Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I recently interview for a job in the SE. The job is in the civil engineering field. I have approximately 3 years of experience, this was a entry/mid level position. I've long been unhappy at my current employer. This job was perfect in a lot of ways, (seemingly) good people, the area of engineering I want to get into, and it was a physical move (which I want).
They flew me down (on their dime) and made a decent offer some weeks later. A little negotiation and I had what I wanted. They, unlike most places, followed the law and the offer letter was "contingent on a satisfactory background check" (most states don't let you ask about criminal backgrounds prior to an interview).
Needless to say I was up front about my past. I have two prior misdemeanors from college, I explained, and was honest. I was told this wouldn't be an issue but they want to get the full report before it's final.
A week later I was called (actually emailed at 5pm one night to set up a time to call). I was told my background was no issue, however, their backlog is less than expected and cannot take someone of my level on at this time.
I asked if this was due to my background, they "wanted to strongly make sure I understand it wasn't due to that, it was a work load issue". They want me to keep in touch should something change in the next 6 months.
Obviously I will never work for them. I have two options, believe what they said or believe they didn't want a discrimination suit based on denying me over a background. However the latter is absurd, a) their offer letter was clear, I signed it. b) why would I really hire a lawyer to go through all that?
If indeed they were telling the truth, they are a god awful business. No one drops $600 on a person for a weekend long interview, including a flight, only to realize they don't have the work to sustain that person. That seems equally absurd, especially because during the interview it was made known their business is picking up (they've been hiring).
Does anyone have any information to offer up to this? In my view, no matter what the reasoning, that was poor business practice. I was honest and up front. I also have a signed letter from them that has nothing about it being based upon work load. If they come ringing in 6 months I hope I will have a job, but if not, will honestly tell them I can't trust them.
As a side note, this type of engineering is difficult to break into. This shady last minute decision has me worried my prior record could screw me. I've had enough of typical engineering firms and if I have to continue at this one I might as well give up the engineering career. It seems sad that a good person, with a great background, who wants to work hard, but made mistakes in college, may not be able to do so.
They rescinded the offer. It isn't like there was a signed contract.
I wouldn't get a lawyer. I was just told they may have said that based on the fact that they may have told me one thing to avoid a discrimination lawsuit. I hadn't even thought of that. I understand it was not a final contract, but the offer letter stated what it was contingent upon, it's also a signed document. So while I could care less about a lawyer or whatever, it still seems wrong.
Furthermore I think you missed the point? Who rescinds an offer a month before a start date because of lack of work load? Shouldn't that b e the first thing you evaluate before you even put out that you are hiring?
Misdemeanors? I didn’t think those showed up on background checks. I’m not sure you should have mentioned it.
Perhaps this is true. Maybe I should have just said nothing and let them come to me if it came up. I was under the impression they did show up and that speaking up prior would look better then letting them find out and then asking me about it.
I recently interview for a job in the SE. The job is in the civil engineering field. I have approximately 3 years of experience, this was a entry/mid level position. I've long been unhappy at my current employer. This job was perfect in a lot of ways, (seemingly) good people, the area of engineering I want to get into, and it was a physical move (which I want).
They flew me down (on their dime) and made a decent offer some weeks later. A little negotiation and I had what I wanted. They, unlike most places, followed the law and the offer letter was "contingent on a satisfactory background check" (most states don't let you ask about criminal backgrounds prior to an interview).
Needless to say I was up front about my past. I have two prior misdemeanors from college, I explained, and was honest. I was told this wouldn't be an issue but they want to get the full report before it's final.
A week later I was called (actually emailed at 5pm one night to set up a time to call). I was told my background was no issue, however, their backlog is less than expected and cannot take someone of my level on at this time.
I asked if this was due to my background, they "wanted to strongly make sure I understand it wasn't due to that, it was a work load issue". They want me to keep in touch should something change in the next 6 months.
Obviously I will never work for them. I have two options, believe what they said or believe they didn't want a discrimination suit based on denying me over a background. However the latter is absurd, a) their offer letter was clear, I signed it. b) why would I really hire a lawyer to go through all that?
If indeed they were telling the truth, they are a god awful business. No one drops $600 on a person for a weekend long interview, including a flight, only to realize they don't have the work to sustain that person. That seems equally absurd, especially because during the interview it was made known their business is picking up (they've been hiring).
Does anyone have any information to offer up to this? In my view, no matter what the reasoning, that was poor business practice. I was honest and up front. I also have a signed letter from them that has nothing about it being based upon work load. If they come ringing in 6 months I hope I will have a job, but if not, will honestly tell them I can't trust them.
As a side note, this type of engineering is difficult to break into. This shady last minute decision has me worried my prior record could screw me. I've had enough of typical engineering firms and if I have to continue at this one I might as well give up the engineering career. It seems sad that a good person, with a great background, who wants to work hard, but made mistakes in college, may not be able to do so.
They were probably telling you the truth. You were overqualified for the amount of work they had, but if they were to get more work, they'd hire you. This kind of thing happens all the time.
I wouldn't get a lawyer. I was just told they may have said that based on the fact that they may have told me one thing to avoid a discrimination lawsuit. I hadn't even thought of that. I understand it was not a final contract, but the offer letter stated what it was contingent upon, it's also a signed document. So while I could care less about a lawyer or whatever, it still seems wrong.
Furthermore I think you missed the point? Who rescinds an offer a month before a start date because of lack of work load? Shouldn't that b e the first thing you evaluate before you even put out that you are hiring?
Contracts get work stoppages all the time. If you've only been in this business for 3 years, you might not understand how companies get their workload. I suggest you bone up on that before deciding a company who may want to hire you is stupid for flying you up and wasting their money.
If you told them about the misdemeanors (they didn't find out from someplace else) then it seems unlikely that that is the reason.
Having said that, if that was the reason, it is not necessarily illegal for them to discriminate against you on that basis. Misdemeanors can show up in background checks depending on the court records and the state it was in.
Whatever the legality of the discrimination or the practicality of your filing suit over it, this seems to me more a junction of 'what kind of person are you' -- you did the right thing in being honest and up front. As an employer, I respect that. If they got cold feet over that, and you sued them, you're no longer honest and up front - you're daring them to disapprove of your convictions and threatening a lawsuit over it. There are a lot of variables we don't know here but anti-discrimination statutes are typically in place to protect things over which you have little to no control or which we've singled out for special protection (race, age, sexual orientation, marital status, family status) and even those are inconsistent from one state to the next.
I really can't imagine that they'd care about misdemeanors unless you need security clearance for the job, or unless your record could open them up to liability in the event that someone can connect the dots between a mistake you might make and your record. That seems pretty far-fetched. Don't be confrontational about why they aren't offering the job; you aren't entitled to the job. Stick with your initial impulse. No reason to feel much shame over making a mistake as a kid and you handled it well. Keep looking and be gracious to them; even if for some reason you do end up suing them, your own conduct needs to be spotless. In the more likely event that you don't, they'll remember you as up-front and honest guy and not 'guy who didn't believe us when we told him why we couldn't hire him.'
They were probably telling you the truth. You were overqualified for the amount of work they had, but if they were to get more work, they'd hire you. This kind of thing happens all the time.
Thanks. I understand this sort of thing happens. But it just seemed odd that they were so happy to have me start ASAP, then I mentioned the background and its "wait, we don't have work".
In my mind a company should know their future work load before they hire someone, I mean, how else do they know they need someone new?
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,936 posts, read 36,989,150 times
Reputation: 40635
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceBoxSteve
Furthermore I think you missed the point? Who rescinds an offer a month before a start date because of lack of work load? Shouldn't that b e the first thing you evaluate before you even put out that you are hiring?
Work load and finances change. Management changes. I've heard of this multiple times. I had an offer and a start date and the job was rescinded due to budget issues. I knew people working their and knew they had a change.
It isn't that unusual.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
