They Can't Do That...Can They?
How did he land this "dream" work term? He researched the company
on the internet, submitted his resume, and followed up with an e-mail that contained
a link to his personal webpage, customized for that employer. Two days later,
they flew him to New York City for an interview and he was offered the position
the same day!
He had already been matched to a Canadian firm through his co-op program but
contacted that employer, explained the U.S. opportunity, and respectfully withdrew
his acceptance to their offer, giving them 6 weeks to find another student.
Even they seemed to appreciate what a coup it was for him to land the other
job and, while expressing disappointment, wished him good luck in his work term.
So, not only is he now working for this U.S. employer, he might also have sparked
some interest within the company to regularly source students from his co-op
program!
"Talk about a win-win situation…. it just doesn't get any better than
this!", he thinks as he opens a letter from his co-op office. The letter
informs him that they consider his decision not to honour his work agreement
with the matched employer to be "unprofessional" behaviour and sufficient
grounds to recommend not only a failed work term but also expulsion from the
co-op program.
"What's the big deal?", he says out loud, "They can't do
that...Can they?"
In an office tower in downtown Calgary, a Recruitment Manager for a major Canadian
employer opens an e-mail that has the ominous subject line: "Employer Beware".
It is an unsolicited reference letter from a university faculty member warning
the employer that they may have interviewed one of his teaching assistants for
graduate employment.
It goes on to say that this student is "without a doubt the most incompetent
and lazy TA" that they have ever "had the misfortune of working with!"
The e-mail details several of the student's shortcomings, provides the faculty
member's name, address, and e-mail/phone/fax numbers.
The note closes by stating that the faculty member would be "more than
happy to provide more information" if the employer would "find that
helpful". The Recruitment Manager is clearly only one of many names on
the blind distribution list for the note.
"Wow", thinks the Manager, "this is a new one!" He'd received
unsolicited poison reference letters before but they were always anonymous,
making them easy to discount as worthy of the delete button.
The Manager's mind races..."Is the student really bad enough to warrant
this kind of a ‘campaign' on the part of his current employer...Maybe we should
steer clear of this student?"..."Is there an unrelated personal issue
at play here that underlies the visceral and vengeful tone in the note?"..."Might this be a cruel joke being played on both the faculty member and the student by a malicious third party?"..."If authentic, such a condemning unsolicited reference from a private sector firm would be enough to raise serious ethical and legal issues... but from the student's university! They can't do that...Can they?"
A 4th year student is still sitting by the phone in Halifax waiting for a phone
call from a prospective employer. She has had a great interview with the employer
on campus almost a month ago. The job looked great and the interview went wonderfully!
She answered all the questions quickly, thoroughly and in eloquent detail. The
interviewer smiled and nodded her head approvingly throughout the interview.
The interviewer closed the interview by commenting on how well the student
had performed in the interview and assured her that she would be hearing from
them very soon. The interviewer also mentioned that the next set of interviews
would be held at their head office in Toronto and that the company would cover
all travel expenses.
After two weeks the student leaves a message on the interviewer's
answering machine and requests a call back. Three days later she leaves
another message and four days after that she calls the company's head
office and explains her situation to the receptionist, asking for a return
phone call...from anyone!
Another week goes by with no communication from the employer. "How dare
they keep me hanging like this?" The student's frustration is exacerbated
by her concern that while this employer is keeping her from getting on with
her job search, other opportunities might be passing her by. "How long
am I supposed to wait?"
She checks out www.cacee.com, and finds
the "They
Can't Do That! Can They? (Guidelines for Ethical Recruitment/Ombudsperson)"
section and sends an e-mail to the Ethics Committee of CACEE (Canadian Association
of Career Educators and Employers) at ombuds@cacee.com outlining her situation and stating, "This employer's behaviour is clearly unethical. They can't do that...Can they?"
The three cases outlined above come directly from the files of the
CACEE Ethics Committee. Like any ethical dilemma, ethics
in recruitment usually boil down to "what is thought, or known, to be right"
vs "issues of self-interest".
Discussions of ethical recruitment considerations tend to result in as many
new questions as answers. Upon further investigation, the ‘black and white'
ethical question tends to reveal itself as being one of various shades of grey.
Are there times when it is OK for a candidate to renege on their
acceptance of an employer's offer of employment if the benefit of a
newly developed opportunity is clearly and significantly better than the
one already accepted? After all it is a major benefit for the candidate
and only a minor inconvenience for the "big company".
Should an employer:
- Avoid the risk of a bad hire by screening out a candidate that a
past employer has labeled incompetent?
- Take the time (which he doesn't have) to investigate the
authenticity of an unsolicited poison reference letter?
- Discount the unsolicited input as biased and irrelevant?
Where do you draw the line between an employer's unprofessional
approach or poor recruitment processes and unethical behaviour?
During your search for work you are expected to treat prospective
employers respectfully and honestly. They are expected to do the same in
return. If you feel that an employer has subjected you to inappropriate
behaviour or unfair treatment during the campus recruitment process, the
Career Educators at your campus Career/Placement Centre are there to
provide you with information and support.
Additional information is available online at www.cacee.com Here you'll find
an array of resources including
CACEE's Guidelines for Ethical Recruitment, articles on recruitment ethics
and links to provincial human rights information.
You will also find an e-mail address for an ombudsperson (ombuds@cacee.com)
that will put you in touch with CACEE's Ethics Committee. The Ethics Committee
is comprised of 17 career educator and employer members and will respond (through
me, as Chair) in confidence to your questions or concerns. We may not give you
"the answer" but we will provide the benefit of our various perspectives
for your consideration.
As for the above scenarios:
In New York - The student's actions may very well have seriously jeopardized
the co-op school's relationship with its current employers. If the co-op program's
policies are clearly documented for its students then this student may have
some major politicking (or groveling) to look forward to if he wants to remain
in the co-op program.
Were the student's actions ethical? Is the "dream" work term worth
getting booted out of the co-op program and having the co-op program's reputation
sullied in the employer community? How much damage can the actions of a single
student really have on a school? After all, didn't the student mitigate the
damages to the first employer by providing early notification and didn't the
matched employer agree to the acceptance being withdrawn?
If word gets out about the student's "unprofessional" behaviour,
might it jeopardize his career prospects with the U.S. employer? With Canadian
employers?
(I told you, sometimes more questions than answers. What do you think?)
In Calgary - The employer did investigate through the university, the
university found the note to be authentic and entirely inappropriate. The
university initiated disciplinary action against the faculty member,
contacted all employers on the distribution list, and counseled the
student mentioned in the letter.
In Halifax - The employer's actions were unprofessional and
ineffective, but not unethical. The only thing that kept the student from
"getting on with her job search" was her own fixation on this
single employment opportunity.