Here’s a story from the academic world in which a woman received an offer for a tenure track position, and replied with the following email:
The college replied as follows:
TLDR: She replied to the offer by attempting to negotiate for better pay and various benefits, and they replied by rescinding the job offer.
People in academia are generally up in arms about this, though this isn’t universal. Some complain, for example, that her email showed an entitled attitude that justified the rescinsion. (I am not sure that is a word but it should be.) A reply to that argument is that to think of negotiation attempts as evincing a kind of “attitude” is to misunderstand the practice of negotiation completely. If you don’t want to negotiate, just don’t negotiate, stand on your original offer, and let the candidate take or leave it. No harm no foul as they say.
A petition to the American Philosophical Association has even been started, asking the APA to weigh in against the college and amend their handbook to deal with situations like this. About a hundred signatures at this moment, I don’t know if it will go anywhere but it’s all over my facebook feed today.
Well, I’m curious what you guys think. I’m particularly curious how this would be viewed “in the real world (i.e. outside the academy).” How would this rescinding of the offer be viewed? Business as usual? Unusual but totally justifiable? Okay but stupid? Positively unethical? What do you think?
And whatever the answer is to the question of how it would be viewed, how should it be viewed?