OK, explain to me this one.

[Berry Cool]

A couple of months ago, I interviewed with an employer (if this helps, it was a Big Four accounting firm) for a professional but non-accounting position that was one of only a handful of positions the employer has for folks in my city under the same job title (which I learned during interviewing). I had a series of interviews that I felt very comfortable with, and waited to hear the firm's decision.

A few weeks ago, I received a call informing me I had not been selected for an offer. I said thank you very much for letting me know, I hope you will keep me in mind for any future openings, etc., very politely, and we ended the call.

Well, I was just checking a career board today--don't know why this didn't come up before, maybe I didn't enter the exact right word or something to call it up--but what should I see on it but a posting advertising the very same job I interviewed and was rejected for. The listing said it was first posted 29 days ago, which is actually longer ago than I received my rejection call.

What's up with this? Maybe another opening under this same job title appeared in my city (as in, they had only one position open under that name when I interviewed, and now maybe they have another?). And maybe, despite the polite way they rejected me, they didn't really want me, no way, no how. But they also didn't want anyone ELSE they interviewed as intensely as they did me?

Although I don't know exactly how many, I can only assume that when I made it through the round of interviews I made it through, I was one of a chosen few. Assuming one of us was made the offer and accepted, that would still leave at least a few good people left so that if another opening popped up in that position, it would make sense to extend an offer to one of us. If not me, someone else (and it's highly likely we'd all have other jobs by now, or say no for other reasons).

I guess what I'm asking is this: Why would an employer that has just undergone the process of winnowing out candidates for a particular job title--or is actually still IN that process--choose to reopen an identical search and start all over if another opening popped up for that job title, rather than give first consideration to those already interviewed but not chosen for the first opening? Did we all somehow present "deal-breaker" information in our final interviews that caused us to be rejected not just this time around, but for all time?

I can see starting all over if, even, six months had gone by since they'd last conducted a search to fill the position. A lot can happen in six months to change the makeup of the candidate pool. But is this company seriously thinking that by advertising for the same position in late November, they would find better candidates for it than the ones they interviewed in October and didn't pick?

Or--despite what they told me about having decided to make the offer to someone else--did the employer, after doing lots interviewing and of dithering, just reject us ALL as inadequate and decide to start over? And, if so, do they really think they're going to find better candidates now than they did a few months ago?

Is that how picky employers have become?

Just curious.

[Kat45]

1. They have become that picky.

I've been looking for a job for a year and I've made quite a few observations. I would say that companies are looking for the absolute perfect candidate for each job. And because there are so many people out there looking, they believe they can find that person. If a person is only 99.9999% perfect, they will pass on him because they believe they will find a person who is 100% perfect. Unfortunately with all the folks out there looking for a job, they probably will.

I have often seen the posting of a job I had recently been turned down for. I've noticed that when you come in second for a job the company is no longer interested in you even when another job is available. I'm not sure why that is. I guess they figure they passed on you for some reason and it must have been a good one so you are 'tainted' in their eyes. I've had situations several years ago where a job I interviewed for, sometimes even had a second interview, came along again but when I sent my resume again it was ignored.

My biggest problem in trying to get a job, other than my age, is that I am not 100% perfect for any job. There is always someone more perfect for it than I am. I've done a lot of different things so I don't have any one thing nailed down. And the longer I'm out of work, the more I'm forgetting the software and other things that I did know. Companies expect their new hires to know every single thing that they could possibly have to do in the position and to know it backwards and forwards. Gone are the days when they would hire a reasonably intelligent person, give her some training and know she would grow with the job. I am often terrified that I will never get a real job again. (I'm currently doing a very low paying PT customer service job several nights until midnight. It is making me totally miserable and I want out so bad, but I feel like I shouldn't leave because it's my only (meager) income.)

[rocktivity]

2. How true.

I just got out of a low paying PT job myself. My resume had been sent to the company twice before, but I was only 99.99% qualified, as you said. Then a month ago, the recruiter called again and these were his exact words: "This time, they're looking for YOU."

It turned out to be an understatement. At the interview, the very first thing I was asked about was not my skills or experience, but where I lived and how I'd get to the office. The area is so parking-challenged I wouldn't drive there even if I could. But there's plenty of public transport, so I said I take the bus. As good a fit as my qualifications were, I think my winning edge is that I didn't have a car.

But now there's as storm cloud on the horizon: I'm due at jury duty next month. I have a long-term contract position, so they're not going to put up with me disappearing for a week or two!

:(
rocktivity

[Kat45]

3. That's interesting--after passing on you twice, they decided to hire you!

I've never heard that one before, but it's good to hear. Is this through a temp agency?

[Berry Cool]

4. Two things about this don't wash for me.

First of all, they have no damn business asking you where you live (although that would ordinarily be on a resume or application) and how you plan to get to work. The assumption should be that if you get the offer and you accept the job, you will manage to get your ass to work. They should not care if you take a train, plane or flap your wings and fly. They DEFINITELY should not be hiring based on who is or isn't going to take up a parking space. (Conversely, they should not make hiring decisions based on you having your own vehicle and not using public transportation--unless the job requires you to drive around a specific area to visit various sites. But even then, it would be preferable for them to have company vehicles and to require nothing of you other than a clean driving record.)

Really, it's none of your employer's damn business how you get to work. They should not hire you over a person with a car. For all they know, a person with a car might choose to commute to work.

Second, NO employer should hold the fact that you were selected for jury duty against you. It is a civic responsibility and they should just work around it! Whether or not they choose to pay you, or how much, is another matter, but it is illegal for an employer to fire you because you were selected for jury duty. If they do, you can sue, and win.