OT: Job offer pulled as a result of salary negotiation
Trying to take advantage of the multitude of expertise from the users of the site, especially those in hiring positions and/or HR to see if there is any experience with this kind of thing.
Disclaimer: job is a union position with no room to negotiate advancement beyond the union-negotiated contract pay step schedule. It is possible, however, to be placed at different levels when hired.
Long story longer: I applied for a position, went though 2 rounds of interviews and was clearly the #1 candidate from the start and throughout the process. Ref. checks and Xscripts already done (no issues there). I get a call from the HR director who offers the position with the starting salary and wants 48hrs for me to respond. I am pretty content with the job I have (wasn't even looking for a new position but was asked by an acquaintance to apply to the new position). I ask about flexibility re: starting salary and she mentions that in some circumstances she could get approval but likely not in this case. She ends an email later that night reiterating the offer. I respond to the email explaining my additional years of unique experience and how I'm interested in the position but would like consideration for those additional years beyond their initial offer. I basically ask for 13-15% more than what they offered which I thought left a decent window to meet somewhere in the middle.
Maybe I was to forward/firm in the email, but HR director lady responds to me by rescinding the offer b/c they "have a deliberate recuitment and selection process and we would not want to be put in a situation or have you in a situation where you are unhappy with your employment opportunity." I was pretty shocked. At worst, I thought she'd just say,"no, we can't do that please have your decision re: the original offer by the agreed upon timeline."
Now, the main person who actually interviewed me (twice) and made the decision to select me, set up interviews, call my references, check all my documents, etc. was pretty shocked that the HR person essentially trumped her and the entire hiring process. Everything I've seen on the web, reddit, some others I know were pretty confused too. The more I think about it, I'm starting to consider it pretty unprofessional behavior on the HR director's part to rescind an offer just b/c I attempted to negotial starting salary placement, but moreso that she singlehandedly trumped the entire hiring process at this place. I mean, instead of all these questions the committee asked me across 2 rounds of interviews, they could have just cut to the chase and asked me if I'd take $XX,000 dollars with no questions asked. What a complete waste of time.
I guess my questions are, 1) any experiece with salary negotiation resulting in pulled offers of employment? 2) anyone in hiring/HR have any explanation for this? 3) any recommendation about how I should follow up?
I have no criminal history, all references were checked, called and verified prior to the HR office taking over the process. I'm kind of at a loss, but it's really no big deal b/c like I said I am pretty content with my current position. Everything I've heard/read is that you should always negotiate starting salary in a professional manner, stating the reasons for your worth to the company and your excitement for the position, which I thought is what I did. Thanks in advance for indulging in the discussion.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
leave the opinions out of this. MGoBlog is great because it lacks the fighting about this kind of stuff.
I heard a story from a recruiter a little while back about a younger, well-credentialed attorney who the recruiter presented for a general counsel position (for non-lawyers, a general counsel is the lead attorney and often sits on the executive management committee). The attorney did very well during his interviews and was offered the position, despite his relative youth. However, the attorney then proceeded to make the dumbest interviewing move I've ever heard and he hired an employment attorney to represent him during salary negotiations. The employment attorney contacted all the parties at the hiring company to inform them that they were not to speak directly to would-be general counsel any more and that all communications and negotiations would now flow through him. Upon receiving that note, the company promptly revoked their offer and hired the #2 candidate.
I still can't believe a guy good enough to be hired for a position that high up would be that stupid.
Like you said, youth!
I've done this before. (Passed on candidate who hired a lawyer).
I've noticed a trend in the last 30 years,. Everyone hires a lawyer to look at their contract. Lawyers then render their opinion, which is very rarely contributory, and more often seen by the employer as an excuse to justify the lawyers fee to the potential employee.
If a candidate is too stupid to understand a contract, and blindly relies on an lawyer to do his bidding, then I move on. I'll take the person who looks me in the eye, shakes my hand, and wants to get to work. Most contracts are not worth the paper on which they are printed, much less the fees associated with their derivation.
About 4 years ago... I had a college grad take an entry level job. The next morning after receiving his offer letter, I got a call from his dad to negotiate on his behalf. I don't think he was a lawyer, more likely a helicopter parent.
I shit you not.
You forgot the /s right?
Happened to me too. "Dad" started negotiating on behalf of his son about 2/3 of the way into the process. Needless-to-say that represented the end of the negotiations on my end and I was happy to inform both dad & his son that I had zero point zero interest in hiring anybody that wanted me to speak to his father on his behalf.
I thought I was the outlier. Good to know there are other insane parents besides the one I had to deal with. Or maybe it was the same guy......
So when you ended negotiations, did any of your parties take the feedback to heart?
In my case, when I pulled the offer, the dad was offended and called ME unprofessional and unreasonable. I didn't take the bait but wanted to tell dad that his kid was a grown up now and both of you are exhibiting incredibly poor judgement.
Great story. You must have gotten a lot of laughs out of that!!
I was in HR for about 13 years, working mostly in large companies and with management types. More recently, I took a new job out in one of the field locations. There were a good number of college students and entry-level positions. I couldn't believe how many spouses and parents of our employees called or stopped in to talk about a situation their spouse or child had gotten into. Pay, discipline issues, work relationship problems, other random complaints... blew my mind!!!
So I take it you wrote the context yourself then, not a lawyer, right? Because otherwise, if we're going to apply your own standard consistently, this would make you stupid.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I'm a lawyer. Of course I don't think consulting a lawyer is stupid, especially for a position with that kind of compensation/responsibility. However, having your attorney abruptly cut off communication between you and your future colleagues is absolutely idiotic. Formally bringing lawyers into the mix almost invariable makes everyone more defensive and here it turned the situation from a friendly discussion into a polarizing negotiation.
What he should've done was consult with the lawyer behind the scenes, without even mentioning that he retained counsel. There was no need for the company to know the lawyer even existed.
I bet you are a great lawyer! I agree with you completely. That's exactly the way it should be handled.
Unfortunately, the majority of candidates today announce that they are forwarding the draft contract to their lawyer as if they are firing off a warning shot. They then come back with a laundry list of requests, most of which are trivial.
When I decide to hire a new associate/partner, my first concern is how they will perform in ther role. The close second is how they will represent themselves and the partnership. Turning "a friendly discussion into a polarizing negotiation" is a well put example of not representing yourself well.
I agree it should be behind the scenes. What blue marrow wrote that I was responding to was this:
"If a candidate is too stupid to understand a contract, and blindly relies on an lawyer to do his bidding, then I move on. I'll take the person who looks me in the eye, shakes my hand, and wants to get to work. Most contracts are not worth the paper on which they are printed, much less the fees associated with their derivation."
That's quite a double standard since any competent company will either: 1) have an attorney draft all contracts, 2) at least consult an attorney if they write the contract, or 3) use boilerplate written by an attorney.
So for him to turn around and say that a prospective employee is "stupid" for also wanting the consultation of an attorney relative to a contract is quite ridiculous.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Never worked for a union so I can't respond with anything from a micro level. From a macro level I will agree with the majority that you are better off avoiding this company.
If you still have some hunger or want some type of closure (or ego boost?, never a bad thing) I would call a few recruiters to gauge your market value. You might just find a few great opportunities out there at that 15% raise range.
Good luck, keep us posted.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
It is very unusual, but I've rescinded a few offers to candiates after learning about issues that came up after the background check and/or references were completed. These tended to be incidences where the candidate falsified a record or lied on their employment application. Salary negotiation is fairly routine and even if we've already told a candidate this is our best offer, we wouldn't rescind the offer unless there was something else that made us uncomfortable with ultimately hiring the person. I'd probably recommend following up with the hiring manager and see if they can share anything beyond what you've been told.
"These tended to be incidences where the candidate falsified a record or lied on their employment application." Any interesting examples? Are we talking stretching the truth or outright lies?
Another possibility to consider:
If you were clearly the number one cadidate by all metrics, maybe the number two choice, or someone on a tier of number two choices, has connections to those making the decision of whom to hire.
They could not pass over you unless you declined, or "negotiated yourself out of contention."
My bet is that you were either not as competitive as you believe (no offense), or (more likely) someone (not necessarily the HR contact) used your very reasonble sounding negotiations as an excuse to move on to someone else less qualified, but more desired by someone........for whatever reason....
Those possibilities are endless. Happens every day.
I think this might be the closest to the truth, along with the union related issues that the HR person just didn't want to personally deal with.
I am sure there were at least 2-3 other candidates who would be more than adequate in the position, but it is still frustrating that they basically pulled the offer assuming they can just get their 2nd choice for what amounts to a difference of 5-8k/year. We're not talking stock options and 6 figures here.
"We're not talking stock options and 6 figures here." Right, but we're also not talking about working for Apple or Google. We're talking about a school system, where 5 to 8k/year really does matter. My read of this thread is that you have your mind so rigidly set to uphold and bolster your side that you end up using some questionable logic and even making some pretty rediculous comparisons.
It doesnt matter who was right and who was wrong. It's probably accurate to say you both were both. All that matters is that you learn from it.
If they are actually professional and want to hire him, they will just say:
"We're sorry, the offer is what it is and we can't go higher. Please let us know in X hours".
To just pull the offer because he asked for an extra 5-8K tells you that either:
A) They didn't really want him very badly
B) Their financial situation is dire
C) They keep their pursestrings so tight that future raises aren't going to happen.
All 3 of those things add up to indicate that taking the job would probably be a bad idea. If they really wanted to hire him, this wouldn't be how they woudl be acting.
Plus: don't negotiate over email, gives the power back to the other party
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I don't have much to add to the previous comments, but your question reminded me of an episode that got a fair amount of press in higher ed circles last year: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/03/13/lost-faculty-job-offer-r…
As you can tell, this case was unusual enought to warrant several articles and robust online debate. My position is similar to what you stated above: you would think at the very least they would say no to your requests/demands and then give you a chance to accept or decline the offer.
I saw that all, and it honestly muddied by google search b/c she's in higher ed and I'm in secondary ed. plus, lots of female-pay related issues in that case that don't apply to me.
That person made ridiculous demands given the type of institution she received the offer from - a small liberal arts college without a lot of money to spend. A tenure-track philosophy position?! Count your lucky stars and take the damn job. She acted as if she was the cream of the recent philosophy PhD crop, which she clearly wasn't given where the offer came from. Where did her sense of entitlement come from? From being a philosophy graduate student???
Nothing about that email conveyed a sense of entitelment - quite the opposite. It was entirely normal and several of the things involved are more than reasonable on their face - things like maternity leave. Rescinding a job offer over an email like that is really disgusting.
If I'm on a hiring committee, and we provide a nonnegotiable offer, coming back with a huge counteroffer might be enough to cause me to reconsider whether the candidate is the right fit for the position. It would obviously depend on the job, the offer, and the candidate.
It sounds like the counteroffer was made in good faith--i.e., you had compelling reasons to feel like you were worth more, and have a good enough job that you're not going to settle for less than market. You made your play; it failed. No big deal.
From the HR perspective... they should at least give the candidate a reason for pulling the offer... more than just a generic non-answer.
Admittedly, 15% over offer is a fairly high ask... but certainly not so high that responding in an unprofessional manner (as the HR person did here) is called for.
I've had the same passive/aggressive HR bullshit played on me before too. Like you said, you were just negotiating -- HR went to an extreme stretch of deductive reasoning with the you won't be happy here then.
It happens.
I was pissed for a long time too. You mind your Ps & Qs through the whole process and someone acts like that? But then I realized the HR person could give two shits about me being pissed -- so why am I wasting time and energy on this?! It's only affecting me!
If I know my company can't match your $$$ demands and I'm also aware that you are leaving a current employer for us, I would rescind the offer. I would not want someone who will only be with us short term until a better paying job comes along.
That was my thinking as well. If I make an offer to someone leaving a job I know they liked and their salary requirements are that I cant meet I would likewise be very concerned they would only be with us until a better payiing job came along.
I've never accepted a counter... if you do, someone, and it may not be in your immediate org chart, will always question your loyalty.
Best to always take care of your staff in the first place (not saying you don't per se; just in general).
I'm surprised at a couple things that happened: First, I'm surprised to hear of an offer pulled outright so late in the game, from (as you assert) the most qualified candidate. Secondly, i'm surprised any individual in HR could have the authority to suddenly hijack the hiring process, and trump the persons responsible, based solely on routine salary negotiation, not for any HR related issue like discipline, criminal record, or poor references.
This may not be a systemic issue at the company, it sounds more like a petty individual on a power trip. HR people can be odd in the first place, but add in what I remember of many Union characters in positions of authority, and you likely crossed paths with a tenured little bitch with a Nero complex who knows full well they'll never be disciplined for any trouble they greatly desire causing.
Can't blame you for trying to make sense of the issue, I would, but it's not you, it's definitely them. Be glad organizational problems, and problem individuals like the HR person you encountered, are in your rear-view.
Whats with all the HR department butthurt on the board tonight?
There are idiots in every field... HR is one of them... but not the exclusive domain for fools with power-trips.
In my experience HR isn't a domain for folls with power trips... it's the "High School Guidance" counselor of positions - largely filled by pointless inept incomptents.
As a small business owner, I would never have handled this situation like the HR person did. In the end, it's probably good that you did not get the job and don't take it too hard. I personally would have negotiated the salary or made it clear there just wasn't any room to go higher. I have found being up front and brutally honest is the best way too be. Good luck!
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
A 10-15% request from someone who already has a good job and is switching jobs would really cause that much of a stir? That's equivalent to an annual bonus at some places.
My immediate thought is that they had a very viable second choice. When you asked for the significant increase from the initial offer, they may have thought it would be easier (and cheaper) to go with the alternative than to negotiate with you.