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.
No, I don't know why a rejection email with a generic canned response would be more "soul crushing".
However I think it would be better to receive an individual, honest and professional rejection letter, so you can work on what deficiencies you may have.
No, I don't know why a rejection email with a generic canned response would be more "soul crushing".
However I think it would be better to receive an individual, honest and professional rejection letter, so you can work on what deficiencies you may have.
Yeah, especially if there isn't a skills assessment (I refuse to call it a personality test because it is BMS or True Colors or a similar test) where you can find out that you are over-qualified, asking for too much, under-qualified, you related degree don't count, etc. just so you know if you want to retry what you have to work on. If you don't know what to work on, it's throwing darts at the dartboard while wearing a blindfold.
Edit: YES, I realize it is easier when you have the interview than just submitting a resume/application, but hearing they hired the better fit, more qualified candidate is vague and doesn't help you find future employment because it's the dart analogy.
Who said anything about firing? We just don't hire people who do not know how to speak the language properly.
But here's the thing: How do you know that wasn't the "proper" way of speaking, and even if it's a little bit off of the standard, is it worth rejecting for? I don't have a video or audio of the encounter you described so I can't make a full judgment of how the person's English is. But the post said it was based on something very... slight.
But here's the thing: How do you know that wasn't the "proper" way of speaking, and even if it's a little bit off of the standard, is it worth rejecting for? I don't have a video or audio of the encounter you described so I can't make a full judgment of how the person's English is. But the post said it was based on something very... slight.
Actually, this is the thing. When I went to school I learned the rules of grammar. I learned about language and phonics and spelling. And because communication is a big part of my job, I've had to retain all of that information. So I have a pretty good grasp of the "proper" way of speaking, as you put it, and that is how I know it wasn't proper English.
As I've stated previously, if someone is not using acceptable grammar, I cannot put them in front of a client. What may seem like a slight variation to you, could actually be a big thing in the eyes of someone who wishes to partner with us. Clients want to know they are working with educated people who sound like adults when they speak. If a person cannot speak properly, if they insist that "anyways" is correct grammar, or that the word "anyway" isn't the correct word to use in a professional setting, if they say "ain't" instead of "isn't" or "axe" instead of "ask", "prolly" or "probly" for "probably", then it exhibits a level of ignorance I can't have on my team.
But to me the degree of difference between "axe" and "ask", "ain't" and "isn't" (these have to do with a regional accent/speech) and "prolly" for "probably" (anyone who uses "prolly" in a formal presentation is failing to separate casual speech from formal speech) sound more different than "anyway" and "anyways". In other words, all the examples you gave are sharper/more different/more obvious compared to anyway/anyways which to be sounds more subtle and more easily forgivable. I am aware that job competition has grown immensely and businesses aren't so willing to provide on-the-job training like they used to, but it sounds like if "anyways" is the only problem (as in it's something involuntary) and the person doing it is the best candidate for the job, it could be coached away in training.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MPowering1
Actually, this is the thing. When I went to school I learned the rules of grammar. I learned about language and phonics and spelling. And because communication is a big part of my job, I've had to retain all of that information. So I have a pretty good grasp of the "proper" way of speaking, as you put it, and that is how I know it wasn't proper English.
As I've stated previously, if someone is not using acceptable grammar, I cannot put them in front of a client. What may seem like a slight variation to you, could actually be a big thing in the eyes of someone who wishes to partner with us. Clients want to know they are working with educated people who sound like adults when they speak. If a person cannot speak properly, if they insist that "anyways" is correct grammar, or that the word "anyway" isn't the correct word to use in a professional setting, if they say "ain't" instead of "isn't" or "axe" instead of "ask", "prolly" or "probly" for "probably", then it exhibits a level of ignorance I can't have on my team.
I tend to prefer polite mails. I figure not getting the job is a disappointment anyway, but if a company can compose it in a nice way, then it least communicates sensitivity.
lol, The bluntest email I ever got was a few years ago. It read something like, "We have a list of final candidates - you're not on it." The only thing I appreciated from it was the implicit understanding that it would not be a suitable working environment for me. I got over it.
But to me the degree of difference between "axe" and "ask", "ain't" and "isn't" (these have to do with a regional accent/speech) and "prolly" for "probably" (anyone who uses "prolly" in a formal presentation is failing to separate casual speech from formal speech) sound more different than "anyway" and "anyways". In other words, all the examples you gave are sharper/more different/more obvious compared to anyway/anyways which to be sounds more subtle and more easily forgivable. I am aware that job competition has grown immensely and businesses aren't so willing to provide on-the-job training like they used to, but it sounds like if "anyways" is the only problem (as in it's something involuntary) and the person doing it is the best candidate for the job, it could be coached away in training.
We do intensive training but companies are not responsible for teaching English 101 and nobody in my company would have the time and / or patience to try and undo a bad habit someone probably developed early on in their life. There will always be at least five people coming in after the one who sounds like a child, with the same education, skills and accomplishments. Why would I add to our workload by hiring the one who doesn't present well due to improper grammar?
It's curious to me that you keep banging the same drum and have such a problem with what I'm saying that you're now parsing the examples I provided. Are you someone who doesn't speak properly and you feel a need to justify it by saying it's a regional preference or it can be trained away? Perhaps the thought of being passed over for a job bothers you? Whatever it is, I can't keep explaining myself to someone who thinks proper grammar is a debatable point.
Anyone else find "polite" rejection emails to be MORE soul-crushing than honest rejection emails?
Absolutely! Here's an example:
We would like to thank you for speaking with us regarding our ******** ******** position. While your experience is impressive, we are pursuing other candidates whose qualifications more closely meet the requirements for the position.
Oh, come off it! Nothing I provided after dressing up, driving forty miles, and wasting several hours of my time couldn't have been discerned when I visited your booth at the local job fair. I noticed you were taking more detailed notes back then, and I now think I know why.
I don't "meet the requirements" for your position because I'm over 60 years old and unencumbered -- and no other reason. I want to work, but if the pressure becomes too great, I'm in a better position for a "soft landing" than the 30-year-old single Mom you can chain to the job
We will retain your information for future opportunities and encourage you to continue to visit our website to review newly posted positions as well.
For the next wild-goose chase, I suppose.
Thank you once again for your interest in ******* and we wish you the best in your career search.
If you already knew I wouldn't suit your purposes, why did you allow me to hold out hope for another eight days, (turning away two other "marginal" opportunities in the process)?
Sincerely, (???)
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 07-04-2014 at 03:32 PM..
I've done my part saying I'm not an expert. Please have some patience, and understand it's perfectly acceptable for the uninitiated to "you keep banging the same drum and have such a problem with what I'm saying that you're now parsing the examples I provided."
Now, what kind of academic backgrounds do you hire from? Maybe people with a public speaking background go over intense grammar instruction and are told "don't you dare use anyways instead of anyway" ... Yes, I can understand being so picky over anyway/anyways. I can also understand if they're English majors as they are supposed to know the finer points of the language.
But the "stressed importance" (not merely the grammar rule, but how seriously it's taken) of anyway/anyways in oral English is not English 101 (I say this from personal experience) and so this grammar instruction in regards to spoken language is NOT given at the university level to every major. People do take speech classes but I don't remember anyone being harped upon for using "anyways". That's why I'm so critical, because people from other backgrounds won't know that this is a "don't do this or you lose the chance of a job".
If you only hire people who are supposed to have public speaking backgrounds, though, please disregard!
As for me: you don't have to worry about me. I never applied to the type of job you are describing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MPowering1
We do intensive training but companies are not responsible for teaching English 101 and nobody in my company would have the time and / or patience to try and undo a bad habit someone probably developed early on in their life. There will always be at least five people coming in after the one who sounds like a child, with the same education, skills and accomplishments. Why would I add to our workload by hiring the one who doesn't present well due to improper grammar?
It's curious to me that you keep banging the same drum and have such a problem with what I'm saying that you're now parsing the examples I provided. Are you someone who doesn't speak properly and you feel a need to justify it by saying it's a regional preference or it can be trained away? Perhaps the thought of being passed over for a job bothers you? Whatever it is, I can't keep explaining myself to someone who thinks proper grammar is a debatable point.
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.
