> I'd suspect the hiring committee found reason to suspect this person was laid off for performance / behavior. For example, perhaps their company has not conducted a large layoff, or is known for laying off based on performance.
Even if true, this is something the recruiter and/or some of the interviewers should also have been aware of. The candidate should not have to go through the entire interview loop (I would imagine at least 5 rounds) only to be rejected for this reason.
That's what I am saying. The HC is there to make final judgement based on the data. This is what's making me think it's not a systematic thing (we never hire people who were laid off) but something specific to that person (we suspect he was fired for a reason)
Even if true, this is something the recruiter and/or some of the interviewers should also have been aware of. The candidate should not have to go through the entire interview loop (I would imagine at least 5 rounds) only to be rejected for this reason.