canadian_critic

It's politeness. Something that North America is so bloody superficial over and people like you obviously missed out on that during your childhood.

It's never been so easy to send a mass mailing to unsuccessful candidates via their email addresses (BCC so their emails are invisible to others). Just no excuse.

People don't expect Canadians to be impressed with their accents, although I find many are! But people aren't about to let essential politeness go out the flipping window just because they find themselves in a place that is completely backward when it comes to respecting others. The only politeness here is completely meaningless and spineless. "Oh thank you so much" basically means "piss off you creep". Well perhaps more in my case but Canada is ever bit as superficial as US.

Steve_P

If what you've written in the last two posts is any indication of your character I don't know why you were surprised.

Alan2005

Apparently sending an email like that is impossibly difficult for employers here.

canadian_critic

Not sure whether there's a technical or legal reason why they cannot, but I think it's more about "cannot be bothered" than cannot do it. I always approached unsuccessful candidates when I was in a hiring position, because I felt feedback would help them, and also many were of great interest and picked to the post by someone slightly better. However I did get some very angry responses, hardly reflecting on the efforts I'd gone to, in dealing with unsuccessful candidates personally. This whole "we'll contact you if interested" is probably fuelled by companies and candidates alike.

johnh009

I think this is the worst when companies go through the interview process, just to make it look democratic, when a job has been spoken for. Unfortunately, there is not much you can do about this. Like I said earlier, it is a numbers game sometimes. I have been for interviews and it has been blatantly obvious that they have never even read my resume/CV.

I think it is better for both parties if they give candidates a phone interview first. I have been down this route a number of times in the UK and it can save a lot of time wasting.

Aviator

The flip side, businesses are being accused of discrimination by not interviewing, some are also wary of what they put in writing, hence some won't give references anymore. There are now even illegal interview questions! Sure some employers carried it too far with reasons for firing and not hiring, but it seems to have swung too far the other way now.

Even when there is no foundation in a discrimination claim, it costs time and money to address it and attend hearings, with little or no chance of recovering those costs.

Then there are employees who show up for work when it suits them, quit with no notice, accept a job, don't show up and then when the employer phones, they got another job and did not let the employer know.

There are as many bloody rude employees/candidates out there as there are employers, if not more.

Canadian's accept the way things are done, if immigrants don't want to, become an employer and change it!

R I C H

From an employers perspective...

There are currently over 120 vacancies where I work, with 4 HR advisors assigned to the different business divisions, and responsible for handling recruitment issues (as well as their daily workload associated with 2,000+ employees).

Each job will attract as many as 100 candidates, with a rough average of 50. Resumes come in by mail, email, on USB sticks, CD roms, all manner of formats. It doesn't matter what's stipulated or requested, candidates ignore it and think they know best, or feel they are differentiating themselves by doing something they think is better in some way or another.

HR's policies for handling applications is dictated by union rules, and essentially they're just a middle man handling the applications, collecting and filing them, then passing them on to the hiring manager once the application date has closed.

Last month I read over 200 resumes for a single position. The paperwork process required to justify a shortlist selection to the union, get union and then HR approval for interview questions and/or exercise, and then book out 2 days for the shortlisted interviewees, then further documentation for the union and HR to justify the final selection, means I just don't have the time for the administrative effort required to respond to those applicants that have been rejected. The policy concerning contact only being made to selected candidates is very clear at the application stage, so I think it's perfectly fair and transparent.

All this is of course after 6 months of protracted negotiations with the union concerning the pay scale, duties and responsibilities associated with the role, numerous hours spent in job evaluation committee meetings and budget planning meetings. The whole process is enormously time consuming and at some point you have to decide where your time's best spent.

Oink

In my brief dalliance with corporate world I received many cv/resumes for posted jobs but many for unsolicited. Ninety nine percent of them I chucked straight in the bin and I certainly couldn't be arsed to write a rejection letter/email. Now in back in the Super Mario World I'm in now, we're very polite, will write a long letter plus a personal phone call from the hiring committee chair, department head and maybe some of the committee as well, detailing why we didn't hire them and wishing them all the best.

johnh009

I think this is why many companies choose to use agencies to do the screening for them. Not sure how this fits in with union polices though.

ann m

I now work in Admin in HR (commence the flaming session) and what I see echos much of what R I C H has said above.

We have over 2000 employees and 4 HR recruiters. They work flat out sifting and sorting an average of 70 applications per post, interviewing for days on end, back to back, and then have to sort through references, etc, and even chase up people who said they did want the job (). Add in the union meetings (and stipulations), offer-letter meetings, exit-interview meetings, and other random miscelleneous stuff, and they have no time to fart.

I'm not making any excuses, and yes, we need more staff - but they simply do not have the time to collate email addresses and write to every single applicant and thank them for their interest. And as an aside, and I was shocked by this - they do also do not routinely contact internal applicants either. Just like R I C H says, our job information expressly tells applicants that if we want to interview them, they will be contacted within 28 days. It's pretty clear. Tough - but clear.

We also don't state salaries either - but when you apply you will be asked what you want. I know that applicants who are aiming too high are culled at the first round. The union's won't pay them that much.

I suppose, compared to a small more personal company, we appear difficult to get into - we appear impersonal - and we seem a vast organisation. But we are very welcoming and personal once you are through the door - and we have hundreds of long term and happy employees.... And hundreds leaving and retiring each year too, thank goodness

Juliet C

What I find hard to comprehend is that companies Lrge and Sml spends hundreds and thousand of pounds trying to build relationships with their current and potential customers yet cannot be bothered to send a simple email thanking applicants for their response even if that person is not successfull, these applicants are potential/current customers, work colleagues or future bosses. Ideally as a marketer I want EVERY SINGLE interaction between the outside world and the company I own or work for has to be a positive experience, whether they are speaking to HR, Sales, Admin or the cleaning staff. I know in the real world this does not happen but surely its something we should all aim for.

Also surely if you are receiving 100's of CV's for each position, some of these may have potential to work for you in the future so why not keep them on file to use and save the cost of advertising/agencies??? some larger companies do this already, you apply on-line and when a post opens up that suits your profile you are sent a email inviting you to apply, I appreciate this is probably not suitable for the roles talked about on here but I thought worth throwing it in

Any thoughts on this appreciated.....

ExKiwilass

Yeah, but again, not everyone takes it personally that they don't get a reply. I certainly don't and I bet I'm not the only one...don't care really. Having said that, if someone did take the time to say "hey, thanks for replying" it does feel warm & fuzzy.

Maybe I should go into HR ...tee hee

sonlymewalter

And therin is the key and some companies/recruitment people are too blinkered to see

It's true we can't please all of the people all of the time however by responding and showing respect means the company has the edge and is leading by example.

Companies & HR departments should tailor their recruitment process and responses to the individual circumstances and in today's technological arena there is no reason no to be abe to manage the recruitment process accordingly.

matt_t

I think you misunderstood, I was agreeing that it's a typical "human resources" attitude where people in the administration/recruiting role for that specific company are probably on a power trip, therefore thinking they don't have to give them them the polite "you were unsuccessful email" or just cannot be bothered. Thats the impression I get anyway.

ann m

We do this - and sometimes, if someone was not successful, or just missed out on one role - they are remembered for another that comes up.

See my post above. No power trips that I have seen. No time to fart. Maybe companies need to invest in yet another admin person to simply reply to all the unsuccessful applicants? Is the cost justified under "marketing"? There's another job right there ...