| First, let's have more follow-ups like these that name the actual company, please (even though there's no abuse or massive incompetence alleged in this particular case). The more genuine transparency we have about these companies, the better. As to your concern - well it seems to be not that they did anything horribly misleading or abusive to you - but simply that they passed on you, right? The thing is ... at the end of the day, companies pass on qualified or nearly qualified candidates all the time -- sometimes for perfectly good reasons, sometimes for perfectly bad reasons. And a lot of times because they just don't know. A lot times also they'll just (perhaps narcissistically) pass, and pass and pass on what may have been perfectly decent candidates ... until one day they go, "Oh shit, this starting to drag on, we need to fill this role" and then they just take the 4th or 5th person who comes along and seems to vaguely meet the bar. Or whom one of the panel just has a certain hunch about (or a lack of negative hunches). And then of course promptly forget about the whole time-wasting experience for all involved, and repeat it again in the next hiring cycle. All the while complaining about how difficult it is to hire. That's just what these companies do, and there's not a lot anyone can do about it. Especially not the candidates, who at best can just take their lumps, and factor this all into the cost of job switching. In this case you can again be thankful that nothing really abusive seems to happened, other than ... companies doing what they're gonna do Which I grant can be quite frustrating to all concerned, especially the way it keeps happening ... at scale, again and again. |