Recruiters Are Still Complaining About No-Shows At Interviews (kyma.com)

An anonymous reader quotes CNN Money: Chandra Kill had scheduled face-to-face interviews with 21 candidates to fill some job openings at her employment screening firm. Only 11 showed up. "About half flaked out," said Kill.... "A year or two ago it wasn't like this." With the U.S. unemployment rate at its lowest in 18 years, and more job openings than there are people looking for work, candidates are bailing on scheduled interviews. In some cases, new hires are not showing up for their first day of work....

While there's nothing wrong with accepting another job offer, bailing on an employer without notice could have lasting effects. "The world is small," said Johnny Taylor, president and CEO of the Society for Human Resource Management.... He added that he's heard of a candidate being flown out for a job interview only to skip that part of the trip. "I expect that if I send you a plane ticket and block off two hours to meet with you, you will show up." As a result, he said some companies are having candidates agree to reimburse for travel costs if they take the trip but flake on the interview.

In an effort to curb the problem, recruiters have been changing their tactics and moving through the hiring process faster. If they have a qualified candidate that seems like a good fit, they work to get them in for an interview the next day.
Inc. magazine once blamed the problem of no-shows on the low unemployment rate and "the effects technology have had on the communication style of younger generations." But leave your own thoughts in the comments.

And have you ever been a no-show for a job interview?

Comments

I still remember how it was

[johannesg]

When you sent in a resume and didn't even receive a reply telling you that you weren't selected. If you hear nothing, we weren't interested. Must be painful to find the shoe's on the other foot now...

Re:Shoe on the other foot

[Freischutz]

I think it's high time people start talking about their experience with recruiters and how useless they can be.

I'd have to second that. The vast majority of recruiters is utterly, utterly, utterly useless. All most of them seem to do is shovel anybody who even remotely fits the description they get from the client into an interview. Half the time they even call the HR person at the company and get their approval before sending you on an interview for a job you are only theoretically qualified for but realistically are certain not to get. Something like an experienced .NET GUI programmer guy being sent on an interview for an position requiring an experienced C++ system programmer with lots of low level network programming knowledge, or vice versa. Those are totally different areas of expertise, programmers are not an entirely fungible type of employee, you can't just replace a C programmer with a Java web developer even though they both have a BSc in Comp. Sci. and are experienced each in their own field. So I'd add that a large proportion of HR people are also utterly, utterly, utterly useless

Re:Don't no-show

[Jane Q. Public]

This is very clearly a case of a worker's market. HR and others have been used to it being an employer's market, for years.

Time to step up to the new reality.

Workers want their employers to comply, not the other way around. And they have the clout to make it happen.

That's putting it a bit simplistically, but that's the gist of it.

It is no longer an employer's market. And if they want to get ahead, they'd better start getting on the bandwagon.

And most of established HR (from the last 10-15 years) should be sharply told to change their game, or they will be shown the door.

Re:Shoe on the other foot

[Anonymous Coward]

I had an offshore recruiter "hire" an acquaintance away from a job. Then told him on the first day of the supposed new job that there wasn't a job, and his previous boss just wanted him out and paid them to get him to quit, so the boss wouldn't have to pay unemployment insurance. Since the recruiters were out of the US, nothing could be done legally.

Re:Don't no-show

[Freischutz]

I've never been a no-show period. If I won't make it somewhere I've promised to be, I contact the folks I was to meet with and let them know as soon as I know. Basic courtesy folks.

I've been on the other end of this too. Seen candidates not show up and then submit an application to a different job 6 months later. Guess who doesn't get considered for the job?

Well that has to work both ways. Quite a few HR people and recruiters have this arrogant tendency to consider themselves entitled to treat applicants like trash. I've applied for jobs with certain recruiting agencies and companies and never heard from them again. I've been sent (at my own expense) considerable distances to be interviewed by people who clearly hadn't even read my CV. A recruiter will do that to me exactly once. After that, guess whose job adverts are ignored and whose e-mails and messages go straight into the waste basket? Recruiters should just get used to the idea that if they reserve the right to ghost job applicants, give them the run-around or send them on bogus interviews, applicants are going to treat them the same way. Respect is a two way street.

You are right, respect is a two-way street. But in many cases this is a three way transaction between you, the employer and the recruiter. If a recruiter behaves badly, you might want to take this up with the potential employer, stating that due to past experiences you will not work with that recruiter/recruiting firm in the future and state the reason. This shows that you are still interested in that particular employer for future job openings, but that you want your application to be treated seriously, and that this recruiter/recruiting firm is doing a poor job of representing the employers business and interests.

As you say, paying out of your own pocket to travel to a interview far away only to discover that a recruiter have no idea who you are despite them having your CV is extremely poor form. Those recruiters should be outed and lose any future assignments.

That would be nice but there is usually no way to contact the perspective employer and this is by design. The only thing you can do most of the time is to add the recruiter and the agency he works for to your 'never deal with these a**holes again' list and create an e-mail rule that forwards any mails from their domain to the wast basket. I have never had problems finding work without the help of recruiters and I will never use their services if I can avoid it. This goes double for those agencies where you don't actually working for your employer. You end up working for the recruiting agency who hires you out as a contractor and takes a hefty commission out of your paycheck for the privilege while you get no benefits, worker protection does not apply to you and there are no paid vacations while the employer spends a year or two mulling over whether to offer you a permanent position. Another shitty trick that I have encountered is being sent to an interview (sometimes more that one with the same company) getting told they want to hire you only to get a phone call at the last minute informing you that it will come to nothing due to changes in company budgeting. By then you have turned down a bunch of other offers expecting to get this job. Companies feel entitled to do stuff like this and then they have the temerity to complain people are not showing up at interviews? Tough!!

Re: My peers

[MachineShedFred]

And how many of those companies will be companies in 9-12 months?

Some of us want to have a career, not a list of failed startups we spent a few months at.

Sauce for the goose...

[hyades1]

Isn't it cute how employers expect the whole "gig economy" thing to work JUST for them? We've all heard stories, or actually lived through them: You turn up for work on Monday morning and get told your services aren't needed til after Labour Day. See ya then. Or yes, you can attend your mom's funeral. Just don't expect to get paid for the time off.

So if a better gig comes along and you don't need to go to an interview...oh, well. If you're feeling polite maybe you call. But especially if the company has made you jump through hoops to get the interview, why give them one more minute of your life if it turns out you don't need them?

I have to admit, though, I loved this story for mostly one reason: it appears that there actually is a real human being named Johnny Taylor who bears the title "President and CEO of the Society for Human Resource Management." I couldn't help but imagine a Monty Python sketch starting with those words inscribed on a door in an endless row of offices in a cookie cutter high rise in Anywhere USA.

And this guy Johnny, whose job title is almost as long as my johnson, claims there could be consequences for ditching a job interview because "the world is small". Yes, Johnny, the world is small. And because the world is small, I can ditch three or four interviews with you, and you'll come crawling back to invite me for another one. Because if I'm good, companies will want me, and delivering me into their tender embrace will make it look like you're actually worth whatever they're paying you to recruit guys like me.

So get used to it, Johnny boy. We both know that if the shoe were on the other foot, you'd ghost me without a thought. The entire HR profession is based on tipping the scales as far as legally possible in the employer's favour. Here is your introduction to Law of Unintended Consequences. Welcome to the real world.