4 ms·

The email the interviewee sent was very unprofessional. Even without the passive aggressive 'Benefits will be included, right?' it was very unprofessional. To

The email the interviewee sent was very unprofessional. Even without the passive aggressive 'Benefits will be included, right?' it was very unprofessional. To me it would be a big warning flag. But the reply was also a warning sign, you never call out why you reject the person on specifics it never benefits you. If you want to be nice do it verbally and be broad. And the company turn out right, as the interviewee went out and burned the company on twitter because they didn't get the job. And I'd point out, since the article is making this a women's issue, she was rejected by a women.

lovich 10y ago
Considering I've had jobs that only tell me after my first day there that the health insurance wouldn't kick in for 2 months which would trigger the aca fine at that point, I don't think this was an unreasonable request. The person appeared polite in the email based on what's shown in the article here. Personally I wouldn't be insulted if a candidate was completely to the point in an opening question like this. If employers can just post a list of required skills in a matter of fact manner, why can't a prospective employee act the same way for their requirements? Edit:Additionally, your problem with the companies reaction is that they told her their reason? That would be the only positive mark for them in my book. That sort of view would imply discriminating against employees for any sort of illegal or immoral reason would be fine as long as they kept quiet about it
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
chrisbennet 10y ago
It is not "unprofessional". I'm a professional developer and when an employer asks me what I can do for them I don't consider it unprofessional. Likewise, when I ask an employer what they can do for me, it isn't "unprofessional". To think otherwise is to lose sight of the fact that this is a business arrangement; a value for value exchange. Asking the counter party what they are trading for your labor is a "big warning flag" to an employer only if they didn't want a fair exchange of value i.e. "Sorry, we're looking for someone more exploitable."

lovich 10y ago

Considering I've had jobs that only tell me after my first day there that the health insurance wouldn't kick in for 2 months which would trigger the aca fine at that point, I don't think this was an unreasonable request. The person appeared polite in the email based on what's shown in the article here. Personally I wouldn't be insulted if a candidate was completely to the point in an opening question like this. If employers can just post a list of required skills in a matter of fact manner, why can't a prospective employee act the same way for their requirements? Edit:Additionally, your problem with the companies reaction is that they told her their reason? That would be the only positive mark for them in my book. That sort of view would imply discriminating against employees for any sort of illegal or immoral reason would be fine as long as they kept quiet about it

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

chrisbennet 10y ago

It is not "unprofessional". I'm a professional developer and when an employer asks me what I can do for them I don't consider it unprofessional. Likewise, when I ask an employer what they can do for me, it isn't "unprofessional". To think otherwise is to lose sight of the fact that this is a business arrangement; a value for value exchange. Asking the counter party what they are trading for your labor is a "big warning flag" to an employer only if they didn't want a fair exchange of value i.e. "Sorry, we're looking for someone more exploitable."