5 ms·

Totally legal. Your main risk is social opprobrium. There exists a social norm that you not do this, and it may be considered unprofessional behavior by the p

by patio11 12y ago

Totally legal. Your main risk is social opprobrium. There exists a social norm that you not do this, and it may be considered unprofessional behavior by the people attempting to hire you. People do talk, so I'd weigh the possibility of burning those bridges over the relative certainty in the differences between offer Y and offer X. In my younger days, I would have flatly advised against it for mostly karmic reasons, but having seen the general tenor of business relationships and how many companies treat not-yet-signed employees, I am unable to muster any moral outrage against an employee who terminates a negotiation despite that negotiation appearing to be in late stages.

davismwfl 12y ago
My younger self would have said the same thing, that you have a moral obligation once you make a commitment. But having been around quite a while now, I have seen companies retract offers between when it was accepted and when the person was supposed to start, because they "changed their mind", or had a change in circumstances. So I take the opinion now that as long as you are up front and honest it is just a business transaction and the karma balances out by being up front.
- greenyoda 12y ago
  "I have seen companies retract offers between when it was accepted and when the person was supposed to start..." I've also seen companies hire people and then turn around and fire them after a couple of weeks because they "weren't working out" or because "the funding for the job disappeared" or because they had layoffs due to financial difficulties (which they probably could have seen coming at the time they hired the person). "At-will" employment goes both ways. If the company has the right to fire an employee because it's convenient for them (or just because they feel like it), an employee shouldn't feel bad about firing a company for the same reason.
  - rmc 12y ago
    Even in countries without "at will" employment (e.g. Europe), companies can still dump employees. It goes both ways, everywhere.
MarkMc 12y ago
I have to disagree: It may be legal and in your self interest, but I don't think you should reneg on your offer. You should treat others the way you want to be treated, which means honouring the email agreement. And if you do withdraw your offer to company x, don't complain if company y withdraws its offer to you. If you stick with company x then show them the job offer from company y at your next salary review. It is great leverage in negotiating a higher salary.
- barry-cotter 12y ago
  He's not dealing with pre Lou Gerstne IBM, or a Japanese keiretsu. He's dealing with a company that has no loyalty. I appreciate that you may remember a time when company loyalty wasn't the punchline of a joke but noon under 30, probably noone under 40 did.
  - davelnewton 12y ago
    You don't know anything about the company and its "loyalty", you're guessing. (Unless you're not, in which case, you should disclose that you have inside information.)
- chc 12y ago
  It is not usually the employee who sets the deadline on the offer, so I don't believe this moral equivalence is real. If a company does not want this situation to come up, it is at liberty to give a deadline that's long enough for the employee to consider other offers and make an informed decision. A company that attempts to rush an employee to accept an offer before others come in is attempting to exploit the employee's feelings of responsibility to the company's advantage. I do not think people are obligated to allow themselves to be exploited in this way.
  - notahacker 12y ago
    In the absence of any insinuation by the OP that the first company put any pressure on them to accept the offer within any time frame at all it's pretty wild speculation on your part to accuse them of "exploiting" them. (it's just as easy to assume the latter... that the first offer was accepted because it was perfectly reasonable and the second company was slow to make an offer and poor at communicating. If the second company did take a surprisingly long time to make an offer that's actually another variable to take into account; possibly representing organisational problems or a preference for other candidates at their end)

by patio11 12y ago

davismwfl 12y ago

My younger self would have said the same thing, that you have a moral obligation once you make a commitment. But having been around quite a while now, I have seen companies retract offers between when it was accepted and when the person was supposed to start, because they "changed their mind", or had a change in circumstances. So I take the opinion now that as long as you are up front and honest it is just a business transaction and the karma balances out by being up front.

greenyoda 12y ago
"I have seen companies retract offers between when it was accepted and when the person was supposed to start..." I've also seen companies hire people and then turn around and fire them after a couple of weeks because they "weren't working out" or because "the funding for the job disappeared" or because they had layoffs due to financial difficulties (which they probably could have seen coming at the time they hired the person). "At-will" employment goes both ways. If the company has the right to fire an employee because it's convenient for them (or just because they feel like it), an employee shouldn't feel bad about firing a company for the same reason.
- rmc 12y ago
  Even in countries without "at will" employment (e.g. Europe), companies can still dump employees. It goes both ways, everywhere.

MarkMc 12y ago

I have to disagree: It may be legal and in your self interest, but I don't think you should reneg on your offer. You should treat others the way you want to be treated, which means honouring the email agreement. And if you do withdraw your offer to company x, don't complain if company y withdraws its offer to you. If you stick with company x then show them the job offer from company y at your next salary review. It is great leverage in negotiating a higher salary.

barry-cotter 12y ago
He's not dealing with pre Lou Gerstne IBM, or a Japanese keiretsu. He's dealing with a company that has no loyalty. I appreciate that you may remember a time when company loyalty wasn't the punchline of a joke but noon under 30, probably noone under 40 did.
- davelnewton 12y ago
  You don't know anything about the company and its "loyalty", you're guessing. (Unless you're not, in which case, you should disclose that you have inside information.)
chc 12y ago
It is not usually the employee who sets the deadline on the offer, so I don't believe this moral equivalence is real. If a company does not want this situation to come up, it is at liberty to give a deadline that's long enough for the employee to consider other offers and make an informed decision. A company that attempts to rush an employee to accept an offer before others come in is attempting to exploit the employee's feelings of responsibility to the company's advantage. I do not think people are obligated to allow themselves to be exploited in this way.
- notahacker 12y ago
  In the absence of any insinuation by the OP that the first company put any pressure on them to accept the offer within any time frame at all it's pretty wild speculation on your part to accuse them of "exploiting" them. (it's just as easy to assume the latter... that the first offer was accepted because it was perfectly reasonable and the second company was slow to make an offer and poor at communicating. If the second company did take a surprisingly long time to make an offer that's actually another variable to take into account; possibly representing organisational problems or a preference for other candidates at their end)