Three articles on dangers on the way to being hired have
come out. The first was from top employment
writer Liz Ryan of Forbes, this past
weekend. Titled “Ten Ways Lousy
Recruiters Use Fear To Keep Job-Seekers In Line,” it reports on the problem of
headhunters, who work in the gaps between employers and the prospective employed,
acting as if they have all the power in relationships with the latter. It outlines ways that some of these
recruiters intimidate those looking to be hired, seeking “to keep candidates
feeling fearful and desperate,” by insisting on collecting “personal financial
information,” threatening to drop them if they don’t cooperate with
unreasonable requests, telling them their credentials are commonplace and
marginal, and pushing them to accept any offers immediately. Ryan points out that top-flight candidates
are rarely common, even in an employer’s market, and that even bad headhunters
would not submit anyone for positions for which they were not solidly
qualified.
Second, last month and also by Ryan, addressed companies
bringing in people for job interviews only to collect information that would
help them solve problems. That is a common
potential concern, as answers to questions assessing applicants’ skills may
reveal ways of doing things better than the organization has known previously,
and is hard to completely avoid. Yet
there is a point at which such gathering becomes not only primary but even the exclusive
reason for the interview. Per Ryan, that
may have been reached if “your interviewer has very detailed questions for you,
and takes notes on everything you say” but will not share much about their own situation,
if queries about the rest of the hiring process and the job itself elicit no
substance, and if the interviewer generally seem to be more interested in the
candidate’s specific methodology than in how they might fit in. She suggested, logically enough, that someone
being treated as a consultant should act like one, giving only general ideas
and even offering a contract.
Third, by J.T. O’Donnell in Inc. in March, dealt with an “ugly recruiting tactic,” also called
“the exploding offer,” one which expires in 48 hours or less. (I’m not sure that two days is an
insufficient time, but requiring an answer sooner than the end of the next
business day would clearly qualify.)
O’Donnell saw these short deadlines as a pure pressure tactic,
indicating not only an urgent need but fear that longer amounts of time would
precipitate losing the potential employee.
She advised against that device, not only since it could encourage
workers to leave later, but would cause “employer shaming” on online
forums.
How can jobseekers defend themselves against measures like
these? One way, described by Ryan on
October 30th, is being willing to leave a job interview in
progress. That may seem taboo to people
in a process where the other side is known to hold most or even all of the
cards, but it’s not as simple as that. Sometimes
in these meetings things can happen that mean the end of any future there. They would include a long impersonal set of
interview questions followed by a refusal to talk about the job itself; a
bait-and-switch replacement of the position with something less desirable; a
requirement to pay for office equipment, office supplies, or the likes of
background checks or drug testing; a need to sell products to friends and
family members; or a need to work unpaid for a day or more as part of the
hiring process. If such information
comes to light, Ryan advocated politely standing up and saying something like
“it’s been wonderful to meet you, but I’m very conscious of the demands on your
time and it’s clear we don’t have a good match.
I’ll get going now, and let you get on with your day. Thanks very much for your time!”
As I have written before, the hiring process will always be an
adversarial situation where each side tries to get the other to make
mistakes. New ideas there, and revived
old ones, pop up all the time. And, despite
the permanent jobs crisis, a jobseeker is not, as Ryan put it, “a desperate
beggar,” but has personal and professional value along with choices. That thread runs through this entire
post. If you are looking for work, don’t
let yourself be conned out of that.
No comments:
Post a Comment