In the US? Liability. That's why this doesn't happen. Actually having to tell someone "we're not hiring you," regardless of polite spin, puts you in the crossha

In the US? Liability. That's why this doesn't happen. Actually having to tell someone "we're not hiring you," regardless of polite spin, puts you in the crosshairs of a lawyer. Much like discussing former employees in my "right-to-work" state. "Yes, she did work here from P to Q. No we can not discuss her work performance." Doesn't matter if she was the model employee or an incompetent moron, saying anything is a potential liability. If you express your opinion that she was that incompetent moron, you're stifling her ability to find work and a jury of her peers will find against you, the former employer. So back to the topic at hand. Say you get the generic "not hiring you" email. Are you going to leave it at that? If so, great, everyone can move on. Or are you going to try to appeal to the HR staffer's humanity and harass them with questions like "why not?" And then some candidate gets all pissy because "that's not what the job ad said!" and lawyers. So we send the email from a generic address that ignores replies ... and someone fouls up and sends it to all current candidates. Should companies adopt a "we're not hiring you" generic message to send out and just never reply to replies? Sure. I'd love that. It's easier to ignore people.