Re: Rejection Letters

[Barry Kieffer <barry -dot- kieffer -at- EXGATE -dot- TEK -dot- COM>]

        Laurel writes:
        <snip> ...made me think about how many
> companies don't bother with sending out rejection letters--either as a
> result of an interview or a resume submission. I wonder if these companies
> realize how discourteous and unprofessional they are being...
        </snip>

Rejection letters imply that a resume or applicant was *rejected*. That is
pretty harsh. Even after an interview where an applicant is not offered a
position, some companies will not send out a rejection letter because they
may want to call that applicant back in a few weeks or months if they have
another opening, or something did not work out with their first selection.

Some companies do not send out letters for two valid reasons:

1. The applicant was never rejected. The applicant may not have been asked
for an interview "at this time", but most (maybe all for legal reasons) keep
every valid resume they receive on file.

2. The sheer number of resumes received. Try to imagine how many resumes
Microsoft, Intel, and others receive _each week_. The number is staggering.

There is nothing discourteous or unprofessional about not sending a letter
out for every single resume received. Some applicants, in a misguided
attempt to get noticed, will send the same company two slightly different
resumes every month.

Some companies, as a result of resume scanning, send out autoreply postcards
stating that they received your resume.

There is also nothing discourteous or unprofessional about calling that
company's HR department to inquire if they received your resume. That is
being interested and proactive.

Please don't think it discourteous or unprofessional; it is just business.

Have a great weekend!

Barry Kieffer

 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=