I've been rejected!
Judith applied for a job that she thought had something to do with her skills and that it could bring her some financial security.
She followed a very strict and specific online application. It was a public-private logistics company, regulated by national laws.
She respected all the rules, accepted the very clear conditions from the beginning and all the procedures, followed them to the letter. She passed all the stages.
Without knowing why, she received an email as she was not selected.
She called the HR department for clarification; wanted to know why she wasn't selected. "I was sure that everything had gone well", she said.
They were not available at that time to clarify her.
1 week later Judith called again and sent an email. No answer.
1 month later, it was finally lightened up, they call her from an unidentified number, which she usually doesn't answer. But that day she answered.
It was the company psychologist that she applied to answer some questions about her application.
The fact that she was called from a private number was already dubious and unethical, much less professional, but what shocked her even more was the explanation she gave.
They said that all her results were positive at all stages of selection, including online language and knowledge tests, telephone and personal interviews and very exhausting and long psycho-technical exams. However, the human resources team thought it was a good idea not to consider her application, despite her positive results and some even highly diverse ones, because she did not get a guarantee of longevity in the company, that is, she would never stay for at least 15 to 20 years in the company and that would be a problem for them. It was a bad bet, then.
They also gave her suggestions to look for other types of jobs, namely random ones, which she didn't even like or see herself working in her professional career.
Judith asked where they came to that conclusion and based on what facts or documentation. They were unable to give her a clear answer. They started to avoid providing further clarification and, to end the conversation, they told her that this did not mean that her CV would not be kept there for the next opportunity or reflection.
In any contract, anyone can terminate their collaboration with a company, through the clauses and laws they sign.
Who can guarantee that by signing a contract, someone will stay with the same company for life?
Who can guarantee that tomorrow you have a better job offer or even start your own company?
If they thought so, why did they accept her application and make her go through 4 or 5 difficult stages of selection in 8 months?
She felt discriminated against and wronged. Everything was right to sign a contract, after so much work and time invested. She even spent money on official documents to introduce her application and missed work to go to interviews and take exams.
Should she have hidden some of her training and skills in her CV, as it was a determining factor in deciding not to accept her?
Personally, it cost her a lot to hear that she is competent, but even so she wasn't selected. It's hard and revolting. At the very least, it is incomprehensible.
At first she thought that this company, which she considered to be rigorous and ethical, deceived her, since it seemed not to want an employee, but rather a slave for at least another 15 or 20 years. They probably didn't want intelligent and competent people. But the whole selection process was rigorous and difficult in some stages for any less literate or less enlightened citizen. All this was contradictory and confusing in her head.
Professionally, Judith could think that, perhaps, she is competente and cannot show it, because she misses opportunities and doors close.
Legally and ethically, how can Judith interpret such a type of recruitment?
Personally, for her, was this good or bad?
I am launching the discussion here.