| ▲ | kridsdale1 8 hours ago |
| I insulted him in my mandatory Exit Interview form from HR when I resigned. It had no impact of recruiters trying to win me back since then. |
|
| ▲ | simmerup 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Until the day when Zuckerberg meets you, and his Ray Ban glasses profile your face and pull up that comment on your exit interview as pertinent information. His eyes glaze over and he just reads that instead in his corner vision instead of listening to
you, and you get snubbed forever more |
| |
| ▲ | seanp2k2 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | As if you would ever be afforded an audience in the first place. | | |
| ▲ | simmerup 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | True, was thinking while writing that that was the most unlikely thing in the story which is wild |
|
|
|
| ▲ | BeetleB 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > I insulted him in my mandatory Exit Interview form from HR when I resigned. How can they legally mandate an exit interview when you resigned? Is it part of the employment contract? What would have happened if you showed them the finger and not participated? |
| |
|
| ▲ | gambiting 7 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| In my experience at other companies recruiters and pretty much no one else has any idea that someone has been blacklisted, until you do all of your interviews and tell HR to hire that person and that's when they tell you the person is on some kind of shit list and we can't hire them. That was an awkward conversation with someone who was basically told we'll be making an offer soon. |
| |
| ▲ | mancerayder 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | What is the blacklist and is it company-specific? I'd be more concerned about industry-wide blacklisting. | | |
| ▲ | gambiting 6 hours ago | parent [-] | | No it was company specific. Basically that person used to work for our company, years prior, in a different office in a different country. But I also had a different situation where we also decided to hire someone, only to find out that we can't because he's been let go from another company owned by our parent company, and his severance agreement said he can't work for the same group of companies for 12 months. I think he was genuinely unaware that we're part of the same group(if was a huge corporation) and it just never came up in any conversation until HR tried to put together paperwork for him. |
| |
| ▲ | balamatom 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Huh. What do you reckon would have happened if you'd hired them anyway? | | |
| ▲ | computably 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | What? Hiring is a contract between employer (company entity) and employee. No individual "you" can hire anybody except through the company's official process. If HR says "no we won't extend an offer," a lowly HM extending an offer would be clear-cut fraud. | | |
| ▲ | jjmarr 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Managers usually have the authority to bind the company to an employment contract. Even if they don't, the rule of "apparent authority" often means the employee can still sue. In the USA this is mostly theoretical since HR could immediately fire the employee due to at-will employment. But in Canada, it's a much bigger issue due to labour protections. e.g. Many managers at American multinationals gave assurances over email to employees about work-from-home arrangements. Then the company does a huge RTO push. When the employee refuses, HR discovers they can't fire the employee without a hefty buyout. Best not to give assurances if you're managing a multinational team. | | |
| ▲ | gambiting 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | >>Managers usually have the authority to bind the company to an employment contract Is that an American thing? I've been a manager for years and never heard of that happening. I didn't even know how much the people I managed were paid. | | |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | storus 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Narcissists often want to get the ones that ran away back to properly destroy them. |
|
| ▲ | LightBug1 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Should have framed it. Good job. |
