About 10 years ago, I had an interview with a well-known financial news organization as an editor. I won’t disclose the name, but I can say its offices were in Hudson County.
I must have impressed them at the interview, because the woman in charge invited me back for a test. After the test, she said, “Well, there was one section you didn’t do so well on, but you did so well on all the other sections, we’ll overlook it.” She scheduled a three-day tryout a few weeks away, and I thought I was on my way.
The big day came. Because of my relative inexperience with the PATH train, I got confused by the directions and I got there late. I was prepared to apologize, but I never got the chance. I was kept waiting for about a half hour.
Finally, the person who interviewed me emerged.
“There’s been a staff crisis,” she said, “and the people who were supposed to supervise you aren’t here. Why don’t you go home and we’ll call you.”
I smelled a rat, but was willing to give them a chance.
Two weeks later, I gave her a call. “Well,” she said, “we’ve had a change of plans and have decided to look elsewhere.”
Stunned, I asked what the problem was. She mentioned the test and the section that she initially said she would overlook.
A few days later, I wrote a letter addressed to her, several executives in the company, and the human resources department, telling my story and demanding an apology. And I got one, although it was written in rather vague, tepid language.
Recently, I wondered what would have happened had I hired a labor lawyer in order to get another tryout. I asked several attorneys and they were unanimous – nothing. In the U.S., one lawyer friend said, employment “at will” is the rule. This means that unless a particular company policy or union contract specifies otherwise, the employer has the right to hire and fire people at will. If this is the case for actual employees, he continued, it follows that job applicants also have few rights.
Just about the only time that an applicant can challenge a decision in the job-hunting process, this lawyer told me, is when that applicant suspects that he or she was excluded because of race, religion, age, or disability.
Another exception in which a “reasonable argument” can be made – and only in certain states – is if an applicant leaves a job with the promise of another, only to have the new employer cancel at the last moment.
But these exceptions, as necessary as they are, leave out the majority of instances of lack of simple politeness or honesty on the part of employers. According to an article I read online, fewer companies are even bothering to send out letters to candidates who didn’t get the job. This can wreak havoc upon a person who has his heart set on a certain job, and only wants to apply for other jobs when he knows that a particular job was filled.
The whole job application process resembles a plantation, where one party holds all the cards and the other is forced to plead and grovel.
That’s why I’m proposing a Job Applicants’ Bill of Rights in this country. Among its provisions might be:
A) If an employer says, “I’ll let you know in two weeks,” he will have to give the applicant a progress report – within two weeks.
B) The employer, on request, will have to let the applicant know where he stands in the process – whether he’s one of two, one of three, or whatever. There would also be a deadline by which the employer would have to let the applicant know his status – possibly, within a month.
C) The employer will have to let the applicant know as soon as possible when someone else is hired.
D) If someone else has been chosen, but the employer says, “We’re impressed with your credentials, and we’ll keep your resume in case something else turns up,” the employer will have to specify the time period, and if an appropriate position turns up, he will have to let the applicant know and ask whether he’s still interested.
E) If the employer promises the applicant a second interview, a test, or a tryout, he will have to follow-up, except in extenuating circumstances.
F) These provisions will not apply to an applicant who has never been contacted as a possible candidate – but once contact has been made, the wheels would be set in motion.
None of these provisions would require any more than a negligible expenditure on the part of any company, especially a large corporation. At most, they would require a little more bookkeeping, which would be easy given today’s computer programs.
I call on all municipal, state, and federal elected officials! Come on! Who will be the first to introduce the Job Applicants’ Bill of Rights?
Raanan Geberer is a frequent contributor. Comments on this piece can be sent to: current@hudsonreporter.com.