Why Is My Friend Being Ignored by His Former Employer? Seeking Answers and Rights

Background of the Situation

One of my friends was working for a company where he proved his expertise in the role assigned to him and had a good tenure. Since he had another opportunity with a better role and benefits, he resigned and took over the new position in the new company. The exit from his old employer was smooth too. He was even happy to re-associate himself with the old company after a few years if given a chance.

Offer and Negotiation Challenges

Years went by, and the old company did come back. He had the official discussion, and the offer was also extended. While he was amidst negotiation on the CTC part, there was a response from HR that the offer had been canceled and extended to another candidate.

Repeated Attempts and Concerns

Again the next year, he had a chance to discuss with the same company on another suitable role, and the technical team was happy enough with his competencies and was positive. But again, HR is probably not willing to proceed with the candidature.

Seeking Answers and Understanding

Now, we would like to know the root cause of this. Are we not entitled to know the reason? Don't we have the right to be informed why he is being ignored? Please share with us a way where we could get to know the reason behind this from that particular employer only. Is it because he worked there earlier that this happens?

Your friend's former company called him twice to offer a chance for a second tenure. However, both times the deal did not go through. You and your friend feel that HR might have influenced this outcome, but this is only your assumption. We do not know the actual reasons.

In the last paragraph, you asked whether the job candidate is entitled to know the reasons for the rejection of his/her application. The simple answer is no; the job candidate is not entitled to this information. Nevertheless, since it is your friend's former company, HR might informally disclose why his application was sidelined.

In fact, after the bitter experience of rejoining, your friend should not have considered a second chance to rejoin. Perhaps he forgot the age-old proverb "once bitten, twice shy." Since he was not shy, he was bitten once more. This is how a person becomes wise.

Lastly, ask your friend who initiated the rejoining discussions. Was it him, or did it come from the other side? If it was from the other side, and that too both times, then advise your friend to write a letter to the company's MD detailing his bitter experience.

The final lesson is not to consider rejoining this company for the third time!

Thanks,
Dinesh Divekar

Understanding Professional Loyalty vs. Organizational Loyalty

Having already claimed anonymity for the post, I am not sure why the poster tried to ghostwrite his own story. The sequence of events is so precisely described, and the exactly replicated final results on the two occasions of the employee's sustained efforts to return to the former organization amply prove that this is none other than the poster himself. Perhaps this is the reason for his questions.

Though we are not aware of which category the individual belongs to—either a professional category like Law, Medicine, or C.A., or a non-professional category like Engineering, Technology, or HRM—generally, loyalty to the profession rather than loyalty to the organization is a preferable trait of professional employees. However, employers are always the same; they prefer employees with a high degree of loyalty to the organization when the degree of employability is the same or similar when more than one is in the final list for selection.

Therefore, my opinion is that the poster can derive the answers from his story itself. I earnestly solicit the views of experts.

While I am no expert, my comments are:

The old company itself had internal disagreements about the candidate. HR disagreed with the technical department's choice of calling back the candidate. Probably, it had something to do with his exit. As the learned member Shri Umakanthan said, loyalty may be doubtful. The candidate in question should treat it as a learning experience and leave it at that. There's no point in going back to the company, even informally, to find out what happened. The way "one is treated gives you the unsaid message." Do not try to return to the old company. There is resistance to taking you back, and working there will not be advantageous to the employee and employer. The candidate should learn from this and move on. Every misstep is a learning experience. Do not worry if you learn the right lessons through your own self-analysis of the fiasco; it is worth it.

Whether HR has done the right thing or not, the left hand is not knowing what the right hand is doing. Someone is offering them a job, negotiating CTC, and then somebody else is saying no. Not a good advertisement of efficiency and clear thinking.

All the views expressed by our members are in unison. The important points have already been addressed. I am curious to know why the candidate wants to understand the reason for rejection. This is not something like an appraisal feedback to highlight areas of improvement. Suppose he comes to know that the Managing Director (MD) has rejected him, how will this benefit the candidate? On the contrary, if HR has rejected him, what will be the use of such information? Please advise him to concentrate and look forward. From now onwards, let him refrain from being inquisitive about not being selected for future interviews as well.

Regards, V. Raghunathan Chennai