He presents himself as some sort of enlightened manager. Yet when he's on the spot with a chance to prove it, he slinks back into the traditional "neither confirm nor deny" stance of old-style corporations.
He was within his rights not to give a reason. Not saying otherwise. I'm just saying I'll never work with him or his company in the future. Although he'll probably never have any use of this "bridge", he gained nothing by burning it.
Who says that an "enlightened manager" is one who opens his company up to potential litigation by providing honest feedback to any rejected job applicant that wants it?
There's not a whole lot of people who are going to like what a potential employer has to say about them if they have been rejected. They have no way of gauging how someone will react and there is virtually zero benefit to providing any feedback whatsoever. This has nothing to do with management style; it's just common sense.
Who says that an "enlightened manager" is one who opens his company up to potential litigation by providing honest feedback to any rejected job applicant that wants it?
Potential litigation? Given that (1) I would have absolutely no legal leg to stand on, and (2) I'd rather get another job and advance my career than spend a year suing someone, blackballing myself in the process: why would I possibly do that? If that thought even went through anyone's mind, I'm insulted, because I'd have to be an idiot to try to pull that off.
If your legal strategy, regarding someone who has absolutely no incentive (and plenty of counterincentives) to sue you, comes before your humanity, there's something wrong.
They have no way of gauging how someone will react and there is virtually zero benefit to providing any feedback whatsoever.
There's no benefit to helping out someone who applied to work at your company and might be doing something of interest to you in the future? Really?
Potential litigation? Given that (1) I would have absolutely no legal leg to stand on, and (2) I'd rather get another job and advance my career than spend a year suing someone, blackballing myself in the process: why would I possibly do that? If that thought even went through anyone's mind, I'm insulted, because I'd have to be an idiot to try to pull that off.
All of your suppositions assume that the potential employer knows and understands all of your motivations! They don't. Maybe you're a wonderful, stand-up guy. But maybe you're not. They have no way of knowing for sure. So it's only natural for them to assume that some applicants may give them grief if they provide an "honest answer" as to why that particular applicant was not hired. Whether or not you, specifically would cause them grief is totally and completely irrelevant unless, perhaps, they have an explicit reason to believe that you, specifically wouldn't cause them grief. Can you provide any reason that you, specifically should be treated differently than all other applicants who they interview, including the ones who would cause them grief if they were told exactly why they were not hired?
On the topic of litigation, even if you didn't have a leg to stand on legally (which may or may not be true), even launching a frivolous legal claim against them can be annoying and costly to them. They still have to grab a lawyer to advise them on the matter and they still have to defend themselves against anything you may or may not bring forward, frivolous or not.
There's no benefit to helping out someone who applied to work at your company and might be doing something of interest to you in the future? Really?
Really! Fog Creek undoubtedly receives a veritable plethora of job applications. The chances that you specifically will be of great interest to them in the future outside the scope of being employed with their company is slim as a matter of probability, assuming that you don't already have some kind of working relationship with their company. If you do already have a working relationship with Fog Creek, you should take this issue up with them directly instead of on Hacker News.
Joel mentions in the linked article that Fog Creek now has 32 employees. Given the hundreds of applicants he alludes to for every open position and the fact that he spends several days a week focusing on his blog I'd say the odds are good that he didn't personally reject you.
Most companies don't call back. You can just assume that they had at least one candidate in the pipeline who was a better fit in terms of culture, location, salary expectations, or skills.
Joel mentions in the linked article that Fog Creek now has 32 employees. Given the hundreds of applicants he alludes to for every open position and the fact that he spends several days a week focusing on his blog I'd say the odds are good that he didn't personally reject you.
Oh, I'm sure of that, but it reflects badly on his company that, when a talented applicant-- someone you'd not want to piss off if you have any future-sight whatsoever-- wanted to know what he could do to make future applications more successful, they wouldn't even help me out in the slightest.
"someone you'd not want to piss off if you have any future-sight whatsoever"
All joking aside.....from reading your posts, something seems a bit off about you. You seem to be introspective, but it really seems you have some deep seeded issues, maybe you should talk to someone about it?
I think I know where he's coming from. Being unemployed when you just get out of college sucks in a big way, because you feel like you never got a chance. Partly because we hvaven't really had a chance yet, and because interview skills don't always correlate with job performace and interviews have a random component, people in my subgroup really would appreciate feedback, though I realize why that's imposssible. The parent poster is merely expressing a sentiment from my age group. Joel is really more of an innocent bystander that got caught in a generic rant.
I try to stay more upbeat about it though and work on a portfolio in the meantime so I'll get a competitive edge. Maybe you'll even see a startup by me in the near future ;-)
If being unemployed just out of college is such a problem for the young man (and that's not unreasonable), he should drop the attitude of "I'm pretty particular about what kind of work I want to be doing, and that makes me a poor fit for most jobs". If he doesn't want to work or only wants a very specific job and can't get it, that's reasonable. Just don't complain about it. Otherwise, this young man who believes himself highly qualified should take a job that's reasonably satisfactory as opposed to perfect until the "Worst Recession Ever" is over. There are a lot of people out there who'd kill to be in his position.
I don't disagree with you at all. I was just trying to explain what I think his motivations are from a more neutral perspective to promote cross-segment understanding.
Feedback is not impossible. I don't know where this lawsuit paranoia is coming from. If someone is a decent programmer and has a good resume, he's not going to launch a frivolous lawsuit about not getting hired. I wanted to know so I could be more successful in future applications; that's all. I wanted to move on. Suing someone would accomplish the exact opposite.
I'd just been laid off and my ex-boss was a friend of Joel's, which is why I said it was unprofessional not to inform me of the reason; declining to do so casts aspersion onto my ex-boss (although I checked my own references and he wasn't saying anything negative).
Dude, plenty of people launch lawsuits at the drop of a hat. Even if they are something like 1 in 100 people, a lawsuit is _expensive_. The cost benefit analysis just doesn't pan out. If I were in charge, I'd do the same thing. Protecting your own people far outweighs a questionably existent responsibility to someone you don't know. It really is nothing personal. The way to beat the system is with volume and constantly making yourself more competitive.
He was within his rights not to give a reason. Not saying otherwise. I'm just saying I'll never work with him or his company in the future. Although he'll probably never have any use of this "bridge", he gained nothing by burning it.