On file for one year
One duplicitous part of the job interview and application process I’m noticing is the “We’ll hold your resume on file for up to one year” line. Of course, this comes after the line where they say, “Sorry, but we’re not going to extend you an employment invitation at this time.” I’ve been lucky, and I’ve gotten about as many job offers as rejections. Of course, not even the best potential employee is going to get 100% job offers; there’s always going to be some rejections, particularly because no one person can really be the best qualified for a large number of different jobs.
But anyway, back to the “on file for one year” line. Isn’t this the biggest cop-out ever? I wonder if, in the history of employment, there’s even been a single person who, after being rejected, the company goes through year-old resumes that are theoretically “on file” and actually hires one of them. I don’t think this is the primary, secondary, or even tertiary purpose of telling you that they’re keeping your resume on file.
What it’s really about it getting you to bugger off. Seriously. They’ve made it clear that they don’t want you, and to make sure that you stay away for a bit they give you this false hope that maybe, some time in the coming year, you’ll be contacted. So rather than having to process applications for the same person twice in one year, they can just say, “Oh, we already have it on file, and we’ll tell you if something comes up” when denying the second application.
I just wish they could be a little bit more honest about the process. They’re giving false hope. I can easily imagine the poor geek who, after being turned down at a place he really wanted to work (say, Google), forlornly just hangs around doing nothing for a year after turning down other offers in the false hope that they will somehow change their minds and offer employment anyway. Sorry bud, it’s just not going to happen. Accept the rejection and move on. They don’t want you, and it’s unfair to keep you hanging on a slim thread of a “promise”.
So when some employer tries to feed me the “we’ll keep it on file” line, I realize it for what it really is, and cross that company off my list. It’s not even possible to respond to these inquiries usually. Whereas solicitations for employment come from real people with real contact information (and they want you to be in touch), rejection notices almost always come from non-replyable email addresses with disclaimers in the email itself that no human reads the dummy account that the rejection is coming from. That should tell you everything you need to know right there. Actually getting a job offer after they’ve cut off contact in such a manner is more unlikely than getting a good deal at a used car dealership.
April 4th, 2007 at 15:35
I think I remember one case where we filled a position, and then another similar position opened up (possibly in another department; my memory’s hazy) and old resumes were pulled out and reexamined. Or maybe we just talked about it.
At any rate, this doesn’t disprove your main thesis. And since job-hunters pretty much understand that “we’ll keep your resume on file” means “we don’t want you now, and don’t expect to hear from us again”, the only people you’d get by trawling old resumes are the people who haven’t managed to get a job in however many months the resume has been languishing in your files.
April 4th, 2007 at 17:13
Hah, you bring up an excellent final point that I didn’t consider at first. That really would consist of scraping the bottom of the barrel. I know, in my case, it’s going to be pointless for any of these companies I’m “on file” with to contact me, because at that point I’ll already be working at one of the places that did give me a job offer. It really is quite the pathetic applicant who hasn’t secured a job many months down the line.