I worked with somebody who applied for the same job on another team without disclosing he already worked at the company. It turns out that’s not something they actually check for. He got an offer for about 15% more than his current salary. I think he should have just accepted that job and gone through the motions of quitting his current position and starting the new one with the same company. Mostly because I wanted to see how that played out. Instead he showed the offer to our manager and asked her to match it. That went to HR and the offer was rescinded. He left a few weeks later.
I’ve had instances where recruiters for the company I work at are contacting me on LinkedIn about the role I not only applied to but also been working at for a few months.
About a year after I left megacorp, the manager of a team I'd worked with asked me to come back. He signed off on my salary requirements only for HR to come back and say that even though it was within budget and within the pay grade they couldn't sign off on it because my previous salary was so much lower.
I went back for a few months and quit again, only to get headhunted by one of their direct competitors. I went through the motions but they were disorganized enough I blew them off. Turns out I dodged a bullet as they were acquired by megacorp a few weeks later.
In most companies, said hiring manager would be the one pounding sand.
HR works for the company (aka the owners/senior execs), not a random line manager.
If they like what the line manager is doing, then that’s cool.
If they don’t, unless execs or ownership cares, they’ll happily set said line manager on fire for their amusement just as easily as a random employee.
And since line managers need HR’s co-operation to hire/fire in most places, they’ve got to manage that relationship very carefully or be really screwed.
Not sure why this is getting downvoted. Anecdotally this seems to be the case. In my personal experience, HR is only accountable to the executive level.
HR is an arm of corporate, yes. That being said, anytime personnel decisions come up, all I see is legal hedging that there have to be documented performance problems, policy violations, etc whatever. I think it is a significant stretch that HR is going to fire a previously acceptable manager because they advocated for an agreed upon hire.
Yup. Like cops, they can’t be everywhere or pay attention to everything, so if someone starts threatening their authority, an example needs to be made.
The more professional and actually strong/competent they are, the more measured and appropriate that example can be.
If they’re actually weak or incompetent, expect to be stabbed in the back instead of the front, and for it to be insane and disproportionate instead of rational and measured.
> If I was the hiring manager, I would tell HR to pound sand.
And do what? The manager can't hire anyone if HR doesn't approve and process the hire.
HR has all the power on this. Many times I've seen the eng organization all aligned to hire someone but if HR says no, it's no.
The head of HR usually reports to the CEO, so unless it's a position high enough that the CEO is personally involved in the hiring process and can override HR, there's nothing you can do.
HR here means Human Resources, right? I have never heard of them needing to approve of any hiring. Finance and some director high enough needs to approve.
You clearly work in a differently organized company where HR takes care of bureaucracy and employee assistance and didn't grab the authority to control hiring. Probably the ambitious, important people at the foundation of the company were "finance and some director" and they never allowed HR to interfere with the business and become more than a service; hope it lasts.
I'm guessing you didn't have visibility into the HR approvals, or worked in some oddball company.
HR controls for example the background checks for new offers, and if those don't satisfy HR there will not be an offer (also, HR generates offer letters). No amount of complaining from anyone short of the CEO will override this.
I guess I must just be lucky because I've never worked at a company where HR had any real say at all over the normal hiring/termination process. They're there to make sure the paperwork is filed properly and has the right font and that's about it. My only interactions with HR over 20+ years have been on my first day of work where they hand me brochures about the health insurance, 401(k) and other benefits, and then on my last day when I return my badge.
I don't doubt that these places exist, where HR inserts themselves and becomes part of the hiring process--just never saw one myself.
I’d love to hear some anecdotal stuff. Not having dealt with either hr or hiring managers in years I miss enjoying the shenanigans, cringe and stupidity!
I can see the company being upset at attempting to leverage an internal position for more money at the current, but denying the move entirely is bizarre to me. I know several people who have interviewed within the company, not in an unduly secretive way, for a new role which has always come with a higher title or pay.
Edit: I guess I should say this was not part of a corporate, "Interview for your job after a layoff" kind of deal. Just seeing a posting on an internal job board, and semi-privately interviewing with that line manager. An internal job hop that can happen for any number of reasons.
