Re:We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage
by marcosdumay on Saturday April 20, 2019 @03:59PM
(#19708555)
How is it not a promise? I fail to imagine it being said in a way that isn't one.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage
by revvx on Saturday April 20, 2019 @05:00PM
(#19708845)
It is a verbal promise, not a contract. They just broke it.
They were unprofessional.
Re:We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage
by aoeusnth1 on Saturday April 20, 2019 @05:11PM
(#19708909)
A verbal promise can very easily be interpreted as a contract by a court. (IANAL, and clearly YANAL)
Re:We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage
by wool_gather on Saturday April 20, 2019 @09:21PM
(#19709982)
The legal side is almost irrelevant. The situation is that they're trying to initiate what should be a mutually-beneficial, longish-term working relationship. Leading into it with this kind of letdown isn't a good start.
Re:We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage
by baddox on Saturday April 20, 2019 @07:20PM
(#19709543)
The commenter hadn’t even done the interview yet. There’s no way a court would interpret this as a contract to pay the person that amount.
Re:We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage
by marcosdumay on Saturday April 20, 2019 @06:15PM
(#19709233)
The only reason it's not a contract is because the job offer wasn't closed yet. This is more similar to false advertising.
Re:We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage
by nwatson on Saturday April 20, 2019 @08:01PM
(#19709688)
The hiring company just counters they "can give X" for an imminently qualified candidate but after the interview process they feel the candidate has too little experience or aptitude and is being offered a job in spite of their shortcomings and should be so happy with the offer.