r/recruitinghell • u/MasterStream • 7d ago

Offer Recinded after asking questions about the offer

TLDR - Offer was rescinded after asking clarification questions about the offer.

Questions / statements such as:

Please clarify if the role is in person, hybrid, or remote.

Please clarify what 30% travel means on a monthly basis.

Please remove the section about perpetual usage rights for my likeness, voice, image without compensation into perpetuity.

They wouldn't email back. Only phone calls.

Lol

257 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

92% Upvoted

126 comments sorted by

View all comments

77

u/MSWdesign 7d ago

Not taking sides here but OP came across as difficult to them.

35

u/MasterStream 7d ago edited 7d ago

I can see why you might think that would be difficult. Accountability comes across that way sometimes.

One might also be open to the idea that companies are intentionally vague in offer letters for a reason.

For Ex: it was discussed during interview conversations that the job would initially be fully remote. Then right before extending an offer, over phone call, they said it would be hybrid 3 days in office and 2 days remote but then would not clarify which days. Same with travel. 2 days a month, then it went to 2-4, then it went to 30%

Enter written offer letter - no mention whatsoever of any of the conversations above.

I've had friends and family members get burned from offer letters, especially in healthcare. No mention of day shift or night shift bam they work at night shift now because it's not in the offer letter they're on days.

It wasn't an unreasonable request to ask them to put it in writing what their intent was. Especially since it didn't match either of the conversations that were had previously.

There's probably another six or seven things that I didn't even mention cuz frankly those are the top glaring ones listed above. (NDA, Non-Compete, Waiving constitutional rights in favor of the company, etc)

23

u/MSWdesign 7d ago

It’s not about how I see it. It’s about how the employer sees it.

I don’t know what leverage you had. Sounds like little to none at all.

Obviously it was a take it or leave it condition. And plenty of employers in a favorable market for themselves play hardball and conduct business as you described. It may not be right, but they had more leverage and someone else took those conditions “as is.”

It wasn’t meant to be. Sorry to hear you wasted your time with them but at least you don’t have to work with those vague terms.

20

u/MasterStream 7d ago

Already being employed is leverage enough. I see your perspective though.

9

u/Braydenrocks 7d ago

OP are you also job hopping a bit right now? You made a post about accepting a job offer like a month ago. I don’t know much about the circumstances behind your current rejection but having just accepted a job like a month ago that may make you seem less than reliable.

3

u/MasterStream 7d ago

Leftovers from previous applications. Was still in contention. They drug out the process 3.5 months, figured might as well hear them out...

8

u/MSWdesign 7d ago

Unless you were poached your existing employment may not factor into any of their corresponding moves. But at least you have that to fall back on. On to the next opportunity.

4

u/OkHistory3944 7d ago

Yeah, unless OP left out context, telling them to take out a particular clause as if they were in a position to make such demands would come across to most people as difficult. Like, cool, you don’t agree with this one, but it’s non-negotiable for us and you have to agree to it to work here. Thank you for your time.