Recruiter Sparks Debate by Rejecting Candidate for ‘Offer Shopping’

A recruiter’s decision to reject a candidate for seeking better offers while already holding one has ignited a fierce debate on social media platforms.

Siddharth Sharma, an entrepreneur and former CTO of Shaadi.com, shared his encounter with a candidate who disclosed his intention to refuse a secured position if a better offer came along.

Just met a candidate who said that they're due to join some place in 15 days and were looking for a better offer. I politely declined to continue the call.

Candidates, I understand the compulsions but offer shopping is not elite behaviour. It reeks of desperation and tells the…

— svs 🇮🇳 (@_svs_) April 8, 2024

Sharma criticized the practice of “offer shopping,” denouncing it as a display of desperation and a lack of integrity. He emphasized the importance of honoring commitments and advised job seekers to focus on honing their skills rather than chasing better offers.

The post polarized opinions, with some supporting Sharma’s stance while others deemed it unreasonable. Critics argued that job seekers are merely emulating the behavior of organizations that often rescind job offers or impose arbitrary conditions on candidates.

Read some views of users given in comments section of the said post, Here:

” Bad business for recruiters “

“The person in question here was not just gathering offers but accepted one and was ready to join. And still wanted to try other options. This isn’t a good thing.”

“Apparently companies want people who should be dedicated to them even before the offer. I recently learnt that you can’t even tell companies that in case they offer you a job, you will need 3-4 weeks as you have other interviews lined up. They want you to choose only them.”

In a landscape where job security is precarious and layoffs are commonplace, many defended the candidate’s right to pursue the best opportunity available. They contended that job seekers should prioritize their interests, just as companies prioritize theirs.

The debate underscores broader questions about ethics in hiring and recruitment, highlighting the tension between individual aspirations and organizational imperatives. As discussions continue, the episode prompts reflection on the evolving dynamics of the job market and the ethical responsibilities of both employers and candidates.