I had a friend accept a job and when he showed up the first day they told him that they decided to go with someone else and he doesn’t actually have a job and they must have forgotten to tell him. Fucking brutal.
According to another comment and the article they cite, it might actually be grounds for a suit in the US too, if the would-be-employee incurs damage for actions taken in reasonable reliance on getting that promised job. I imagine if they quit their old job or rejected other offers because they expected the would-be-employer to honour its promise, that might count as damages.
Whether it’s worth suing is a different question, of course.
Wild that it’s from the pocket of the employee though, here it is usually a government department that handle most legal cases Vs corporate, with that private individuals only have to do it themselves in exceptional cases.
Wild that it’s from the pocket of the employee though
It’s a repeating pattern, really, like the legal equivalent to The Sam Vimes theory of socioeconomic unfairness: If you can’t front the price of asserting your rights, you’ll get neither your rights not the money to assert them in the future.
I worked in an office where a guy came in and on his first day he was taking phone calls from recruiters and discussing other job opportunities. He was shown the door on the same day.
The phone was a shared phone on a desk in an open plan office. His boss sat on the same desk.
Does it work both ways? If the applicant says they accept the job and then later says they went with a different company, like the applicant in OP’s post?
You can only make a claim like that if you can prove real damages. The idea is that someone made you a promise, and based on that promise you took steps that cost you real money. Maybe you quit your job. Or you paid to move cities and all the related costs.
So the employer would have to prove they suffered real damages as a direct results of the employee backing out. And that would be difficult in most cases. After all, in most cases the result of an employee backing out will just be the status quo the company was already operating under. And they would have to show why they couldn’t just go with another candidate.
It would be a lot harder for an employer to make this kind of claim than an employee. Sure you can imagine some edge cases where a company spent a lot of money in expectation of a new employee. But usually a new employee backing out just means the company keeps operating in the exact same state it was previously.
I’m assuming if you are an applicant and you took one offer and rejected another, and then the company you accepted then rescinded their offer, and it’s too late to accept the other offer, that alone wouldn’t be enough in damages to sue right?
Likewise if a company gave an offer to an applicant, the applicant accepted so the company rejected all other applicants, and then the applicant who accepted rescinded their acceptance, company doesn’t get to claim damages?
I had a friend accept a job and when he showed up the first day they told him that they decided to go with someone else and he doesn’t actually have a job and they must have forgotten to tell him. Fucking brutal.
Illegal in EU
Illegal in based land
If by which you mean “almost everyone except America and Canada”, yes
According to another comment and the article they cite, it might actually be grounds for a suit in the US too, if the would-be-employee incurs damage for actions taken in reasonable reliance on getting that promised job. I imagine if they quit their old job or rejected other offers because they expected the would-be-employer to honour its promise, that might count as damages.
Whether it’s worth suing is a different question, of course.
Wild that it’s from the pocket of the employee though, here it is usually a government department that handle most legal cases Vs corporate, with that private individuals only have to do it themselves in exceptional cases.
It’s a repeating pattern, really, like the legal equivalent to The Sam Vimes theory of socioeconomic unfairness: If you can’t front the price of asserting your rights, you’ll get neither your rights not the money to assert them in the future.
I worked in an office where a guy came in and on his first day he was taking phone calls from recruiters and discussing other job opportunities. He was shown the door on the same day.
The phone was a shared phone on a desk in an open plan office. His boss sat on the same desk.
lol, either they have huge balls or they’re an idiot
That deserves shaming
Nike.
I live near them and only hear bad things
In the US, this isn’t illegal, but it is something you can sue an employer over. At-will employment does not apply here.
It’s a claim of promissory estopel.
Does it work both ways? If the applicant says they accept the job and then later says they went with a different company, like the applicant in OP’s post?
You can only make a claim like that if you can prove real damages. The idea is that someone made you a promise, and based on that promise you took steps that cost you real money. Maybe you quit your job. Or you paid to move cities and all the related costs.
So the employer would have to prove they suffered real damages as a direct results of the employee backing out. And that would be difficult in most cases. After all, in most cases the result of an employee backing out will just be the status quo the company was already operating under. And they would have to show why they couldn’t just go with another candidate.
It would be a lot harder for an employer to make this kind of claim than an employee. Sure you can imagine some edge cases where a company spent a lot of money in expectation of a new employee. But usually a new employee backing out just means the company keeps operating in the exact same state it was previously.
I’m assuming if you are an applicant and you took one offer and rejected another, and then the company you accepted then rescinded their offer, and it’s too late to accept the other offer, that alone wouldn’t be enough in damages to sue right?
Likewise if a company gave an offer to an applicant, the applicant accepted so the company rejected all other applicants, and then the applicant who accepted rescinded their acceptance, company doesn’t get to claim damages?
I’m not an attorney. I don’t know the specifics of it. I’m not sure what the exact bounds of provable damages are.
Also, companies know better. If they sue someone who did not start yet, nobody who has other options will ever apply, because why risk it.