when they got the rejection letter.
Job interviews and hiring processes can be stressful on candidates, and can bring out the worst in people who aren't equipped to handle the stress. You don't know their mental state or how they handle negative feedback, and in a situation where they've just randomly shown up and confronted you, they're already showing signs that they may not be the most stable, by-the-book person. Think of your own personal safety first and do what you can to de-escalate, end the discussion, and get outside help from security or police as needed.
answered Jan 11 at 21:20
dwizumdwizum
12.2k52747
And this is just one reason why interviewers generally do not give out their contact information to the interviewee. (Though sometimes it is easily guessable or discoverable, like an email address.) The interviewer is not the one on the hook for the legal elements that must be considered, nor is he typically trained on it - but if he volunteers something to the rejected candidate then he may become so, and there's no upside to him for that!
– davidbak
2 days ago
add a comment |
Give them no information. If they press, refer them to the information in the rejection letter or refer them to contact the recruiter they were working with at your company (assuming it wasn't you). If there are signs that make you uncomfortable, do not hesitate to call your building security or the local police or law enforcement.
Giving ANY information is not going to benefit you personally or your employer. Your employer has already covered all the bases they care about in the rejection letter. That process exists for a purpose, you should respect that. Giving the candidate info likely won't benefit the candidate, either - if they're not fit for the job, giving them info on why won't suddenly get them hired. And if they want to "improve for the future" they certainly can, and should, focus on getting employment support elsewhere (ie a third party recruiter, job training, etc), not from an employer who has rejected them. Your obligation to interact with this individual ended when they got the rejection letter.
Job interviews and hiring processes can be stressful on candidates, and can bring out the worst in people who aren't equipped to handle the stress. You don't know their mental state or how they handle negative feedback, and in a situation where they've just randomly shown up and confronted you, they're already showing signs that they may not be the most stable, by-the-book person. Think of your own personal safety first and do what you can to de-escalate, end the discussion, and get outside help from security or police as needed.
answered Jan 11 at 21:20
dwizumdwizum
12.2k52747
And this is just one reason why interviewers generally do not give out their contact information to the interviewee. (Though sometimes it is easily guessable or discoverable, like an email address.) The interviewer is not the one on the hook for the legal elements that must be considered, nor is he typically trained on it - but if he volunteers something to the rejected candidate then he may become so, and there's no upside to him for that!
– davidbak
2 days ago
add a comment |
Give them no information. If they press, refer them to the information in the rejection letter or refer them to contact the recruiter they were working with at your company (assuming it wasn't you). If there are signs that make you uncomfortable, do not hesitate to call your building security or the local police or law enforcement.
Giving ANY information is not going to benefit you personally or your employer. Your employer has already covered all the bases they care about in the rejection letter. That process exists for a purpose, you should respect that. Giving the candidate info likely won't benefit the candidate, either - if they're not fit for the job, giving them info on why won't suddenly get them hired. And if they want to "improve for the future" they certainly can, and should, focus on getting employment support elsewhere (ie a third party recruiter, job training, etc), not from an employer who has rejected them. Your obligation to interact with this individual ended when they got the rejection letter.
Job interviews and hiring processes can be stressful on candidates, and can bring out the worst in people who aren't equipped to handle the stress. You don't know their mental state or how they handle negative feedback, and in a situation where they've just randomly shown up and confronted you, they're already showing signs that they may not be the most stable, by-the-book person. Think of your own personal safety first and do what you can to de-escalate, end the discussion, and get outside help from security or police as needed.
answered Jan 11 at 21:20
dwizumdwizum
12.2k52747
Give them no information. If they press, refer them to the information in the rejection letter or refer them to contact the recruiter they were working with at your company (assuming it wasn't you). If there are signs that make you uncomfortable, do not hesitate to call your building security or the local police or law enforcement.
Giving ANY information is not going to benefit you personally or your employer. Your employer has already covered all the bases they care about in the rejection letter. That process exists for a purpose, you should respect that. Giving the candidate info likely won't benefit the candidate, either - if they're not fit for the job, giving them info on why won't suddenly get them hired. And if they want to "improve for the future" they certainly can, and should, focus on getting employment support elsewhere (ie a third party recruiter, job training, etc), not from an employer who has rejected them. Your obligation to interact with this individual ended when they got the rejection letter.
Job interviews and hiring processes can be stressful on candidates, and can bring out the worst in people who aren't equipped to handle the stress. You don't know their mental state or how they handle negative feedback, and in a situation where they've just randomly shown up and confronted you, they're already showing signs that they may not be the most stable, by-the-book person. Think of your own personal safety first and do what you can to de-escalate, end the discussion, and get outside help from security or police as needed.
answered Jan 11 at 21:20
dwizumdwizum
12.2k52747
answered Jan 11 at 21:20
dwizumdwizum
12.2k52747
answered Jan 11 at 21:20
dwizumdwizum
12.2k52747
answered Jan 11 at 21:20
dwizumdwizum
12.2k52747
12.2k52747
And this is just one reason why interviewers generally do not give out their contact information to the interviewee. (Though sometimes it is easily guessable or discoverable, like an email address.) The interviewer is not the one on the hook for the legal elements that must be considered, nor is he typically trained on it - but if he volunteers something to the rejected candidate then he may become so, and there's no upside to him for that!
– davidbak
2 days ago
add a comment |
And this is just one reason why interviewers generally do not give out their contact information to the interviewee. (Though sometimes it is easily guessable or discoverable, like an email address.) The interviewer is not the one on the hook for the legal elements that must be considered, nor is he typically trained on it - but if he volunteers something to the rejected candidate then he may become so, and there's no upside to him for that!
– davidbak
2 days ago
And this is just one reason why interviewers generally do not give out their contact information to the interviewee. (Though sometimes it is easily guessable or discoverable, like an email address.) The interviewer is not the one on the hook for the legal elements that must be considered, nor is he typically trained on it - but if he volunteers something to the rejected candidate then he may become so, and there's no upside to him for that!
– davidbak
2 days ago
And this is just one reason why interviewers generally do not give out their contact information to the interviewee. (Though sometimes it is easily guessable or discoverable, like an email address.) The interviewer is not the one on the hook for the legal elements that must be considered, nor is he typically trained on it - but if he volunteers something to the rejected candidate then he may become so, and there's no upside to him for that!
– davidbak
2 days ago
add a comment |
Provide feedback if you feel comfortable doing so. If you don't simply say you can't divulge that information or give them some sort of canned answer like "we felt other candidates were better suited for this position" and usher them out the door. If you're worried this candidate might get angry and come back with a machine gun or something then alert the appropriate authorities.
answered Jan 11 at 17:18
Lee AbrahamLee Abraham
1,67811321
This answer seems the best. Even though it is not a typical behaviour for companies, every candidate should have the right to know why they were rejected -- ideally in their rejection letter. I wouldn't think upfront that such person is a threat or in a bad mental state or talking about weapons... Major words. I would say: try to address its request if you can and be polite to that person while doing so. Then, when leaving, apologise and make sure s/he leaves.
– Kiddo
Jan 11 at 19:31
15
@Kiddo "every candidate should have the right to know why they were rejected" Companies tend not to elaborate because it opens them up to all kinds of legal liability if the candidate doesn't like the answer.
– Blrfl
Jan 11 at 20:49
@Blrfl: allowing them to know that they failed the interview because they were deemed not fit because of X (e.g., one of the requisites of the offer) or they failed an assignment because of Y (they did wrong this or that). These are objective replies that I fail to see how they could be used legally to claim anything like damage or abuse. Instead, it provides clarity on the process. They (should) have some KPIs, the candidate did not meet some of them. I know that in some kind of countries they love tending to legal matters, but even so I fail to see how they could "corrupt" such replies.
– Kiddo
Jan 11 at 20:58
5
Providing specific feedback is a dangerous, slippery slope, which is why many (most?) employers won't do so, directly to a candidate. There's nothing for the employer to gain, and by saying anything specific, you're opening yourself up for potential backlash (ie you unintentionally give them ammo for a discrimination lawsuit).
– dwizum
Jan 11 at 21:13
5
Agree with @Blrfl on this, the company has zero upside and only potential downsides to even having this conversation. A rejected candidate randomly showing up at the office is very abnormal behavior, and is not the type of person you want to give any possible legal fodder to.
– Nuclear Wang
Jan 11 at 21:31
|
show 2 more comments
Provide feedback if you feel comfortable doing so. If you don't simply say you can't divulge that information or give them some sort of canned answer like "we felt other candidates were better suited for this position" and usher them out the door. If you're worried this candidate might get angry and come back with a machine gun or something then alert the appropriate authorities.
answered Jan 11 at 17:18
Lee AbrahamLee Abraham
1,67811321
This answer seems the best. Even though it is not a typical behaviour for companies, every candidate should have the right to know why they were rejected -- ideally in their rejection letter. I wouldn't think upfront that such person is a threat or in a bad mental state or talking about weapons... Major words. I would say: try to address its request if you can and be polite to that person while doing so. Then, when leaving, apologise and make sure s/he leaves.
– Kiddo
Jan 11 at 19:31
15
@Kiddo "every candidate should have the right to know why they were rejected" Companies tend not to elaborate because it opens them up to all kinds of legal liability if the candidate doesn't like the answer.
– Blrfl
Jan 11 at 20:49
@Blrfl: allowing them to know that they failed the interview because they were deemed not fit because of X (e.g., one of the requisites of the offer) or they failed an assignment because of Y (they did wrong this or that). These are objective replies that I fail to see how they could be used legally to claim anything like damage or abuse. Instead, it provides clarity on the process. They (should) have some KPIs, the candidate did not meet some of them. I know that in some kind of countries they love tending to legal matters, but even so I fail to see how they could "corrupt" such replies.
– Kiddo
Jan 11 at 20:58
5
Providing specific feedback is a dangerous, slippery slope, which is why many (most?) employers won't do so, directly to a candidate. There's nothing for the employer to gain, and by saying anything specific, you're opening yourself up for potential backlash (ie you unintentionally give them ammo for a discrimination lawsuit).
– dwizum
Jan 11 at 21:13
5
Agree with @Blrfl on this, the company has zero upside and only potential downsides to even having this conversation. A rejected candidate randomly showing up at the office is very abnormal behavior, and is not the type of person you want to give any possible legal fodder to.
– Nuclear Wang
Jan 11 at 21:31
|
show 2 more comments
Provide feedback if you feel comfortable doing so. If you don't simply say you can't divulge that information or give them some sort of canned answer like "we felt other candidates were better suited for this position" and usher them out the door. If you're worried this candidate might get angry and come back with a machine gun or something then alert the appropriate authorities.
answered Jan 11 at 17:18
Lee AbrahamLee Abraham
1,67811321
Provide feedback if you feel comfortable doing so. If you don't simply say you can't divulge that information or give them some sort of canned answer like "we felt other candidates were better suited for this position" and usher them out the door. If you're worried this candidate might get angry and come back with a machine gun or something then alert the appropriate authorities.
answered Jan 11 at 17:18
Lee AbrahamLee Abraham
1,67811321
answered Jan 11 at 17:18
Lee AbrahamLee Abraham
1,67811321
answered Jan 11 at 17:18
Lee AbrahamLee Abraham
1,67811321
answered Jan 11 at 17:18
Lee AbrahamLee Abraham
1,67811321
1,67811321
This answer seems the best. Even though it is not a typical behaviour for companies, every candidate should have the right to know why they were rejected -- ideally in their rejection letter. I wouldn't think upfront that such person is a threat or in a bad mental state or talking about weapons... Major words. I would say: try to address its request if you can and be polite to that person while doing so. Then, when leaving, apologise and make sure s/he leaves.
– Kiddo
Jan 11 at 19:31
15
@Kiddo "every candidate should have the right to know why they were rejected" Companies tend not to elaborate because it opens them up to all kinds of legal liability if the candidate doesn't like the answer.
– Blrfl
Jan 11 at 20:49
@Blrfl: allowing them to know that they failed the interview because they were deemed not fit because of X (e.g., one of the requisites of the offer) or they failed an assignment because of Y (they did wrong this or that). These are objective replies that I fail to see how they could be used legally to claim anything like damage or abuse. Instead, it provides clarity on the process. They (should) have some KPIs, the candidate did not meet some of them. I know that in some kind of countries they love tending to legal matters, but even so I fail to see how they could "corrupt" such replies.
– Kiddo
Jan 11 at 20:58
5
Providing specific feedback is a dangerous, slippery slope, which is why many (most?) employers won't do so, directly to a candidate. There's nothing for the employer to gain, and by saying anything specific, you're opening yourself up for potential backlash (ie you unintentionally give them ammo for a discrimination lawsuit).
– dwizum
Jan 11 at 21:13
5
Agree with @Blrfl on this, the company has zero upside and only potential downsides to even having this conversation. A rejected candidate randomly showing up at the office is very abnormal behavior, and is not the type of person you want to give any possible legal fodder to.
– Nuclear Wang
Jan 11 at 21:31
|
show 2 more comments
This answer seems the best. Even though it is not a typical behaviour for companies, every candidate should have the right to know why they were rejected -- ideally in their rejection letter. I wouldn't think upfront that such person is a threat or in a bad mental state or talking about weapons... Major words. I would say: try to address its request if you can and be polite to that person while doing so. Then, when leaving, apologise and make sure s/he leaves.
– Kiddo
Jan 11 at 19:31
15
@Kiddo "every candidate should have the right to know why they were rejected" Companies tend not to elaborate because it opens them up to all kinds of legal liability if the candidate doesn't like the answer.
– Blrfl
Jan 11 at 20:49
@Blrfl: allowing them to know that they failed the interview because they were deemed not fit because of X (e.g., one of the requisites of the offer) or they failed an assignment because of Y (they did wrong this or that). These are objective replies that I fail to see how they could be used legally to claim anything like damage or abuse. Instead, it provides clarity on the process. They (should) have some KPIs, the candidate did not meet some of them. I know that in some kind of countries they love tending to legal matters, but even so I fail to see how they could "corrupt" such replies.
– Kiddo
Jan 11 at 20:58
5
Providing specific feedback is a dangerous, slippery slope, which is why many (most?) employers won't do so, directly to a candidate. There's nothing for the employer to gain, and by saying anything specific, you're opening yourself up for potential backlash (ie you unintentionally give them ammo for a discrimination lawsuit).
– dwizum
Jan 11 at 21:13
5
Agree with @Blrfl on this, the company has zero upside and only potential downsides to even having this conversation. A rejected candidate randomly showing up at the office is very abnormal behavior, and is not the type of person you want to give any possible legal fodder to.
– Nuclear Wang
Jan 11 at 21:31
This answer seems the best. Even though it is not a typical behaviour for companies, every candidate should have the right to know why they were rejected -- ideally in their rejection letter. I wouldn't think upfront that such person is a threat or in a bad mental state or talking about weapons... Major words. I would say: try to address its request if you can and be polite to that person while doing so. Then, when leaving, apologise and make sure s/he leaves.
– Kiddo
Jan 11 at 19:31
This answer seems the best. Even though it is not a typical behaviour for companies, every candidate should have the right to know why they were rejected -- ideally in their rejection letter. I wouldn't think upfront that such person is a threat or in a bad mental state or talking about weapons... Major words. I would say: try to address its request if you can and be polite to that person while doing so. Then, when leaving, apologise and make sure s/he leaves.
– Kiddo
Jan 11 at 19:31
15
15
@Kiddo "every candidate should have the right to know why they were rejected" Companies tend not to elaborate because it opens them up to all kinds of legal liability if the candidate doesn't like the answer.
– Blrfl
Jan 11 at 20:49
@Kiddo "every candidate should have the right to know why they were rejected" Companies tend not to elaborate because it opens them up to all kinds of legal liability if the candidate doesn't like the answer.
– Blrfl
Jan 11 at 20:49
@Blrfl: allowing them to know that they failed the interview because they were deemed not fit because of X (e.g., one of the requisites of the offer) or they failed an assignment because of Y (they did wrong this or that). These are objective replies that I fail to see how they could be used legally to claim anything like damage or abuse. Instead, it provides clarity on the process. They (should) have some KPIs, the candidate did not meet some of them. I know that in some kind of countries they love tending to legal matters, but even so I fail to see how they could "corrupt" such replies.
– Kiddo
Jan 11 at 20:58
@Blrfl: allowing them to know that they failed the interview because they were deemed not fit because of X (e.g., one of the requisites of the offer) or they failed an assignment because of Y (they did wrong this or that). These are objective replies that I fail to see how they could be used legally to claim anything like damage or abuse. Instead, it provides clarity on the process. They (should) have some KPIs, the candidate did not meet some of them. I know that in some kind of countries they love tending to legal matters, but even so I fail to see how they could "corrupt" such replies.
– Kiddo
Jan 11 at 20:58
5
5
Providing specific feedback is a dangerous, slippery slope, which is why many (most?) employers won't do so, directly to a candidate. There's nothing for the employer to gain, and by saying anything specific, you're opening yourself up for potential backlash (ie you unintentionally give them ammo for a discrimination lawsuit).
– dwizum
Jan 11 at 21:13
Providing specific feedback is a dangerous, slippery slope, which is why many (most?) employers won't do so, directly to a candidate. There's nothing for the employer to gain, and by saying anything specific, you're opening yourself up for potential backlash (ie you unintentionally give them ammo for a discrimination lawsuit).
– dwizum
Jan 11 at 21:13
5
5
Agree with @Blrfl on this, the company has zero upside and only potential downsides to even having this conversation. A rejected candidate randomly showing up at the office is very abnormal behavior, and is not the type of person you want to give any possible legal fodder to.
– Nuclear Wang
Jan 11 at 21:31
Agree with @Blrfl on this, the company has zero upside and only potential downsides to even having this conversation. A rejected candidate randomly showing up at the office is very abnormal behavior, and is not the type of person you want to give any possible legal fodder to.
– Nuclear Wang
Jan 11 at 21:31
|
show 2 more comments
Your organisation should have a process for this. Usually the information they can be given is exactly the same as that they would have received in the letter turning them down, or also quite commonly they will be turned away unless they have an appointment.
In the UK we have a requirement to provide interview notes to the interviewer if they ask, but typically that is all.
answered Jan 11 at 17:15
Rory AlsopRory Alsop
5,79312442
add a comment |
Your organisation should have a process for this. Usually the information they can be given is exactly the same as that they would have received in the letter turning them down, or also quite commonly they will be turned away unless they have an appointment.
In the UK we have a requirement to provide interview notes to the interviewer if they ask, but typically that is all.
answered Jan 11 at 17:15
Rory AlsopRory Alsop
5,79312442
add a comment |
Your organisation should have a process for this. Usually the information they can be given is exactly the same as that they would have received in the letter turning them down, or also quite commonly they will be turned away unless they have an appointment.
In the UK we have a requirement to provide interview notes to the interviewer if they ask, but typically that is all.
answered Jan 11 at 17:15
Rory AlsopRory Alsop
5,79312442
Your organisation should have a process for this. Usually the information they can be given is exactly the same as that they would have received in the letter turning them down, or also quite commonly they will be turned away unless they have an appointment.
In the UK we have a requirement to provide interview notes to the interviewer if they ask, but typically that is all.
answered Jan 11 at 17:15
Rory AlsopRory Alsop
5,79312442
answered Jan 11 at 17:15
Rory AlsopRory Alsop
5,79312442
answered Jan 11 at 17:15
Rory AlsopRory Alsop
5,79312442
answered Jan 11 at 17:15
Rory AlsopRory Alsop
5,79312442
5,79312442
add a comment |
add a comment |
I think it goes without saying that this kind of behaviour is unusual and probably inappropriate in most cultures, but I don't think that needs to preclude giving the person the information that they're seeking. Perhaps even more so in this situation as the individual might not be aware that they're breaching social norms - in all likelihood their blind spots didn't help them during the interview process either.
You'd be well within your rights to turn them away, but I don't think there is any harm in having a conversation with them either, and using the time to explain your decision and what the can do to improve their chances in future. Who knows, they might impress you down the road and the positive conversation might lead them to succeed at getting a job at your organisation in the future.
This would also be a good time to point out how inappropriate it is for them to show up like this, and that they would have improved their chances by simply calling or sending an email for further clarification.
I think the other answers are needlessly paranoid; there are plenty of completely innocent explanations for this behaviour and while a cursory assessment of their mental state wouldn't be a bad idea I also think the premise that some kind of violent derangement is a likely outcomes is a bit silly.
answered 2 days ago
quantquant
973
New contributor
quant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
6
-1 Someone who things turning up in this fashion after already being rejected, shouldn't be indulged
– motosubatsu
2 days ago
1
@motosubatsu I fail to see why this is a big deal. Obviously it's not appropriate or socially acceptable, but I don't think that should necessitate being rude to them or locking them out of the building.
– quant
2 days ago
3
Why reward rude and entitled behaviour? All that will do is encourage it. I'm not saying you should be rude to them or lock them out, but politely and firmly turn them away.
– motosubatsu
2 days ago
@motosubatsu locking someone out of a building and refusing to talk to them on the basis that their behaviour is outside of social norms strikes me as more "rude and entitled" than what the candidate is doing.
– quant
yesterday
I think this is the right answer, but I think my explanation wasn't particularly good, so I've tried to clarify the rationale a bit. @motosubatsu I think your response is a bit arbitrary. Can you point to something other than social norms that would justify the way you're proposing to behave in this scenario?
– quant
yesterday
|
show 5 more comments
I think it goes without saying that this kind of behaviour is unusual and probably inappropriate in most cultures, but I don't think that needs to preclude giving the person the information that they're seeking. Perhaps even more so in this situation as the individual might not be aware that they're breaching social norms - in all likelihood their blind spots didn't help them during the interview process either.
You'd be well within your rights to turn them away, but I don't think there is any harm in having a conversation with them either, and using the time to explain your decision and what the can do to improve their chances in future. Who knows, they might impress you down the road and the positive conversation might lead them to succeed at getting a job at your organisation in the future.
This would also be a good time to point out how inappropriate it is for them to show up like this, and that they would have improved their chances by simply calling or sending an email for further clarification.
I think the other answers are needlessly paranoid; there are plenty of completely innocent explanations for this behaviour and while a cursory assessment of their mental state wouldn't be a bad idea I also think the premise that some kind of violent derangement is a likely outcomes is a bit silly.
answered 2 days ago
quantquant
973
New contributor
quant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
6
-1 Someone who things turning up in this fashion after already being rejected, shouldn't be indulged
– motosubatsu
2 days ago
1
@motosubatsu I fail to see why this is a big deal. Obviously it's not appropriate or socially acceptable, but I don't think that should necessitate being rude to them or locking them out of the building.
– quant
2 days ago
3
Why reward rude and entitled behaviour? All that will do is encourage it. I'm not saying you should be rude to them or lock them out, but politely and firmly turn them away.
– motosubatsu
2 days ago
@motosubatsu locking someone out of a building and refusing to talk to them on the basis that their behaviour is outside of social norms strikes me as more "rude and entitled" than what the candidate is doing.
– quant
yesterday
I think this is the right answer, but I think my explanation wasn't particularly good, so I've tried to clarify the rationale a bit. @motosubatsu I think your response is a bit arbitrary. Can you point to something other than social norms that would justify the way you're proposing to behave in this scenario?
– quant
yesterday
|
show 5 more comments
I think it goes without saying that this kind of behaviour is unusual and probably inappropriate in most cultures, but I don't think that needs to preclude giving the person the information that they're seeking. Perhaps even more so in this situation as the individual might not be aware that they're breaching social norms - in all likelihood their blind spots didn't help them during the interview process either.
You'd be well within your rights to turn them away, but I don't think there is any harm in having a conversation with them either, and using the time to explain your decision and what the can do to improve their chances in future. Who knows, they might impress you down the road and the positive conversation might lead them to succeed at getting a job at your organisation in the future.
This would also be a good time to point out how inappropriate it is for them to show up like this, and that they would have improved their chances by simply calling or sending an email for further clarification.
I think the other answers are needlessly paranoid; there are plenty of completely innocent explanations for this behaviour and while a cursory assessment of their mental state wouldn't be a bad idea I also think the premise that some kind of violent derangement is a likely outcomes is a bit silly.
answered 2 days ago
quantquant
973
New contributor
quant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I think it goes without saying that this kind of behaviour is unusual and probably inappropriate in most cultures, but I don't think that needs to preclude giving the person the information that they're seeking. Perhaps even more so in this situation as the individual might not be aware that they're breaching social norms - in all likelihood their blind spots didn't help them during the interview process either.
You'd be well within your rights to turn them away, but I don't think there is any harm in having a conversation with them either, and using the time to explain your decision and what the can do to improve their chances in future. Who knows, they might impress you down the road and the positive conversation might lead them to succeed at getting a job at your organisation in the future.
This would also be a good time to point out how inappropriate it is for them to show up like this, and that they would have improved their chances by simply calling or sending an email for further clarification.
I think the other answers are needlessly paranoid; there are plenty of completely innocent explanations for this behaviour and while a cursory assessment of their mental state wouldn't be a bad idea I also think the premise that some kind of violent derangement is a likely outcomes is a bit silly.
answered 2 days ago
quantquant
973
New contributor
quant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 1 hour ago
answered 2 days ago
quantquant
973
New contributor
quant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
answered 2 days ago
quantquant
973
answered 2 days ago
quantquant
973
973
New contributor
quant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
quant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
quant is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
6
-1 Someone who things turning up in this fashion after already being rejected, shouldn't be indulged
– motosubatsu
2 days ago
1
@motosubatsu I fail to see why this is a big deal. Obviously it's not appropriate or socially acceptable, but I don't think that should necessitate being rude to them or locking them out of the building.
– quant
2 days ago
3
Why reward rude and entitled behaviour? All that will do is encourage it. I'm not saying you should be rude to them or lock them out, but politely and firmly turn them away.
– motosubatsu
2 days ago
@motosubatsu locking someone out of a building and refusing to talk to them on the basis that their behaviour is outside of social norms strikes me as more "rude and entitled" than what the candidate is doing.
– quant
yesterday
I think this is the right answer, but I think my explanation wasn't particularly good, so I've tried to clarify the rationale a bit. @motosubatsu I think your response is a bit arbitrary. Can you point to something other than social norms that would justify the way you're proposing to behave in this scenario?
– quant
yesterday
|
show 5 more comments
6
-1 Someone who things turning up in this fashion after already being rejected, shouldn't be indulged
– motosubatsu
2 days ago
1
@motosubatsu I fail to see why this is a big deal. Obviously it's not appropriate or socially acceptable, but I don't think that should necessitate being rude to them or locking them out of the building.
– quant
2 days ago
3
Why reward rude and entitled behaviour? All that will do is encourage it. I'm not saying you should be rude to them or lock them out, but politely and firmly turn them away.
– motosubatsu
2 days ago
@motosubatsu locking someone out of a building and refusing to talk to them on the basis that their behaviour is outside of social norms strikes me as more "rude and entitled" than what the candidate is doing.
– quant
yesterday
I think this is the right answer, but I think my explanation wasn't particularly good, so I've tried to clarify the rationale a bit. @motosubatsu I think your response is a bit arbitrary. Can you point to something other than social norms that would justify the way you're proposing to behave in this scenario?
– quant
yesterday
6
6
-1 Someone who things turning up in this fashion after already being rejected, shouldn't be indulged
– motosubatsu
2 days ago
-1 Someone who things turning up in this fashion after already being rejected, shouldn't be indulged
– motosubatsu
2 days ago
1
1
@motosubatsu I fail to see why this is a big deal. Obviously it's not appropriate or socially acceptable, but I don't think that should necessitate being rude to them or locking them out of the building.
– quant
2 days ago
@motosubatsu I fail to see why this is a big deal. Obviously it's not appropriate or socially acceptable, but I don't think that should necessitate being rude to them or locking them out of the building.
– quant
2 days ago
3
3
Why reward rude and entitled behaviour? All that will do is encourage it. I'm not saying you should be rude to them or lock them out, but politely and firmly turn them away.
– motosubatsu
2 days ago
Why reward rude and entitled behaviour? All that will do is encourage it. I'm not saying you should be rude to them or lock them out, but politely and firmly turn them away.
– motosubatsu
2 days ago
@motosubatsu locking someone out of a building and refusing to talk to them on the basis that their behaviour is outside of social norms strikes me as more "rude and entitled" than what the candidate is doing.
– quant
yesterday
@motosubatsu locking someone out of a building and refusing to talk to them on the basis that their behaviour is outside of social norms strikes me as more "rude and entitled" than what the candidate is doing.
– quant
yesterday
I think this is the right answer, but I think my explanation wasn't particularly good, so I've tried to clarify the rationale a bit. @motosubatsu I think your response is a bit arbitrary. Can you point to something other than social norms that would justify the way you're proposing to behave in this scenario?
– quant
yesterday
I think this is the right answer, but I think my explanation wasn't particularly good, so I've tried to clarify the rationale a bit. @motosubatsu I think your response is a bit arbitrary. Can you point to something other than social norms that would justify the way you're proposing to behave in this scenario?
– quant
yesterday
|
show 5 more comments
christen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
christen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
christen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
christen is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to The Workplace Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworkplace.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f126307%2frejected-candidate-showing-up-to-the-office%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
17
Is this a thing that happened?
– TheSoundDefense
Jan 11 at 17:11
2
This seems awfully vague. Depends on details, how the applicant is behaving and their age and sex, location, what is the office like and who are present... Any answer can't be anything but speculation.
– hyde
2 days ago