If they had one permanent slot and one contractor slot, could be. We have very distinct new college grad and experienced openings, so having different buckets is a possibility. It might even not be that there was someone they liked better, it might be that the didn’t want to risk the permanent slot on an NCG. That’s not a decision that would be made in real time, so it explains the difference in jobs between the interviews.
But that is putting a better face on it than it deserves - though it is possible.
Is it common for a month to elapse between a first and second interview in this industry?
Because, if not, the company was all ready rejected by at least one, and probably two better candidates.
You do not get second interview unless you are qualified, or at least one of the best qualified, for the job. If you are the preferred candidate, the second interview comes within a week or two; if the second interview comes after a month, it’s because the preferred candidate did not work out - failed the drug test, couldn’t provide a convincing reference, or walked away after company low-balled.
Between the first and second interview, there was a quite lengthy reference checking process.
On July 8, the company requested that I provide 5 references through a third party email reference survey. The way it worked was I had to enter the email addresses and other personal information of at least 5 references. The survey was then sent to each reference. Once all of the references had completed the survey, the results were sent to the company.
It wasn’t until a couple of weeks after July 8 before all of my references had completed the survey. There were delays attributed to contacting my references to ask for their permission and in following up with a few of them to bug them to complete the survey.
A week or so after the survey results were in I had my second interview. I do think that there was at least one other candidate to get a second interview. When i was given the shop tour as part of the second interview, a labourer remarked to the hiring manager “another one ?!” as the hiring manager and I passed him by.
That reference checking is new to me, so I retract my comments. Maybe. But if even the floor personnel think there are a lot of candidates, the recruitment practices are … weak.
It’s certainly possible that other candidates went through the reference checking process quicker and so received second interviews before me, putting them in a position to reject low ball offers before me.
What seems odd to me is why the company would spend so much time on me and then move on the moment I tried to negotiate salary. Surely they could have replied and said $37.50/hour was too high before proposing their own counter offer.
Then again I feel the hiring manager was thoroughly unhappy that I didn’t accept $30/hour right away. When he told me to email me him my counter rather than call him with it, I got the impression that he didn’t want to tell me over the phone that they were moving on to different candidates.
It seems there has been one or two posts (from people in the industry) that have suggested that perhaps this manager didn’t have the power you or others were ascribing to him and that this may have been an honest mistake and not the work of a company intentionally low balling people.
When I first started reading the thread I was with the “good for you for turning it down”, but now I’m not so sure.
The manager himself is probably under pressure. I assume the money isn’t coming from his pocket (although maybe his budget) - so he probably wants to give as much as possible.
The fact that you seemed to think reporting him was a reasonable response makes me think you might not be viewing this situation objectively. I’m not saying this to be a dick. I’d be upset too, but sometimes things are just honest mistakes.
Sometimes companies have ridiculous constraints or rules put on them that can make the actions they take look illogical (which they can be as a whole), but if you try and understand why those rules exist in the first place - it can help you understand how and why these things come up (when they do in the future).
You should never hang up the phone on someone unless you have a really good reason. Don’t burn bridges and try to be friendly with those in the industry (and well everyone in general) - you never know when it will come in handy.
Or no candidates. Maybe he needed someone but TPTB said “only if you can get someone for $30 / hour and no benefits.” Job openings get yanked during the interview process all the time.
However you should feel good about one thing - if there are lots of people out there looking for a job, you wound up ahead of all of them for this one. In bad economies companies take forever to make up their minds, often with more then two interviews. This according to a friend who is a headhunter, and who was very frustrated during the recession about how long it took for her client companies to make up their minds.
[QUOTE=DataX]
It seems there has been one or two posts (from people in the industry) that have suggested that perhaps this manager didn’t have the power you or others were ascribing to him and that this may have been an honest mistake and not the work of a company intentionally low balling people.
[/QUOTE]
In my experience no first level manager has the power to set a salary. The potential for shady dealings should be obvious. I trust the question about reporting him was made in the heat of anger - it would not even be close to being a good idea.
No, not at all. Under Anglo-Canadian common law, an employee cannot be forced to work - that would be involuntary servitude. An employee can walk at any time. May lose some pay as a result, but that’s generally it.
The employer, on the other hand, has to either have cause to dismiss, based on misconduct by the employee, or must give the employer reasonable notice or pay in lieu. Most employment standards laws set the minimum notice period at two weeks. An employee has to have worked for a certain period with that employer to be entitled to notice.
Don’t know the answer to that. I would assume, though, that most people don’t know the details of employment law until they bump against it personally.
I do not believe your experience is the norm. I have in my life received a handful of job offers and every single one came from HR. A hiring manager may say something like, “I’m going to recommend you” but I’ve never received an offer or negotiated with the hiring manager.
And my experience is just the opposite: I’ve never been hired by HR, but by the person responsible for the interviews. When I’ve been involved in hiring, the offer to the new hire goes out from the lead person on the hiring committee.
I really don’t think it’s possible to generalise. Different workplaces and industries will all have different approaches.
As a counterpoint, I’ve never negotiated with HR. They’ve set up interviews, checked references, and the like, and then afterwards do the paperwork to come aboard, but all of the actual offer process has been with the hiring manager.
Probably it depends on industry, or the size/politics of the company.
You’re assuming they wanted to go to the effort. You probably appeared somewhat hostile to them by not falling in line with their wishes. That probably became a strike against you. Add that to your demand for 37.50/hr, which became the second strike. They just did what was reasonable for them, they went to someone with fewer strikes thinking that this many headaches so far would only equal more in the future.
As you said, it’s not a job seekers market there. That means you have to do a bit of sucking it in to get a job. The good news, you’re free to get another job, and probably, the market will change in the future.
I have many years of experience contracting. The OP was wise not to except their offer, because they were setting the OP for further abuse. Once they say “no benefits”, and if you accept that, then it left it open to lower the rate. If you accept that, then the next thing would be an even lower rate perhaps appearing in the first paycheck. I never, and I repeat, never regretted turning down a job that didn’t look right or they were playing games like they were with the OP. How you are treated from the start should be the best foot forward the company can show, because it generally gets worse after you start the job. This company was starting out with terrible treatment.
Their industry and how tight the job market has nothing to do with how management handled it. I don’t buy the “HR said…” stuff, because HR works for management at the company. They could have gotten approval from everyone BEFORE they went forward so they presented an acceptable offer. I don’t care how bad the industry might be, it wasn’t bad enough that overnight they had to lower the OP’s pay by $5.00 an hour ($10K a year).
Because I’ve seen plenty of companies that try to hire people, jerk around the candidates, and end up not being able to fill the position even after a massive wasted effort by a dozen people.
The most charitable interpretation of the company’s behavior is that the original job listing was for an experienced candidate, they interview the new college grad and decided he wasn’t a fit for the original listing but wanted to hire him for a more junior position. Except to turn around and try to lower the salary on him after offering him the “contract” position is a dick move. The offer to make a counter-offer probably wasn’t a real offer, it was a way of saying take it or leave it.
And I’ll add that in my experience HR has very little to do with hiring candidates, other than filling out the paperwork and making sure the hiring manager complies with company policy. How exactly is the HR drone supposed to know which candidates can actually do the job? If you’re hiring teams of unskilled or semi-skilled workers then I guess I can see it.
You just need to prepare, you can do all this verbally. You have a range of what you would accept and conditions. I’ve done this with contracts for years and never felt I was at a loss of what to ask for, but it’s because I was prepared. I knew the market, I knew what other contracts were offering and the situation with their company. I believe waiting to get back to them causes them to look for someone else as backup and the time factor to give an answer on the phone is important.
I always looked for something better, did my home work, and I never ended up with a shitty job. If you had shitty jobs, it might be because you were willing to put up with abuse like this. I wouldn’t brag about having held a shitty job and it isn’t a badge of courage, because while you were working a shitty job many people were not. It could have been you working in a better job too, but you took a bad situation. Here the OP is not even employed there yet, and already they are totally screwing with pay and benefits in a dramatic way. It’s a total red flag and to ignore that and criticize the OP for not accepting it is totally misguided.
If the OP should be paid, for example, $35.00 or $37.50 an hour, and took it for $30.00 an hour and this is assuming they didn’t lower it to $25.00 an hour when the first paycheck arrives, the OP is going to have a very hard time taking another job for $35.00 an hour or more if they aren’t being currently paid at that level. The OP can’t say, “I’m only making $25.00 an hour without any benefits because it’s a shitty job and they got my in a weak moment, but I’m really worth more…”. No you aren’t. If you were, you would have been paid more and accepted a job for higher pay, because that’s how they are going to look at it. They will know because they do background checks which can involve asking for a recent paycheck stub, so it isn’t easy to hide previous income.