Recruiter Sparks Social Media Debate After Rejecting Candidate For 'Offer Shopping'

'Offer Shopping': The candidate revealed during the discussion that he already possessed a job offer but was exploring the possibility of securing a more advantageous offer

A tech recruiter has ignited a heated discussion on social media platforms after disclosing his decision to turn down a candidate who was seeking a better offer while preparing to join a company within two weeks. Siddharth Sharma, an entrepreneur and former chief technology officer (CTO) of Shaadi.com, recounted a recent encounter with a job seeker during a conversation regarding an available position.

The candidate revealed during the discussion that he already possessed a job offer but was exploring the possibility of securing a more advantageous offer. If successful, the candidate expressed intentions to decline the previously secured position.

Upon learning of the candidate's intentions, Sharma opted to terminate the conversation. In a post shared on a prominent platform, Sharma criticised job seekers engaging in what he termed as "offer shopping," characterising the practice as indicative of desperation.

"It reeks of desperation and tells the world that your word is worth nothing to you," wrote Sharma. He said his personal adherence to never engaging in such practices and claimed similar behaviour was uncommon among what he described as "elite players" in the industry.

Sharma concluded his post with guidance directed towards tech job seekers, advising them to prioritise learning programming skills and cultivating a passion for the field.

The post on X quickly divided opinions on social media, igniting a heated debate on the ethical aspects of hiring and recruitment. While some supported Sharma's stance, others deemed it unreasonable.

Several others argued that the candidate's actions mirrored common practices employed by organisations themselves, who often select the most suitable candidate from a pool of applicants. Furthermore, critics highlighted the arbitrary requirements imposed by companies, such as demanding candidates to accept offers within limited time frames or risk losing the opportunity altogether.

Instances of companies retracting job offers after initially extending them were also highlighted, leaving candidates unemployed. In such a case, proponents argued, job seekers should be entitled to seek the best possible offers to safeguard their interests.

"I know a couple of folks, who after getting one offer stopped job hunting. Their joining kept getting extended and eventually offer was revoked! This is not offer 'shopping', you need to primarily secure yourself as companies are not liable for any damage," remarked one user. "And I am saying this despite hiring people myself. Candidates should have the right to choose a secure place for themselves."

Others pointed out the prerogative of companies to conduct mass layoffs at will, suggesting that candidates seeking optimal opportunities were merely exercising similar rights in safeguarding their futures.