[danaris]

No, it's not symmetric, but not at all in the way you describe.

Worst case, from the employer's side, is they might have to pay the successful candidate *gasp* a few tens of thousands more per year (out of a budget, in a huge percentage of cases, in the two-to-three-digit millions or higher).

Worst case, from the employee's side, is that they might not get any job. For months. During which they still have to pay for food, rent/mortgage, clothing, utilities, etc, possibly for several people.

And these days, the median rejection letter is none. Most employers just ghost prospective employees who didn't make the cut.

[ttyprintk]

The worst case on the side of hiring is facing a lawsuit because you treated candidates unevenly. And the detail you go into about a candidate are too personal for the hiring process.

[danaris]

So you might have to pay some legal fees, and possibly a fine.

That's still not symmetrical in the common case. It's incredibly unlikely that such a thing would lead to a business going under, while it's all too likely for a job-seeker to have to spend months looking for a job, with no income, very little savings (because a huge percentage of Americans simply don't make enough money to save any even if they have jobs), and a horribly dysfunctional social safety net.