Ms. Guo found a job in Hangzhou, and got an offer letter on March 9th, telling her to report to the company on March 16. But because Ms. Guo is busy with the demolition of her hometown, she feels that running back and forth is too hard, so she doesn’t want to go to work anymore. She communicated with Manager Chen of the company’s personnel department one day in advance. Manager Chen said that the position was an urgent job, saying that she “has no integrity at all”, and then sent her personal information to Moments with a text “This kind of person, fellow colleagues, do you dare to use it?” Ms. Guo felt that her privacy had been violated.
What do you think of the behavior of women and HR? What laws and common sense are involved in this?

First, let’s take a look at what offer means. It is the abbreviation of offer letter, which actually means “letter of invitation”, which is equivalent to a notice description. Under normal circumstances, if you pass the interview, when you decide to hire, the other HR will send you an offer, sometimes by email, sometimes by phone. However, understand one thing: a general offer does not mean a contract, which means that when you receive an offer, you are not signing a labor contract, so you are still in a free status before signing the contract. 2. If you replied to the offer, that is to say, you clearly agreed or when you will be employed. For such a situation, if you clearly reply to your willingness to join in the email, strictly speaking, it is a basic agreement. If you do not go to work at the company, you can count as a breach of contract. However, if the offer sent to you by the other party does not indicate the consequences that you will have to bear if you do not go in the future, that is, it does not tell you the consequences of not going to work, then it is fine, because there is no basis. If it is clearly stated in the offer that when you reply to this email, and you do not enter the job, what responsibilities you need to bear, that is, it is very clear, it is really bad if you do not go, because at this time there is justification and evidence. 3. What should I do if I accept the offer but don’t want to go? Now that you received the offer, it means that you have gone through several rounds of interviews. Everyone feels ok with each other, but you have a better choice or you chose to give up for objective reasons. In fact, at this time, you can call the other party. Regardless of whether the offer is restricted to responsibilities, you have to call the other party to explain the situation. This is professionalism, because no facts have been generated at this time. Working relationship, it is also possible to explain the situation. Generally speaking, no HR hears you say that you don’t want to come, and try to keep it, but it doesn’t exist. In fact, there are many situations in the workplace, especially during the interview process. If you are not a senior in the industry or an indispensable talent, it is generally okay. It is moral restraint or both parties feel uncomfortable. Sometimes you are admitted, the company finds other suitable people, and you are no longer needed. This situation also exists, and in the end it will be nothing. 4. Is hr’s act an infringement? The question of whether hr is infringing, can only put forward a little personal thought. First of all, you need to clarify whether hr infringes on your right to privacy or personal reputation, etc., depending on the specific legal basis. Infringement of privacy does not constitute a crime, and may constitute a civil tort, requiring civil liability. The spread of defamation must be fabricated false facts. If the dissemination is an objective fact, although it is detrimental to the personality and reputation of others, it does not constitute a crime of defamation. As for reputation infringement, even if the content is true and defamation, as long as it is forbidden by law to publicize, publicizing it will damage the personality and reputation of others, and it can also constitute reputation infringement. Even the more true the facts described, the more the degree of infringement will be aggravated. For example, the disclosure of privacy in order to damage the reputation of others, the more realistic the disclosure, the worse the nature of the infringement.

zhiwo

By zhiwo

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
11 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
heloword
6 months ago

After finally completing the recruitment indicators, Ms. Guo temporarily decided not to join the job, and HR felt that she was hit hard and became angry. Very immature HR. 1. Failed to clearly judge the candidate’s willingness to join; 2. Failed to contact the candidate within a week to firm up the willingness to join; 3. No backup candidates on hand. 4. Cooperation is not necessarily just in sight. Not cooperating does not mean you become an enemy. From Ms. Guo’s point of view, there is nothing wrong with not making the offer at the offer stage.

helpmekim
6 months ago

It can only be said that this is extremely unprofessional behavior. It is because of these unprofessional HRs that the image of the HR group has dropped again and again. Candidates who do not enter the job after taking the offer, HRs with a little professionalism will reply “Congratulations on finding the ideal job, and hope to have the opportunity to cooperate again in the future.” More experienced HRs may add another sentence “If you have a position suitable for us.” Colleagues, please recommend us too. “After all, “candidate recommendation” is also an extremely important recruitment channel. The person who rejected you may recommend a more suitable person to you in two days. As an HR, you really shouldn’t do such things that hurt others and are not good for yourself. From the HR professional perspective, the completion of the offer by a candidate is not the end of the recruitment. Before the candidate officially enters the job, HR can do some emotional actions to reduce the possibility of being rejected. For example, regular contact with new employees to understand the new employees’ confusion and resolve the confusion; thank the new employee in writing for accepting the offer, and tell him how wise he is to accept the offer, what he can gain from the company, and strengthen his choice intention; no need to wait for the new employee If an employee is officially hired, you can arrange a mentor for him, and give them corresponding guidance and help during the period before entering the job. To do HR, psychological literacy and professional ethics are very important things. After all, what you represent is the image and face of the company. If you don’t even understand this, I suggest you switch to another career.

helpyme
6 months ago

The company and the applicant are equal. Companies are choosing candidates, and candidates are also choosing companies. This is normal in the first place, and there is no problem with the applicant’s rejection before entering the job. Even after joining the company, the probation period is a process of mutual inspection between the two parties. Such HR is very unprofessional, thinking that children are fighting? I saw that I was still hiring for the position of product manager, an Internet company. I hope that I will become more professional, and do not do to others what I don’t want. Is the current result different from what I expected? In the workplace, you must be reasonable in doing things. No matter how big the company is, if there is no reason, don’t feel that you can do whatever you want.

sina156
6 months ago

Is this HR recruiting for the first time? Looking for a job is originally a double choice. It is reasonable and legal to refuse to enter a job without signing a contract. It is a credit issue at most to inform you one day in advance, but HR infringes on privacy. HR responded that only women can be seen! Just to piss her off! Women’s 3.9-3.15 have always stated that they can enter the job, and only said that they can’t be on the last day. There is indeed a problem of integrity, but as a professional HR, you can’t be so arrogant. HR is too emotional and a bit naive; if, as he wrote, let others be on the top of the boss, and many people can see it, then this is an invasion of privacy, and there is no doubt that the law is blind. In short, a moral issue, a legal issue, this HR is so wrong!

yahoo898
6 months ago

First of all, if you shoot yourself in the foot, this HR is likely to find a job. If you refuse the offer, international practice (not so exaggerated) basically you can’t consider this company in the future. Unless the other HR loves you to the bone, or you are an executive and can handle the big boss (the boss loves you to the bone). It’s not a proper analogy. It’s like a blind date. You meet, and then you tell the introducer that this person can’t do it, so let’s reject it. After two days or two years, if you think about it and go to slap them again, then you have to prepare for the other side not to give face, right? However, legally speaking, an offer has no binding effect. It is about negotiation between the two parties. One party gives a formal and basically unchanged “quotation” or condition. If you accept it, you will start cooperating happily. If you don’t accept it, it means regret. It’s impossible that your company is great. I shook my head and said, “Uncle, I am attracted to you. I accompany my uncle every day for 20,000 a month to unlock various posture skills… If you don’t agree to burn your house, your circle of friends is disgusting, are you afraid of it?” What’s this? Lao Paoer, bandit, ruffian, street gangster. When did HR learn a set of this talent, this company is so popular?

leexin
6 months ago

This time, my focus may still be biased. Not to mention why this lady didn’t go after she got the offer, but she just didn’t want to go, okay? Actually, it really works! People are worried about going back to their hometown to be a second-generation demolisher instead of coming to your small broken company. Is it illegal to be squeezed? It’s definitely not against the law. The company has the final say whether to give the offer or not, the job seeker has the final say. This is actually fair. Let’s take another example. It is very common in the workplace. For example, I got an offer from Company A, but I want to wait for Company B, and I will delay the entry time of Company A. If you can’t wait for B, go to A. When I got to B, I told A I’m sorry. I joined another company because they are bigger than your company, have fewer jobs, have more money, and are close to home. Right, this is so obvious. These days, regardless of whether it is a big company or a small company, the one that gives more money is the good company, okay? Next, let’s talk about the issue of credibility and contract. The company gave an offer, but the job seeker didn’t go. This kind of loss is actually not easy to quantify. Generally, companies don’t lose much money instantly or go bankrupt, right? And after all, an offer is not an entry contract. You can leave the job at any time after you sign the probation period. You can still apply for resignation in advance after you become a regular employee. A labor contract is a kind of contract that can, to a certain extent, restrict the behavior of both parties and stipulate the responsibilities and obligations of both parties. However, an offer is only a notice of a job invitation, and it is normal that the job seeker has the right to refuse. But if the company suddenly withdraws the offer, then the job seeker quits the original job, this is the most embarrassing problem. Isn’t it fun to be unemployed? This is tantamount to cutting off people’s wealth like killing parents! The job applicant was resigned naked for some reason. In this case, the arbitration will generally determine that the enterprise pays a certain amount of financial compensation to the individual, which is an act of corporate dishonesty. The woman in the question informed hr that it was indeed too late, which is an inappropriate workplace expression. However, the behavior of hr’s circle of friends to disclose their personal privacy is indeed illegal and illegal. Belonging to lack of professionalism and legal blindness.

greatword
6 months ago

It is normal behavior to take an offer and not go, and HR’s behavior is very unprofessional. However, I would like to remind everyone of the following points: 1. Although it is normal to take an offer and not enter an offer, in practice, generally HR will discuss with you before issuing an offer, because the offer rate is an evaluation indicator of HR One, so generally you will not send you an offer directly after the interview, but will confirm verbally first, you will come with great intentions, and then make an offer. Therefore, this woman must have promised to come first, and can’t tell after she got the offer. That is to say, although it seems normal to reject the offer, in fact, it is very likely that he has verbally agreed to someone else first. It is possible to reject other candidates, and in this case reject them again. Therefore, although it is normal to refuse an offer, generally speaking, when you look for a job, you will also compare your heart to your heart. If you don’t plan to go, you can’t do it this way. 2. The reason for not committing a crime is because of course this HR is quite nervous about sending relevant information to the circle of friends, and as far as I know, there are HR groups in many places, which is not a circle of friends, you outsiders can’t see it. But they can do the same information sharing within the group. Therefore, you must be defensive. Although you can condemn such unprofessionals, it may be a fact that your job search has been affected. He is indeed unprofessional, but there is nothing you can do about it. Because all the answers are condemning this HR, but I think job seekers should be cautious is necessary. If you don’t go, don’t pick it up. If you pick it up, you will regret it. You should also think about how to communicate to make it easier for the other party to accept. After all, you don’t expect that all you meet are professional people.

loveyou
6 months ago

The behavior of a woman taking an offer but not getting a job may be unethical in the eyes of the general public (it is unethical if someone else agrees to it but fails to do so), but it is normal in the eyes of recruiters. The answerer used to be in charge of departmental personnel work for a period of time, because the department will leave from time to time, and the personnel department of the unit is not willing to spend money on a structured recruitment and interview procedure for a single position (the unit usually only unifies it at a fixed period of time each year Recruitment), so the respondent also has a lot of experience in guest HR recruitment interviews. From the experience of the respondent, if you want to recruit one, you usually need to interview 5-8 before you can select three. When the first candidate was notified, almost one-third of the cases that the first candidate failed to make a decision after thinking about it. When the face was dark, the three candidates did not come, or agreed to enter the job and passed the medical examination, and we also encountered the situation that they could not come the day before the signing. Therefore, in the eyes of frequently recruited HRs, this phenomenon should have been commonplace for a long time and there is a plan to deal with this situation. Therefore, its subsequent accusations seem to be a fuss. As for the subsequent posting of the resume to Moments, the respondent felt that it should be judged according to the situation. If a woman’s resume is sent to an online platform to openly search for potential employers, and the HR has searched for the resume on the online platform, there is no privacy issue. Because of the behavior of women sending resumes to unspecified companies on the Internet platform, it can be considered that they agree that the information filled in on their resumes can be accessed by anyone on the Internet. And if the woman submits the resume directly one-on-one, whether the information filled in on the resume is private can be further explored. As for the behavior of HR mentioned in other answers to be suspected of infringing on reputation rights or defamation, the respondent felt that it should not be considered as such. In terms of defamation, HR is only reporting facts, which does not fit the elements of defamation. As for the infringement of reputation rights, because the crime requires a private prosecution, that is, the lady must first file a complaint with the court, and the lady did not make such a claim in the relevant information, so the claim that HR infringes on the reputation right is also inappropriate—— Of course, after the lady’s complaint, the respondent didn’t feel that HR’s actions infringed on the right of reputation, because formally, the HR merely reported the facts, and then used a question sentence to raise the question, and did not make a value judgment, so it was impossible to talk about it. Violation of reputation. Of course, the above is only the personal opinion of the respondent as a non-legal professional. If you feel that the respondent’s opinion is wrong, please refer to the judgment and opinions of professional legal professionals.

strongman
6 months ago

Recruitment has always been a two-way choice, and anyone has the right to choose. When I need money urgently, will anyone be willing to hire me unconditionally? Of course not, and I would not ask for it. Because I know I don’t have that right. Therefore, this HR approach is not only wrong, it should be illegal. This Ms. Guo should sue him and let him recover Ms. Guo’s loss. No matter what the law allows, Ms. Guo can accept the form. The network is more and more developed, and the use is more and more common. If our laws cannot keep up, there will be more and more problems, and society will become more and more chaotic.

stockin
6 months ago

What we think is important, but not the most important. Objectively speaking, this behavior is already very bad behavior. It should not be a trivial matter to openly divulge her private information without permission. And it’s not considered malicious slander. The important thing is that such behavior should be clearly characterized, and the parties must pay their due price for it. Otherwise, it loses the meaning of the hot search. From another perspective, if Ms. Guo can easily protect her rights, there is no possibility of hot search. Therefore, the problem should not be limited to HR’s private disclosure of her resume, but expanded to protect and respect her privacy. I often say that the most basic principle of being a person should be to emphasize right and wrong and neglect gains and losses. Right or wrong is more important than immediate benefit. In a sense, the temporary change of the candidate’s mind does bring work troubles to HR. Recruiting a favorite worker is indeed not an easy task. It cannot be denied that Manager Chen has devoted a lot of time and energy to this. It is understandable to feel frustrated and lost for this. This is a common gain and loss in work. But because of the current gains and losses, the basic bottom line of right and wrong is lost, which is obviously too outrageous. Such a person sitting in the position of the personnel manager is also a very risky thing for the company. Of course, Ms. Guo is not wrong. If you have to give a high standard, you should talk to Chen about your concerns and possible choices when you receive the notice. Rather than choosing to say it the day before entering the job, give the other party more buffer time.

11
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x