s a clauses where the replacement is subject to the client has settled their invoices. We already start the replacement search, however i think it will be fair if we did get paid prior doing this. Does anyone have been in this situation before ? and what didi you do to solves the issues ?…
inds out about it, why would I lose street cred or my reputation. I didn't lie did I? The candidate did and obviosuly they would have lied to me as well. And yes providing they sacked them within the first 90 days I would be happy to replace the candidate free of charge. I don't see your point on that one or the relevance.
I never said whatever it takes to win win win. I was merely pointing out that by me getting through to the candidate who turns out to be the one offered the position is a win win win.
I think you will find that Karen changed your situational ethics argument to situational lying and I was following the argument with her.
Like I said to Karen, its all a bit hypocritical really because even you say its okay to lie to a candidate about the reason they didn't get hired, even though the very reason they didn't get the job is probably more illegal than the ruse in the first place with the gatekeeper.
Not given candidates true feedback is not only lying but it is cowardly because the recruiter is avoiding telling the truth to save their own embarrassment rather than the candidates. If this example were true and legal and the person really did have a problem that was preventing them getting employment, then it is the recruiters professional duty to be honest with them so they can address the problem.
See how hypocritical this all sounds? You have highlighted several areas where bigger lies are told but seem acceptable which is situational everything.
Rusing is not about desperation. It's about finding the best way to get to a candidate. Thats all.…