my employee is abusing our incentive program

by Alison Green on June 27, 2022

A reader writes:

Our company has a program to incentivize employees to refer job candidates, and we offer a referral bonues if we end up hiring someone they referred. We’re usually glad to get referred candidates into our pipeline.

However, we have one employee, Joe, who loves to send referrals. Rather than referring friends or former coworkers, he “screens” people on LinkedIn who are looking for new jobs and sends them to our hiring team. We usually ask how he knows the person he’s referring and the answer is something vague “works with my old roommate” or “found them through their uncle on LinkedIn.” Sometimes he’s even scoured LinkedIn on his own to find strangers he can encourage to apply.

I recently screened one of the referrals Joe sent over and didn’t think the candidate was well qualified at all. Joe then asked how the screen went and I told him point blank that I wouldn’t be moving them forward. He became defensive and said that the person sounded great when they spoke on the phone and had a lot of skills we are looking for. I explained they didn’t have skills we was looking for. I didn’t tell the employee that he isn’t trained at screening people and shouldn’t be attempting to do so. Joe came back again to talk about it and casually mentioned that he thought the candidate deserved “a fighting chance.”

Our managers have never liked Joe’s referrals. I feel like he’s wasting our time screening candidates he doesn’t even know, just to give himself a shot at earning referral bonuses. Should I address this with him in any way? Can I tell him to back off and only refer people he knows well and can vouch for?

I answer this question over at Inc. today, where I’m revisiting letters that have been buried in the archives here from years ago (and sometimes updating/expanding my answers to them). You can read it here.

You may also like:
{ 169 comments }

{ 169 comments… read them below }

    1. Greg C.*

      People will get weird and forceful about free cookies. I wouldn’t read much into that.

      1. Carol the happy elf*

        Cookies with the chocolate chips picked from the top of the last three!
        The gunk left on the platter after a birthday cake! (True story. That goo. Fer real….)
        People can be incredibly territorial about referral bonuses, two siblings at an early company each referred a cousin who was fresh out of grad school and they came to blows in the parking garage. Bloody noses and knuckles. One black eye and a chipped tooth, pre-security cameras.

        Luckily in my current job, you can only refer a direct report or someone you’ve known for 2 years. If there will be a referral bonus, it’s withheld until the new hire passes the 6-month mark and has had a good review as well.
        Nobody can get a referral bonus until they’ve had 2 reviews themselves, although that was suspended during Covid. Bless LinkedIn; otherwise this guy might dig up an old phonebook.

      1. Rage*

        My org does $1,000. $250 when the referred employee hits the 90 day mark, the remainder when they reach 1 year. The only restriction is you cannot earn a referral bonus on a re-hire.

      2. KuklaRed*

        My (current) company gives $1500 for individual contributor positions and $3000 for management positions — anything from associate director on up. It’s a decent chunk of change.

    3. quill*

      The threshhold for a reward that will get people to develop great efforts to game the system isn’t particularly high. It’s the idea of getting the money for what they originally see as very little effort that does it.

    4. Snarktini*

      Ours start at 1500 and I’ve seen up to 6000 for hot jobs. Enough to make people weird.

    5. Anonym*

      $1000-5000 where I am. Well, some roles have zero referral bonus, but for mid to senior ones that’s typically the range. Greg C. is right about the cookies, but this definitely adds incentive to the weirdness for those so inclined.

    6. Antilles*

      Really depends.
      My understanding is that as a general thing, referral bonuses usually range from a few hundred bucks to a couple thousand. But in some recent letters where the topic has come up, some commenters have said their industries have it in the five figures for certain hard-to-fill or high-value roles (IIRC at least one commenter said their company pays like $30k).
      That said, even in the latter case, I’m assuming the actual once-hired salaries are proportionally larger (e.g., $30k referral bonus is for a job firmly in the six digits), in which case, it’d still seem dumb to torpedo your internal reputation like this guy is doing.

    7. hayling*

      If the person stays for 6 months I get $4k, and if it’s a Priority Role I get $6k (but I work at a VC-funded tech company so hiring is super competitive and they have money to spend on this)

    9. Tsunade*

      At my last company, referral bonuses were $10K for all roles except engineers – they were worth $50K. (NOT a typo!)

      Not sure if the numbers are still the same – this was pre-COVID.

    10. BlueWolf*

      Our referral bonuses start at $2,500 and increase depending on the type of position. Granted, I think you get half if they stay 6 months and the other half at a year, so it’s not like it’s instant money.

    12. Avril Ludgateau*

      I know one federal contractor who was offering $10,000 bonuses to employees who successfully referred candidates who already had the highest level of security clearance.

      (In the US federal gov’t, there are numerous levels of security clearance that involve thorough, expensive, and time-consuming background checks. People can be denied clearance for any number of reasons. Different jobs, contracts, clients require different clearance, and the candidate pool for the highest level is ostensibly sparse. Contractors don’t want to pay or delay work on sensitive projects, and because a security clearance is not guaranteed, the process is a risky investment. So they look for people who are already cleared.)

      1. Federal Contractor*

        My company offers $5k for most roles and $10k for particularly high-priority roles, all cleared. Plus right now they’re having a raffle that anyone who refers a candidate who is interviewed–not even hired–is entered into.

    13. H.C.*

      I worked in a specialized healthcare field (oncology) & it’s up to $10k for referring an oncology-specialized nurse (half upfront, other half after their 1st year.)

    14. Carrie Bradshaw*

      I work in Tech. Our referral bonus starts at $1500 and goes up to $3500 for senior level positions. We can only refer someone we’ve worked with before. Sounds like this company needs to add that restriction too.

      1. kiki*

        My former company gave different rates for referrals depending on whether you actually worked with the person or not. So if a position is eligible for a $1000 referral, somebody who actually worked with the person would get $1000. Someone who knew the person through a professional organization or socially would get $500. There was more trust and credence given for knowing somebody’s quality of work vs. simply knowing someone. I think they wanted to lower the incentive for employees to refer absolutely everyone they know that could theoretically be fit, but not completely eliminate the potential benefit of someone remembering their brother-in-law is actually has background in a niche field.

    15. Meganly*

      It’s $4k if they are hired and stay 6 months at my company.

      This reminds me of a guy at my last job who, instead of doing his work, searched around the internet all day for news/sites incorrectly trademarking our company/products. We had a $100 bounty for finding each instance. He was so aggressive about it that the bounty program was eliminated because literally no one else was getting the money. He ended up being moved into another position that would theoretically take up more of his time. He goofed around doing other stuff instead and at a happy hour flat-out told me that he 100% made up the numbers that he “researched.”

    16. EmmaPoet*

      I believe I got a $150 referral bonus at the company I used to work at. I only referred one person, who went on to stay for nearly a decade, so I figure I did OK with that pick. But I never saw anyone get weird over them.

    17. A Simple Narwhal*

      My company just upped our referral bonus to $7500, so it’s no small change! But as others have said, we’ve all seen people act weirder for far less.

    18. Dan M*

      Worked at a large big box store( think Orange).
      They gave $25 for a referral! Think that might have been only after the person was hired.

    19. PostalMixup*

      I got 2500 for my successful referral. I believe there’s an additional incentive for referring people from underrepresented groups, and this person may have qualified for that. At my company, the hire has to be in their position for three months before the bonus pays out.

    20. Petty Betty*

      It gets real heated. I’ve heard some really wild stories from back when the pipeline was being built, and I know of a few times when certain specialties were needed in very specific fields for remote work.
      Poaching happens, and recruitment/referral/hiring bonuses are huge incentives. Coming between that extra money and those who have possibly earned it is never a good thing.

      1. Chief Bottle Washer*

        I really hate the term “poaching” in reference to hiring activities. Employees are not protected wildlife off-limits to other employers. They are individuals who can see a better deal and decide to leave their current employer for that opportunity.

    21. No Longer Gig-less Data Analyst*

      At my employer it’s $500 for production floor positions, $1000 – $5000 for corporate/office depending on the position.

    22. Koalafied*

      Typically at least a few weeks up to a few months worth of rent/mortgage. My nonprofit does a flat $750 for any role, paid out upon the successful referral’s six-month anniversary – which is at the low end of the scale, being a nonprofit, and also probably very close to a full month’s rent for our younger staff who live with roommates.

    23. Bethany*

      At my firm they’re $3,000 to $5,000. It’s still cheaper than going through a recruiter, so something like Joe’s process might actually be encouraged for us.

    24. Meg*

      It depends. I worked at one company where the reward was a $50 Outback gift card, and the place I work now can be up to $10,000 for a manager referral. (Like referring someone who is hired as a manager, not like existing managers get better bonuses)

      I’ve worked at places with every amount in between.

    25. Ellie*

      The standard referral bonus where I work is $2000, and some key roles come with a $5000 bonus. If he’s screening people on LinkedIn (on work time? using work resources?) that could add up to a lot of money.

    26. InsertNameHere*

      My old job offered $3,000. $1,500 given at the 3 month mark, the rest at the 6 month mark.

    27. Bill and Heather's Excellent Adventure*

      We recently had a letter about an employee DEMANDING that the co-worker who referred him share her referral bonus! They bring out the weird in people.

  2. OwlEditor*

    Dang, why didn’t I think of this! ha ha.
    At my company referrals for certain positions (if they’re hired) can be worth $100 or more.

    1. Carol the happy elf*

      My daughter got a gift card from her job, but it was a local nonprofit. Paid for her weekly groceries and new kid shoes, and she wasn’t expecting it. She was so excited, and it made her day.
      I think she enjoyed that card more than I enjoyed my last signing bonus which was pretty big- but expected.

    2. Meow*

      $100 actually seems low but maybe that’s because of the industry I’m in. Our referral bonuses are $2000 for standard roles and $4000 for roles that are hard to fill.

      1. Gnome*

        My industry is currently understaffed… my company STARTs at 2500 and go up to 10k (hard to fill) AND a temporary bonus if they hire two folks we refer by a certain date. Somebody I know in the same industry, different company, got 5k for a junior employee referral. So, these can be massive.

        I expressly asked if we needed to be able to vouch for people – because I’ve got know folks who have been reaching out with THEIR contacts who are looking for work – and was told no, but to try and talk/email with them a bit first not as an interview, but to pass along a sense of how they might fit culturally.

  3. hamsterpants*

    I’m really surprised by the legal liability aspect! I occasionally refer people from my network to job postings at my company, and I always talk with them on the phone, first. They always have a few questions about the position and I always want to avoid wasting my manager’s time with a candidate who totally misunderstands the position. Unlike LW, I strictly refer only people I know well and think could do a good job based on my own experience with them.

    Should I avoid these informational discussions going forward??

    1. I'm Just Here For The Cats!*

      I don’t think thats the same thing. You aren’t reaching out to people that you don’t know and saying they should apply. It sounds like Joe is almost doing a phone screening.

      1. Wintermute*

        That’s my take on it, an informal discussion with someone you have a relationship with is probably not going to be seen, legally, as an official action of your employer. But what amounts to cold call recruiting is very different and a reasonable person could mistake it for an official action of the employer.

        1. Antilles*

          I feel like the number of ‘referrals’ plays in to it too – the guy in the letter seems to be doing this constantly, which just feels different than doing it once every couple months or whatever.

          1. Wintermute*

            I was thinking more from the perspective of someone who would be making a complaint, someone he contacts. They won’t know how much he does this, but they will know that he reached out to them without prior contact after seeing them on linkedin or whatever else, which would feel very much like what a recruiter does.

    2. Clobberin' Time*

      No, because you are not “screening” for the company. What Joe is trying to do is set himself up as some kind of quasi-hiring manager on the company’s behalf. If the company is aware of this and permits it, then they’re setting themselves up to be liable if Joe’s “screening” process is less than savory.

      Informally referring people in your network to the company isn’t screening and you aren’t pretending to screen on the company’s behalf.

    3. Oakwood*

      Joe randomly contacts a stranger on LinkedIn: “Hi, I’m Joe. I work with ABC corporation. Would you be interested in a position my company has open?”

      At this point, it sounds like Joe is acting in an official capacity recruiting employees.

      Joe continues: “You would! Great. Let me ask you a few questions. Are you married? Are you pregnant? Are you trans or gay? Who did you vote for in the last election? How old are you? What is your religion? Are you disabled? What’s your national origin?”

      Joe is a walking time bomb. Because he has no training (and from the letter, he seems to not have the common sense of a 2 x 4) he’s likely to ask something that will drive away potential candidates or worse, something that will land the company in court.

      I would shut him down. I’d tell him that because he has been abusing the system he is being excluded from the referral bonus program. Even if one of his referrals gets hired, there will be no bonus for him.

      The purpose of the referral program is to give the company an inside track when hiring due to a relationship with an employee. If they wanted people scouring LinkedIn and such they could hire an independent recruiter.

      1. Artemesia*

        Why are companies so timid in dealing with outrageous behavior which this is? He is actively screening for the company without authorization and management should have told him to cut it out when they realized what he was doing. Of course he is perceived as representing the company and of course an applicant would feel they had been recruited by the company.

      2. Love to WFH*

        That happened to me. It took me a bit to figure out that the guy wasn’t a recruiter or hiring manager but just fishing. I was irritated.

    4. learnedthehardway*

      You’re fine to speak with your own network. The liability comes in when someone is acting as an unofficial recruiter for the organization – if you’re talking to people in your network, odds are you know enough about them to know if they’re reasonably qualified, and you’re not screening for things that are delicate issues (like whether they would be entitled to work in your country, whether they require accommodations to interview, etc. etc.) Also, since they’re your contacts, they presumably feel some level of engagement with you so if you did slip up or said something the wrong way, they know you’re NOT a recruiter or HR, and so wouldn’t hold it against you.

      The guy in this situation is acting as a recruiter, not as a networking contact. He’s representing the organization to people who do not know him, and from their perspective, he is speaking for the organization, not just from his own perspective as an employee. That means if he screws up, and asked an illegal question, the candidate is going to assume it was the organization that authorized him to ask.

    5. NerdyKris*

      The problem is he’s screening the candidates. Which implies he’s telling some not to apply. That can be an issue. You don’t know if he just told a female candidate that a job is too difficult for her, or a differently abled person that the company won’t accommodate them.

      1. linger*

        Joe’s essentially asking everyone he contacts to apply (regardless of their qualifications or skills, per OP’s account). Which does no screening work for the company, hence has no value for the company, and going forward, a signing bonus could be denied Joe on those grounds.
        If Joe is performing demographic screening, that would indeed be a legal minefield — but, while Joe hasn’t been trained to avoid that, we also have no evidence that he’s doing that.

  4. Richard Hershberger*

    Joe is why we can’t have nice things. In addition to Alison’s suggestions, another way to go would be to modify the program adding an upper limit to the number of referrals per year that are potentially eligible for the bonus. Look at the highest number any non-Joe has made, and make that the limit. So Joe can spin the wheel three (to pick a number out of the air) times a year. Win or lose, that’s it until next year.

    1. KHB*

      That was exactly what I was thinking too: Limit the number of shots Joe can take at the prize, and he’ll probably be more discerning about who he refers (and even if not, you’ll only have to waste a finite amount of your time on crappy Joe-referrals).

      But I also agree with Alison that if Joe is reaching out to random people as an unofficial recruiter for the company, he needs to cut that out entirely, not just limit it to a few times a year.

    2. Purple Cat*

      This is a really good idea. And it can be an increasing number if your referrals ACTUALLY get hired. So Joe with his losers only gets 3, but Sally who has a kick-ass network can maybe get 5. Kind of like the NFL challenge rule.

      1. MsSolo UK*

        Maybe a successful referral doesn’t count towards your total. So you can have 3 unsuccessful referrals a year before you’re cut off?

    3. Anonym*

      Ooh, I just imagined a particularly stubborn Joe going into even higher gear on sourcing/vetting candidates for his newly-limited referral slots… which goes right back to the eternal advice: whether you change policy or no, make sure you talk to the guy!

    4. Antilles*

      Not sure about that.
      For the rest of the company, this is going to feel weird especially for the people who haven’t heard of Joe’s constant referrals. Some people will likely read the policy and think they might be part of the problem. Others will interpret the policy as wanting to be way more selective on referrals so they avoid offering up otherwise good candidates.
      Meanwhile, Joe is likely to ignore the policy outright, argue that he’s an exception, or claim that actually just one more this one is really good or etc.
      If the current referral policy is working fine except for Joe, the answer isn’t “change what works 99% of the time”, it’s to sit down with Joe and fix that 1% with a direct conversation.

    5. Kes*

      I don’t think I would recommend this. If people have more than three great people they can refer the company wants them to refer all of them, and the company doesn’t want Joe misrepresenting himself/the company/their hiring process even once. This is the epitome of ‘put in rules rather than deal with the problem’ – they should just talk to Joe and make it clear that the referrals process is for people you already know, and he needs to stop trying to refer people he doesn’t actually know.

    6. learnedthehardway*

      This is a really good idea, not only for Joe, but also because employees will typically refer people they know and like, without necessarily making sure the individual really fits any particular role. This will mean they do a little more legwork.

      (Spoken as someone who has ended up interviewing completely unqualified candidates who were referrals from senior people, who should have known better).

    7. NerdyKris*

      I think Alison’s suggestion was enough. You don’t need a company wide rule for something only one person is doing. You can just tell that one person to stop doing it.

    8. Artemesia*

      You don’t have to play games. You can deal with Joe clearly and definitively. We don’t want referrals about people you don’t know well; it violates our policy to be recruiting through linked in or other sites. Cut it out immediately.

    9. tamarack and fireweed*

      Not so sure that’s necessary – making sure Joe doesn’t interview people on his own reconnaissance should do the trick.

      (This and of course that a “referral” is a complete application submitted by the applicant. If Joe can’t pre-screen people that are strangers from the internet then this naturally cuts down on how many Joe-referrals will come in.)

    10. Santiago*

      I think that’s a logical idea, but my reading of the tea leaves is that this is a management issue, not a policy issue. Someone needs to tell Joe to knock it off and cut him off from this program.

  5. Pay No Attention To The Man Behind The Curtain*

    As part of referring someone, all employees should have to fill in the blank (is there a form? how is this tracked?) how they know the candidate, then just immediately screen out anyone that isn’t a first-hand acquaintance, no exceptions. At least this will cut down on the OP’s aggravation and wasted time. When Joe’s efforts aren’t being rewarded by converting into interviews, maybe he’ll eventually learn to target his efforts better.

    1. Dust Bunny*

      This. They need to make it a lot more work for Joe and to not pay out the bonus unless the referral gets further down the interview pipline.

      1. Her name was Joanne*

        At our place, there’s no bonus unless the person gets the job and keeps it for six months.

      2. Fluffy Fish*

        I don’t think the timing of the bonus is really an issue. Referral bonuses aren’t typically paid until not only the person is hired, but they’ve stayed a certain amount of time.

        The people Joe is referring are not being hired so he’s not getting anything – the potential is enough to keep him trying.

      3. Maggie*

        I highly doubt they’re paying him anything for unsuccessful interviews. Most places the person needs to be at minimum hired! And typically stay for a certain period of time (in my experience 90 days to 6 months for entry level)

    2. Smithy*

      I think the phrase “first hand acquaintance” is likely too broad, and could probably be narrowed down to categories like former colleague, former supervisor/supervisee, professional network, and other.

      For those in the professional network/other category you could allow yourself to treat that as a nice to know. For someone like Joe, if the rest of their resume is average to weak – then they don’t even require a screening interview if you have enough other candidates. However, for the rest of employees who rarely if ever make referrals – if it’s someone they knew from grad school or is the wife of their partner’s coworker – whatever – if their resume stands alone, then the referral works as a nice to have astrix. (Plus the bonus option should that person get hired)

      If right now the referral program works as a guarantee to at least a screening interview, then maybe update that language along with some generic “we have very competitive applicant pools and are interviewing top candidates, therefore going forward only those marked as former colleagues will be guaranteed a screening interview” blah blah. That way for any push back for someone like Joe or future characters either looking to refer family members or chase bonuses – there’s just copy/paste language and if someone won’t quit, then that’s an escalation to their manager.

      1. Pay No Attention To The Man Behind The Curtain*

        Usually the point of a referral program is to find qualified candidates the company couldn’t find on their own. I think that even the rare referral of the “wife of the partner’s coworker” is still too far afield to qualify as a good referral, but the person from grad school would still qualify as a first-hand acquaintance depending on how long it’s been since grad school. I wouldn’t want to be too limited to only “former colleagues,” etc. because it’s good to have referrals from candidate pools the company wouldn’t already know of.

        1. louvella*

          I don’t think the goal is always just to find more qualified candidates than what they’re already getting. In some fields (like behavioral health/social services, which is what the organization I work at does) getting any candidates at all is a struggle. I don’t hesitate to refer someone I don’t really know because I know our recruiters will be grateful just to have someone apply at all.

        2. Smithy*

          To louvella’s point – and the reason I chose the example of “the wife of your partner’s coworker” – is that it can really depend on different people’s networks and fields of practice what that might mean. In some fields, having spouses in the same/similar line of work is pretty common, and so double dates can end up with a lot more shop talk and learning about people’s professional backgrounds. Same thing with “students in the same grad school cohort” – a lot of those people were friends I liked more so than potential coworkers I’d vouch for. So I happily refer them to positions as opposed to recommending them.

          And I think most HR departments opening it up that broadly as opposed to just former coworkers/colleagues are viewing referrals as different than references. To the OP’s benefit, I think distinguishing between category A/B will help so they better know when the ties are that tight without losing the incentives to the greater mix of someone’s network. If someone you’ve successfully coordinated a complicated tournament soccer carpool with all season happens to also be an accountant at a larger firm – and you know your company is hiring for that….sure it’s not the same as having worked together. But it’s also not the same as not knowing them at all.

          I think of it as speaking another language fluently for a job that doesn’t require it but in a company where some others do speak it. It’s not necessary, but it is nice to have.

    3. Rayray*

      I don’t know, I get that, but part of networking is introducing people to people you know. I could see someone making an honest attempt to help out a friend of a friend. Good networking is a great tool to finding a job.

      1. Mockingjay*

        Sure. But in this case, I tell friend of friend to apply directly on their own merits. Since I can’t vouch for their work, I can’t (in good conscience) expect the referral bonus.

        1. JR*

          But that’s the difference between a referral and a recommendation. You can’t vouch for (recommend) a friend of a friend, but you can refer them. And if I have a strong professional network, then the contacts of my contacts are disproportionately likely to be strong candidates for a job in my field.

        2. louvella*

          Honestly I wouldn’t bother to tell them if there wasn’t a possibility of me getting paid for it.

          But it benefits my organization if I refer them, that’s why they have the program.

          Not to defend this dude, who is definitely doing something different.

  6. Wintermute*

    I know it’s an old letter, and the advice is very good, but there’s one thing I’d like to mention. This is one thing where someone’s level of acculturation and work experience REALLY matters.

    If the majority of their work experience was service industry, retail or call centers; industries that tend to be perpetually on the hunt for employees and have low hard requirements then they could well be used to the norm being as long as they’re not a felon and can fog a mirror and pass a drug test go ahead and refer them! (in fact for some industries the first and last are strictly optional for good reason).

    In fact, the intent and weight given to referrals and how they are either distinct from or synonymous with a personal recommendation varies from employer to employer so much that it might simply be a matter of spelling out how YOUR company intends for it to be used (and not assuming this should be common knowledge)

  7. Egmont Apostrophe*

    If Joe’s working as a recruiter he should be able to take feedback on the quality of his work.

    1. I went to school with only 1 Jennifer*

      If he were working as a recruiter, there wouldn’t be a problem because he’d be trained. But he’s not a recruiter, he’s just a random employee.

      1. Jill*

        and recruiters are not included in the incentive referral program. It’s literally their job.

  8. bamcheeks*

    Does the referral process require you to screen the candidate? I don’t quite understand why obviously unsuitable candidates aren’t getting rejected at CV stage, or if everyone who applies gets a phone screen?

    1. Wintermute*

      Referral candidates often do start the process at a slightly higher stage. If the referral program is intended for more personal recommendations and people you have a closer relationship with then they might do phone interviews just as a way of helping the referrer save face and avoid an awkward situation in their relationship.

      It’s also quite possible that it’s a situation where it’s not immediately obvious someone is or isn’t suitable until you drill in a little: E.g. “when you say experience with foosoft in what capacity was that?” If they say as a user and you’re looking for an administrator, or they use the local on-prem and your company wants Foosoft Cloud Service then a candidate with “8 years experience” that looked really promising could go to the bottom of the pile in an instant.

    2. learnedthehardway*

      In one org I worked for, ANY candidate referred by staff at a certain level or above got interviewed. It was SUCH a waste of time. Notable was the parking lot attendant I had to interview for a finance manager job (short story – it was a waste of time all around). In this company, senior staff would refer people to do favours for friends and business contacts. Eventually, the higher level higher ups figured it out, and changed the policy to all resumes referred would be reviewed but only qualified candidates would be contacted, much to the relief of hiring managers.

    3. NerdyKris*

      It doesn’t sound like LW is calling the candidates, but that Joe is getting pushy when they don’t.

    4. Rough Week*

      This is what I wondered. If a candidate is obviously unqualified, the resume/CV screen should weed them out (except for the rare person who can write a brilliant resume but can’t talk their way out of a wet paper bag). And most resume/CV screens filter out a lot of unqualified folks anyway, so a bunch of bad referrals shouldn’t break the whole system.
      If referrals are going immediately to phone screens, that may be the problem. But I don’t think I’d recommend that, it puts a lot of pressure and conflicting incentives on the screener.

  9. Mouse*

    This is a big problem in incentivization that economists call “the multitasking problem”. When you incentivize one activity, it often leads people to neglect other non-incentivized activities. It’s a fundamental part of human nature to do the work that maximizes our reward.

    It may be worth looking at your reward structure overall. If Joe can earn more money (or other incentive) from his referrals than through putting that time into doing his work well, of course he will focus his time on finding referrals. You need to make it more valuable to Joe to spend his time on his work (and if he’s not good enough at his core role to meet any incentive standard, and THAT’s why he’s focusing on referrals, then it’s time to move on from Joe).

    1. Alton Brown's Evil Twin*

      Excellent point. Misaligned incentives explain so many stupid things that happen in business.

  10. Jamboree*

    Would it also be reasonable to explain to Joe that in addition to harming his own reputation by referring so many unqualified candidates, he’s also doing those candidates a disservice bc Joe’s low credibility as a refer-er (is that a word) is lowering the screeners’ expectations of his refer-ees. And sure, someone might “deserve” a chance but if the hiring manager already has a full dance card to choose from, they don’t need to interview someone whose referral arrived tarnished in the first place.

    1. SMH*

      This +1000
      We had an employee in a different department referring everyone and their dog to our department and they were not qualified. They were also submitting ridiculous resumes with errors etc. and he was damaging his reputation within our department. Finally I reached out to HR and explained the pattern I was seeing with his referrals. They reached out to him and told him that he wasn’t helping himself. It didn’t stop all of his referrals but it did slow them down.

    2. just some guy*

      It sounds like most of his referrals are people who just aren’t qualified, in which case the disservice is less a matter of hurting their chances than one of wasting their time.

      OTOH, it sounds like Joe isn’t the kind of person who’s tremendously bothered by wasting other people’s time :-/

  11. KofSharp*

    My company has a $2,000 referral bonus, but it comes with “If the person you referred wasn’t good, your reputation will suffer”/you will be removed from certain promotion opportunities.

    1. Wintermute*

      I feel like that’s a little unfair, you can’t control someone’s behavior and you can’t know a lot about how they might work for a given company even if you also work there. People change, circumstances change, even if you make a carefully considered recommendation you might not know it’s not going to work.

      1. KofSharp*

        It’s not my policy, and there’s varying degrees of “what they do about it”:
        Not QUITE a culture fit? Ok. Fine, maybe it doesn’t reflect too much on the referrer.
        Incompetent and an obvious not culture fit? WTF were you thinking?

      2. DG*

        This is a bizarre and wildly unnecessary approach. A referral just gets someone’s foot in the door. If the recruiter, hiring manager, and (likely multiple rounds’ worth of) interviewers can’t determine that someone would be a terrible employee during the hiring process, then they need to either reset their expectations or train their interviewers better.

        Short of someone blatantly misrepresenting their referee’s background and qualifications, there are are no scenarios in which an employee should be punished for making a bad referral.

          1. KofSharp*

            Sometimes people slip through the cracks of literally every check and balance in place, and $2k is a LOT of money.

            1. Lab Boss*

              If the company is going to be so upset at the loss of a $2K referral bonus that they punish the employee who made the referral with a bad reputation and withheld promotions, then they need to offer a smaller bonus- unless they’re also withholding promotions from every manager and recruiter and interviewer involved. You’re absolutely right that “sometimes people slip through the cracks of literally every check and balance” but that’s a reason that the company should accept it as a risk of doing business, not look for someone to blame.

              1. KofSharp*

                The person doing the referring doesn’t get the money if the person being referred doesn’t last, and there’s only been one “Yeah you’re not in the running for that promotion anymore” incident after the referred employee became a walking DEI nightmare.
                Because how can you claim you know someone THAT WELL and not know that his beliefs would cause a lawsuit?

                1. Not Your Admin Ass(t)*

                  “But he always seemed like such a nice, polite person!” is the refrain you hear over and again from friends, family, co-workers, and neighbors almost every single time a charismatic serial killer or predator is arrested. And you don’t have to be either of those things to be a completely awful person who’s capable of masquerading as a decent person.

                  Given how determined you are to defend this ghastly, employee-punishing practice, I have to wonder exactly what your personal involvement is with its implementation?

                2. Madame X*

                  The employee making the referral is only a suggestion, though. The company still has to evaluate if the referred candidate is actually right for the role they are applying to. If the company’s interview process is not able to select the appropriate person for the position they are hiring for, then it makes more sense to review and/or revise their interview process rather than punish an employee for making a referral.
                  If it the candidate is hired as an employee who remains with the company for 6 months or more in good standing, then the person who made the referral gets a bonus. If the candidate leaves/is asked to leave before the 6 months, then the employee who made the referral does not get the bonus. There is no need to make the program vindictive against current employees.

    2. Purple Cat*

      This seems *extreme*. How is “not good” defined. And if someone gets hired and then isn’t good, isn’t that burden more on the actual hiring manager and not the referrer? Unless the company skips all the important hiring steps for referrals….

      1. KofSharp*

        “Not good” in a way that reflects poorly is “Unteachable and a legal liability,” but you also don’t get the payout until the person who was referred has been there 6 months.
        If it’s the person who was preferred just doesn’t like the culture and wants to find a difference job, it doesn’t reflect too badly on the referrer, since you can’t control someone else.
        If the referred person gets fired for reasons like that? No bonus and “Do you have the ability to actually make judgement calls?”

        1. Rain's Small Hands*

          Yep, a referral is a serious business. Its functionally a reference – but its a reference with consequences since you work there. That might not be fair – you don’t control another person – but if you don’t know them well enough to recommend them, then you want to make sure to soft pedal the referral – or refuse to give it and just point them to the jobs portal. As I posted, my husbands referral system has room for referrals with or without recommendations. There IS the questionnaire, you are asked how well you know someone – if its personal or professional, and you are asked to quantify your referral – (1) – please don’t hire this person, they were horrible at my last job, but I don’t want to burn a bridge so I’m putting them in the system because they asked me to (5) Sarah is the most talented and incredible person I’ve ever worked with, would be great at this job and I can recommend without reservations. (Not that literally, of course, but you get the idea).

          1. Lab Boss*

            I disagree that it’s a functional reference within a company- I’ve only ever heard of employee referrals as being a connection between hiring manager and candidate, with the manager then needing to do their normal due diligence and check references. I am in the midst of referring someone to a position at my company right now- All that referral means is that I know she’s qualified on paper for the position and that it seems likely that she’d be a good fit based on what I know of her as an outside-work friend. I can’t be expected to know what she’s like as a coworker, that’s an actual professional reference’s job.

          2. Cj*

            As Alison points out, there is a difference between a referral and a personal recommendation. Your husband’s company seems to handle this appropriately, and hopefully KofSharp’s company makes it clear that they are considering these referrals to be personal recommendations. But in general, they are two different things, and a company that treats them as personal recommendations needs to make that clear to their employees.

          3. Wintermute*

            Some companies treat it like a reference and a personal recommendation, others do not, it’s not universal.

            At my current job a direct reference is treated with much more weight than just referring someone to a job advert, I can sign into our system and endorse a candidate with a personal reference, which is entirely different than just referring them for a job as “I know someone who’s potentially qualified and who may be interested, I’m sending them this link”. Both are given some weight, but an endorsement much more.

      2. linger*

        Yeah, I can see this sort of punitive policy arising in situations where (i) employee’s recommendation removes enough checks from the hiring process that lawsuit-inviting candidates can make it in; and (ii) the position comes with something like tenure so that the new hire cannot be quickly removed once they start inviting lawsuits. Both conditions imply that the company’s HR practices are dysfunctional; it is unsurprising that such a company would also leap to punishing a referrer for a hire that goes badly wrong.

    3. Rayray*

      That’s a little harsh. I had a friend refer me to a company and I didn’t get the job. I am a qualified worker, it just wasn’t a fit. She doesn’t deserve a hit to her reputation because another candidate was better than me. She made the referral in good faith, punishment for that would be cruel.

      1. KofSharp*

        Based on my company’s rules, she’d only miss out on the bonus, not take a hit to her rep.

        1. RebelwithMouseyHair*

          I’d have thought just not getting the incentive money would have been enough. Imagine if you’ve been going above and beyond then you don’t get a bonus.

      2. Ellis Bell*

        There’s a huge difference between “That was a good candidate who just didn’t happen to make the cut, please suggest more of those in future” and “okay we’re not listening to your suggested people any more because you can’t have been thoughtful or careful about the terrible person you recommended. They were a walking liability”.

      3. Rain's Small Hands*

        I doubt its the “not hired” that takes a hit. I suspect its if they were hired, showed up late every day, took a two hour lunch, insisted all the processes you were shown were stupid, annoyed the company’s largest client, and had to be let go that the person who referred them might face corporate wrath.

        Lack of fit is understandable. Better candidate is WAY understandable. You referred someone who was unethical, lazy, or incompetent is a lack of judgement on your part.

        1. KofSharp*

          In the one time I’ve seen the whole reputation take a hit it was “the candidate was employed until his friend got the 2k payout and then used slurs because the trainer was a person of color” so yes, BIG difference between “eh. Didn’t work out, sorry” and “…This person is an absolute legal nightmare.”

          1. Purple Cat*

            But this doesn’t sound like it’s official written company policy of “a bad referral makes you ineligible for future promotions”. This is an exceptionally rare situation where there was possible collusion keep your behavior under wraps until I get my bonus – and then the S(*& hit the fan. That’s not your typical, “this just didn’t work out situation”

    4. Fluffy Fish*

      Its a terrible policy.

      The employer is after you for you referring what turns out to be a bad employee, but they have no responsibility as the ones who actually hired the person? They are the ones that did the actual evaluating and interviewing them and deciding to hire.

      I would never refer anybody. And probably at least consider looking for another job with an employer that doesn’t have weird policy penalizing employees for hiring decisions made by the employer. I suspect that’s not the only terrible policy – where there’s one there’s usually more.

      1. Lab Boss*

        And when you looked for another job, you’d be able to talk to your contacts for advice- because at their companies they could refer you as a possible candidate without fearing reprisals :D

      2. KofSharp*

        If I referred someone that I said I knew well and then they ended up being a walking DEI issue, I sure do expect that to blow up in my face at the office. (We spent months cleaning up the fallout from that incident. The candidate was outwardly discriminatory after the 6 month probation period was up and his friendgot paid.)
        There have been a few “soft” this didn’t work out referral failures while I’ve been here and they haven’t ended in reputation explosions, they just didnt pay the person who gave the referral. If the referred candidate doesn’t work out in a “soft” way of just, not a culture fit, the company didn’t fit the expectations, whatever, the bonus doesn’t get paid.

        1. kiki*

          I get that and wouldn’t expect there to be zero questions if somebody you referred turned out to be abysmal, but sometimes people do wait to reveal their true colors. Or they’re a great employee for 20 years and wake up one day and decide to do fraud or just generally act like they’ve lost their mind. Having a policy as strict as KofSharp mentioned would make me decide not to refer anyone, which would be unfortunate for my company because I know a lot of great, qualified people. But do I know them well enough to bet my career on them? I don’t feel that way about anyone!

        2. KRM*

          Okay, but from your original comment, the implication is “if the person isn’t good (subjective assessment), your (the referrer) reputation will suffer”. You’ve added a lot more context here, but the reaction to your original comment as posted is warranted. It sounds like if I refer someone that the hiring manager doesn’t end up liking, then the manager is then going to judge me on that because I referred them.

        3. Fluffy Fish*

          That’s putting an enormous amount of responsibility on the referrer to “know” someone. Just because you work with someone or know someone in one capacity, does that in anyway mean you are exposed to all parts of them.

          People are not out there knowingly referring terrible employees.

          If they ended up being a walking DEI issue, and that never came up during interviews and especially references, then how on earth would the referring employee magically know about those issues?

          I stand by my assessment of the policy.

        4. Meow*

          This sounds like an absolute nightmare and would not be worth $2000. I wouldn’t risk my $100k annual salary to refer someone for $2k if I knew I would be potentially jeopardizing my own job, reputation and promotional opportunities if it didn’t work out. This is a fantastic way to dissuade folks from referring anyone.

    5. Antilles*

      That seems really over the top and with the likely outcome is that nobody ever refers someone again – if you could lose your chance for a promotion over it, that’s a pretty strong deterrent (especially if we’re talking about $2,000).
      In a more informal sense, sure, if someone regularly sends me resumes of candidates who don’t stack up, I’ll remember that and discount the value of their future referrals appropriately…but not in terms of your overall skills or viability for promotion or etc.

    6. KofSharp*

      I’m unable to reply to the thread I want to reply to, Not Your Admin Asst but ive only seen the reputation damage happen once. I’ve only been with the company for one year and didn’t build this plan.
      I explained it poorly because I’m dealing health stuff: NORMALLY you refer the potential employee, and if they are hired, and stay for a minimum of 6 months, you get the $2000 bonus. If it doesn’t work out, usually it’s an “ok well, why didn’t it work out” and figuring out if it’s just a bad fit, or something else.
      The one time it’s now caused the “do you have poor judgement that may be damaging if you were to be promoted” is because of an especially racist man who was hired. His friend, who referred him, tried to say “That’s just who he is, but he knows his stuff!!!”
      I’m tired and angry about it, because while I know several people of similar qualifications in the field, I would NEVER refer them to be hired here because of their descrimination issues, even for a $2000 reward. I’m trying to defend it because I came from a considerably worse company than this one. I’m not willing to take a risk to refer someone who doesn’t pass the “Don’t insult the client” test
      I referred 2 people, neither of them were hired for reasons on my connections’ end, not on my company, and I’ve gotten 0 from this system due to that.

  12. Tea and Cake*

    It may be worth looking at his salary level. He may be going (way) above and beyond because his salary is below market rate and this is one way for him to try to “make up” the difference to get him closer to market rate.

      1. Rayray*

        Maybe his judgement is skewed because of his salary. It’s getting tough for a lot of people to make ends meet anymore and people get desperate. Desperate people will do whatever they have to do.

        1. I went to school with only 1 Jennifer*

          Old letter, so, can’t be tied to any particular economy.

        2. pancakes*

          When someone in that situation is wrong about precisely “what they have to do,” and what they choose to do winds up hurting their career progression instead of advancing it, maybe they didn’t exactly have to do it.

        3. Santiago*

          If it is primarily a salary issue, rather than a judgement issue, you would imagine him to have enough tact to back down when management called him out on it.

      2. Tea and Cake*

        I’m not sure that it is definitely a salary issue, which is why I said it *May be worth* looking at his salary.

    2. Jennifer Strange*

      I don’t get the sense that the OP can do anything about Joe’s salary. It doesn’t sound like they’re his manager or anything.

  13. Sunflower*

    Back in the days when people walk into offices to fill out job applications, an employee happened to see my relative and asked her to put his name down as her referral. The bonus was around $200 which was good back then so “cheating” has probably been going on since the beginning of time.

  14. BuildMeUp*

    We usually ask how he knows the person he’s referring and the answer is something vague “works with my old roommate” or “found them through their uncle on LinkedIn.”

    Is Joe lying when he says things like this? Or is this one of those “misleading but technically true” things? Because if he’s outright lying, that changes this a lot for me.

      1. Ed123*

        could be that the roomate or the uncle is a mutual connection on LinkedIn and then it would be “technically true”

  15. annoyinggirl*

    I had an employee post our jobs on craigslist and then send us over all the resumes !! We had the jobs posted on Indeed, LinkedIn, Glassdoor, our careers page. The candidates were so confused when we called them.

    1. Anonym*

      Tell us more! Why did they do it? What were they thinking? Did you ask them to stop? So curious!

      1. annoyinggirl*

        Such a juicy story. I managed our referral program at the the time and we tracked them pretty heavily. Candidates kept asking why the needed to apply they had via craigslist. I looked it up and there was the ad. This is a HUGE tech company btw.

        1. Momma Bear*

          Wow. That’s worse than finding out that LinkedIn had apparently scraped up old job postings from somewhere else and was linking them to our LinkedIn page when we specifically do not want that. That was really uncomfortable when the CEO wanted answers like yesterday.

  16. Rain's Small Hands*

    Someone also might want to let Joe know that the candidates he refers reflect on him. If the screening interview reveals a psychopath that Joe didn’t catch during his “screen” then Joe’s lack of judgement is going to be questioned. (And it sounds like it already is – but Joe doesn’t realize it). Worse, if psychopath gets hired, the last thing Joe wants is “oh – he is some buddy of Joe’s.” I only want to refer people I really know into places I currently am.

    My husband’s company’s referral system is great – its one of those five figure deals because they are dealing with finding unicorns (and rejecting the unicorns that aren’t shiny enough- its a brutal hiring process) and he gets people asking him to refer him in where he is only tangentially connected because its a high prestige sort of company. But there is room in the referral system for him to strongly recommend, recommend, and “hey, this guy reached out to me through my brother in law…..” He gets the referral bonus if “brother in law guy” gets hired same as he’d get it for “strongly recommend person I worked with for ten years” – but he is throwing less of his own reputation into the pot on the gamble. Its almost like they know random people from Linked In will be using tenuous connections for a bump in priority.

    Now, he’s referred maybe three or four people with “strong” recommendations and only one was found to be shiny enough – as I said, a brutal hiring process.

    1. Madame X*

      That’s actually a really good system. I like that employee’s can rate how well they know the candidates that they are referring, but that their level of connection is not directly linked to the bonus. This system is a good balance of incentivising people to refer candidates for hard-to-fill positions while minimizing the amount of “flourishing” added to the recommendations.

  17. Doctors Whom*

    It would sound like a policy about candidate screening could also be amended to state that only recruiters and/or hiring managers can do initial screenings of candidates.

    Your referral bonus can then rest on “all conditions of the employee referral process being met” which I imagine would look something like
    – the proper actions are taken by both candidate and employee to note the referral (We have both an internal form AND data collection from the candidate)
    – the candidate is not an immediate family member of the employee (which is specifically defined)
    – referral not paid for people who have been employees of the company previously and come back
    – referral not paid for student interns converting to full time offers
    – all recruiting rules have been followed

    So if Joe is fake-screening randos on LinkedIn, he’s violating the first policy, which is now specifically worthy of performance feedback under the policy, and that makes him ineligible for any bonuses. And it’s easy to trap, because when you are doing an actual screen, you can ask the candidate how they learned about the position.

  18. Ellis Bell*

    I feel like this can’t be the only issue with Joe’s professional judgement. Also, is he getting his actual job done satisfactorily while he is busy calling up randos on LinkedIn?

    1. Putting the Dys in Dysfunction*

      This.

      It wouldn’t surprise Joe does his real work the same way he does these referrals: uncaring about quality, and not realizing that poor quality is both easy to spot and harmful to his organization.

      The referral problem may be a blessing in disguise, as it should suggest that Joe’s entire work be subject to rigorous scrutiny, and if necessary firm instruction on how to do his job and do it correctly.

  19. Slow Gin Lizz*

    I hereby request an update on this one, because I’m extremely curious if the situation was resolved and if so, how. I’m guessing Joe’s actual assigned work is suffering because of all these useless referrals, so was that addressed?

  20. learnedthehardway*

    Someone should speak to Joe’s manager about this, because it is creating a problem for the recruitment function. If Joe is doing another role (effectively), he might as well be evaluated for his total contribution to the company (positive and negative).

    That, or move him into recruitment, and train him to do it properly. That would also make him in-eligible for the referral bonuses….

  21. Becky S.*

    I worked for a social service agency that had a referral program – Don’t remember the amount of money, but it was divided into thirds. 1/3 each after 6 months, 12, and 18, both the referred employee and the referring employee had to have good reviews from their managers, and still be employed.

  22. Momma Bear*

    I think it’s two-fold. One, tell him to stop acting like he’s screening on behalf of the company and appearing to be an internal recruiter and two, clarify the referral process so that it’s clear that these must be people you actually know and can prove it.

  23. El l*

    “Joe, your behavior suggests that you misunderstand the whole point of the referral program. It’s designed to give hiring committees (HR and hiring managers) the benefit of our employees’ networks. It cuts through the chaff of names they’ve worked with in the past and who they can vouch for, rather than finding them the old fashioned way.

    “BUT hiring committees are still the people in charge of this process. Period. You are not part of any hiring committee, and unless you get a position in our HR department, this is not your job. You cannot speak for the company on HR matters – that’s serious, and if you persist in it, we will escalate this to discipline. You cannot recommend folks who you haven’t personally worked with, and if you persist in doing that, we’ll automatically reject it. In fact, I recommend you not refer anyone at all for a while here – this is a program based on trust, and it sure looks like you’re betraying it. Is that clear?”

  24. Aspiring Chicken Lady*

    Is he actually contacting the candidates and having them apply? Or is he dumping a pile of names on the HR dept’s desk and expecting them to reach out?

    I would think that the least a company should expect is that the employee ask the candidate to apply on their own. A referral would be the way that the HR person would be sure to pull up that one more name out of the pool, and to apply the referring employee’s personal clout to the decision rubric.

  25. Veryanon*

    My eye started twitching when I read that “Joe” was doing his own sourcing and screening. Joe is not a trained recruiter and may inadvertently be acting in discriminatory or illegal ways with his activities. Also, does Joe not have enough work to do in his day job? Why would he think this was appropriate? Hopefully LW can nip this in the bud ASAP.

    1. Trawna*

      Ya. Not sure why LW has humoured Joe for so long. We’d get fired for this at any firm I’ve worked for (professional services).

  26. Trawna*

    Why pay by referral? Pay a much larger amount ($2-3K) per HIRE. That cuts out Joes gaming the system.

    1. Madame X*

      It sounds like LW ‘s company is already doing that. The LW indicates that the employee who makes the referral receives the bonus after the candidate is hired. The letter writer did not specify when the employee would actually get the bonus. Usually, with these referral programs the bonus is paid out after a certain period of time during which the new employee should still be in good standing. If the new employee is still in good standing after a designated amount of time, then the person who made the referral receives the payout.

      For example my company has a referral program that pays current employees six months after the hiring date if the referred person is still an employee in good standing. The person who made the referral receives the pay out of the course of two payment cycles.

  27. Blinded By the Gaslight*

    Hold the phone (literally): Joe is CALLING people and actually “screening” them over the phone?!? Holy shit, I would be so appalled and kind of freaked out to find out some rando employee who is not even working in HR called me about a job and interviewed me, then purported to know me to HR, and set me up for a job I’m not even really qualified for. So he’s WAY overstepping boundaries, wasting applicants’ time, wasting company time, AND setting up applicants to fail?? WTF.

    Someone needs to have a serious talk with Joe . . .

  28. Eclecticism is a Virtue*

    Your company may want to review the entire referral program. Is the amount of the bonus in line with the norms of your country and/or industry? If the norm is 200 and your company is offering 500, it should just be brought more in line with the norm just to save money. And it may help to get Joe to not refer as much.

    As others have suggested, adding some actual conditions could help too. Like how long you need to be an employee before you’re eligible for referral bonuses, or you have to demonstrate how / how long you have known your referral. Maybe you can only refer for positions in your department, or only outside your department, or only departments you work closely with?

    But honestly, I wonder if he’s just gaming the system. Alison’s answer seemed to come from the standpoint of, Joe is sincerely trying but he’s misguided. But if he knows exactly what he’s doing and is trying to game your company, it seems like you only have a few options: change the rules for the referral program so he can’t cash in so frequently, have Joe’s direct manager give him a clear warning with clear consequences (like being banned from the program), perhaps something similar. And maybe, the best approach is just focus on some of his actions, namely, tell him to stop screening the candidates, for all the reasons Alison gave, and his talking back and arguing when told the candidate was not advanced to an interview. Referrals, and even recommendations, have never been a guarantee for an interview. Has Joe either been there a long time and feels like he can do whatever he wants, or is very new and hasn’t fully acclimated to the culture yet (or workplaces in general)? Most employees wouldn’t argue with “We didn’t give your referral an interview because they are objectively not qualified for the position.”

  29. Anne Wentworth*

    Oof Alison is so diplomatic. I’d ban Joe from the referral program based on how much of their time he’s already wasted, both recruiters and applicants. And probably given those candidates a bad impression of the company.

    Early on in my new industry, before I’d heard of referral bonuses, I was invited by a Meetup host to apply to her company, and the poor way she handled my application absolutely gave me a bad first impression of the company. (To be fair, something went wrong on their end at nearly every step of that application, including arguably age discrimination during the actual interview, so she just got the ball rolling.)

  30. The_artist_formerly_known_as_Anon-2*

    I worked for a company that paid a $4500 bounty. I referred a friend, not knowing his skills set but he was a QA guy.

    He came in. He interviewed. He was perfect.

    And then the company announced they were moving that department to India.

    (groan)

Comments are closed.