The reality of 3 month notice period for hiring
So I am expanding my team and rolled out an offer to a candidate with around 1.5 year of experience. The guy seemed decent and i gave him around 40% hike on his current salary.
He told me he could negotiate his notice period down from 3 months to 60 days. I said fine. After he accepted the offer and resigned, he told me the team was not letting him go in 60 days and he would have to serve the complete 90 day notice. I understood his situation and I said fine.
Waited for him for 3 months and 15 days before joining he started dodging calls. Told me he had some issues with his phone. I said fine. After 2 weeks, i texted him point blank asking if he is still interested in the job.
Now he is saying he is not sure and is confused about joining. So exactly after 3 months, the confusion suddenly happens. I could have had multiple offers rolled out and revoked his offer on last day of joining too, but I do not like to operate that. But seeing such greediness, I would personally not hire any candidate with even 2 months of notice going forward.
You wait for candidates to join for 3 months only to be left waiting on the day of joining. Such offer shopping behaviour from candidates is why many good candidates with 3 month notice period who are serious about the offer get ghosted from recruiters.
To that candidate, if he is reading this, the analytics industry is very closely knit and you burned many bridges. And to all startup founders, please stay away from 3 month notice period candidates until you have adequate backups in place for such situations.
Thanks!
Such a bs. Companies interviews multiple candidate to arrive at a single one and the candidate can’t do that?? From the hiring perspective I do understand your frustration but do understand, a candidate never wants a 90 day np. They would rather prefer to work for a company which got 30 days np. Coming to burned bridges - buddy if the talent is right, he/she will be just fine. It’s always about prioritizing their own interests. Companies does that and so does the candidates. It’s fair.
Companies talk to multiple candidates and candidates also talk to multiple companies, nothing wrong with that. But once you commit yourself to a company and come to an agreement it’s not ethically correct to go back on your word.
I’m sorry man wherever I go today on GV I see your opinions and they are flawed as fuck.
Agree, if recruiter is interested in the candidate, then they should increase their offer.
Do companies ever think about the impact of laying off people, especially when the employee is the sole breadwinner for their family? How will they survive?
And let’s not forget the other side of the coin, companies often refuse to give budgeted hikes to employees, regardless of their current compensation or market standards. If organizations can’t commit to fair treatment, why should employees feel obligated to show unwavering loyalty?
Sir, I understand your point completely. But you’re comparing startups to corporates which is not fair. The companies who does mass layoffs always have more candidates waiting in the pipeline and the companies who genuinely value their people, often get left hanging.
Giving a 40% hike to a 90 days notice period candidate is like serving them enough opportunities to negotiate outside on a platter. Not much can be done but it is what it is!
Even if you're hiring someone who is already serving notice or is immediately available, they're gonna ditch someone else who released them an offer 60-90 days ago and join you just in case your offer is going to be better. This is an ecosystem issue.
Something to think for you and other hiring managers (including myself) - if a candidate is available in the next 15 days and you like them very much. They say they have an offer with 40 percent hike already, and if we are ready to roll out an offer with a 45-50% hike, then we too are part of the problem.
I agree about hiring a candidate with less than 30 days of notice remaining, but would go by references or referrals from now onwards to at least make them accountable.
It is easily detectable if the candidate will shop further. I personally hate it and have avoided shopping further but it affected me as I was lowballed and given only 20% hike
Hi, I can completely understand your perspective. But from candidate perspective hear me out..
I worked in TCS for 3years and got hike of 9% overall on 3yrs time period.(In the same time, org hired new people in those 3 years and offered them 70% more salary than me)
Then got an offer from other org for 70% hike on my CTC. That time market was not very crazy as today, waited for 90 days only to hear from HR saying "Currently, project is still in pipeline. You will have to wait for 60 days more!"
This is the kind of reasons from org lead to candidates losing trust and doing what is necessary to sustain.
If you really want to change the eco system, the trust has to come from employers rather than cribbing on a person.
Also, You have mentioned your domain is a close knint and he has burned bridges right, The moment huge requirements appear people from your circle are also going to hire him/her.
Remember, the way org can withhold candidate, candidate will also do the same.
Markets have changed. Change the way u work rather than cribbing and trying to scare people.
Just wanted to know the notice period policy of your organization? Is it 90 days or 30 days?
who created this 3 months notice period thing ? if you have good network make sure to tell fellow founders to not to have this shittiest notice period rule in first place…. employers are more toxic than employees… you might be genuine with your case but the market moves by sentiment which is created by the evil founders … i hope you get good one soon … but kisi ek ki galti ni h isme … ye post ka base aur thorough understanding weak hain sorry to say that
“AnaLyTicS inDustRY iS VerY cLosELy kNiT AnD yOU bUrnED maNy bRiDgEs” 🤣