Ask HN: Would you reapply to a company that ghosted you?

[dale_huevo]

Having gone through multiple rounds of interviews at different companies large and small, only to be ghosted is an incredibly frustrating experience. It's happened five times now. Including interviews I thought went really well, and one where the manager verbally assured me I'd be invited back for the next round. Not only is it unprofessional, it's a complete waste of my time invested.

Would you apply to another position at a company that did this? Personally, I have decided to blacklist every company that does this on general principle, not only for the perceived lack of courtesy, but it seems to be a harbinger of corporate dysfunction. What are your thoughts on this practice?

[igleria]

I once cancelled an interview process because the recruiter, after rescheduling twice at the last minute, never appeared on the interview. To top it off, when I told the recruiter how disrespectful the attitude was and that I would be withdrawing from the process, they asked for one last chance because "they had been having back to back calls the whole day".

I'd have let that slip, but then I saw they called me Sergey (my name is Ignacio)...

moral of the story: each person has their own tolerance for mistreatment. Mine, personally, has thinned. Life is too short to eat shit while grinning.

[ryandrake → igleria]

It's amazing the extent to which companies' recruitment departments don't have their shit together. I periodically get recruitment E-mails from a well-known FAANG company, but they are addressed to "Romane" when my name (not Romane) is clearly spelled out directly in my E-mail address. On one hand, I could write back and correct them and set up a call, but on the other hand, do I really want to go work for a company so sloppy and careless in their human interactions that they can't even get someone's name right? If you're so "excited by the background listed in my resume" then maybe you ought to look up at the top of the resume where my name is.

[igleria → ryandrake]

I do have a litmus test on my linkedin that if passed makes me much more comfortable continuing the conversation: I ask people to tell me their favourite food :p

I'd say only 5 % actually read that (even if the relevant conversations are higher than 5%, I have yet to see an irrelevant one that included the food topic).

[hw-guy]

I would not apply unless I was desperate for a job, or if enough time had passed or leadership had changed that I felt sure it was no longer the same company. The way companies treat applicants should be seen as a reflection of how they would treat employees.

[riskyingo]

(in my exp and geo location at least) Hiring and dating are very similar, the more desperate you look the less respect you get. There are a lot of companies out there and an infinite number of ways to make money except getting a job. Good luck!

[anon743448]

Yes. It is just a broken process or overworked recruiter, nothing personal. Yes, it is rude but that is life.

Use them as opportunity to practice your interview skills. If this time they make an offer and you have another offer, use that to negotiate hire salaries. And if you decide to go with the other company, ghost this company.

[JohnFen → anon743448]

> It is just a broken process or overworked recruiter, nothing personal.

It's not really a question of it being personal. If it's a signal that the process is broken or a recruiter is overworked, though, that's a really huge red flag and that company should be avoided or at least treated with great caution.

[cdaringe → JohnFen]

Recruiters often do not operate like the rest of the company. There’s not always a universal culture at a company, nor consistent work patterns between groups/orgs. In other words, I wouldn’t at all associate a recruiter’s behavior with potential future work experience.

If it’s a small company, different story. Any company that could feasibly qualify as “big?” Ya, just bad luck perhaps

[beebaween]

Many times they actually have restrictions / rules for recruiters that they can't re-contact or re-ingest prior applicants even if its for a role in a different department (like eng -> product).

I'd say if they ghost you and they aren't a massive company they probably aren't professional enough to really pursue further and likely would just be a bad place to work in general.

I honestly take more offense to rejection letters that claim "we'd love to stay in touch!" or something with similar ingenue bubbly language.

[Quinzel]

No I would not apply to another position at a company that ghosted me. I too see it as a symptom of corporate dysfunction.

[crazygringo]

Yes, because it's more of a reflection on the hiring manager than on the company. It doesn't tell you anything about what it's like to actually work there.

But also it's not just extremely common, but it's practically the norm. It's just how things are. It's annoying but it doesn't actually affect your planning or anything. If you go in with this as the expectation, then it might not bother you as much because you're already expecting it.

[JohnFen]

As a baseline, I wouldn't apply again at a company that ghosted me (and I haven't yet). That said, this isn't a hill I'd die on. If the company had an open position that I was unusually interested in, I'd go ahead and apply.

Ghosting is very rude and reflects poorly on companies that do it, but there are much worse practices in the grand scheme of things.

[ed-209]

not on principle (unless i was applying to work in HR) - recruiters are not the company ambassadors you seem to imagine but cogs in a small machine that you're not likely to encounter after onboarding.

i would treat it like a 504 error

[duxup]

I want to say no, but I also will say that I can only remember the name of one that did (plenty of others have, I just don't remember the name).

[rahimnathwani]

  but it seems to be a harbinger of corporate dysfunction

It's a signal for sure, but not decisive.

[muzani → rahimnathwani]

Nearly all companies that are hiring are overworked and need at least one extra person.

Either that or they lose people as a matter of process and need a constant funnel. This is probably worse.

[actionfromafar]

I did once and it turned out they'd been super busy and dropped the ball. Turned out fine.

[brudgers]

I have decided to blacklist every company that does this on general principle, not only for the perceived lack of courtesy, but it seems to be a harbinger of corporate dysfunction.

Generally, organizations don’t hire for the ability to find slights and hold grudges. So to me that might indicate potential cultural misfit with regard to some corporate work environments.

where the manager verbally assured me I'd be invited back for the next round

In a large organization, most managers lack full hiring discretion…usually they lack full discretion on everything personnel related. That’s how corporations run themselves. Good luck.

[adrianmsmith → brudgers]

>> where the manager verbally assured me I'd be invited back for the next round

> In a large organization, most managers lack full hiring discretion…usually they lack full discretion on everything personnel related. That’s how corporations run themselves. Good luck.

That's true, but then the manager shouldn't have made that verbal assurance.

[brudgers → adrianmsmith]

Maybe finding slights and holding grudges is a tendency that post interview reference checking suggested and an intent based on perceived cultural fit was reasonably abandoned.

Or maybe like the OP, the manager did not intuit bigger pictures.

[mkbkn]

No, I blacklist them & share the list with my friends & colleagues as well as in relevant forums.

[sharemywin]

Could have been one managers bad practice.

[throwaway5752]

Of course I would. Companies can have recruiting issues that aren't related to engineering. They can be forced to freeze a hire and not advertise it. It is an irrational decision to do blacklist them.

Who is harmed by blacklisting a company? The company will just hire someone else, and you potentially won't have a salary.