[NPV]

Originally Posted by IndieGooner

Of course. HR might even ask them to share the offer letter.

That may backfire for the employee if the HR give some bad feedback to the new (potential) employer, right?
I personally don’t like this counter-offer thing because if someone has really decided to move on and gone to the stage of interviewing and getting offers, it’s better to let them go.

[Chetan_Rao]

Originally Posted by NPV

That may backfire for the employee if the HR give some bad feedback to the new (potential) employer, right?

No upside. An org with scruples won't be playing the poaching game to begin with, an unscrupulous one won't care beyond getting the candidate they want. No recruiter wants to get a 'tattle-tale' reputation, esp. in an industry as predatory as recruiting where a candidate of value often has more viable choices than the recruiter trying to place them. Finding a good-fit candidate is a long-drawn, tiresome and often expensive process, and no recruiter wants to lose one playing saint.

Poaching is also vicious-circle process, in the sense a recruiter/org poaching someone else's candidate is likely simultaneously getting one of theirs poached too.

Just observations; not a personal endorsement of the practices.

...I personally don’t like this counter-offer thing because if someone has really decided to move on and gone to the stage of interviewing and getting offers, it’s better to let them go.

100%.

Retention should be a proactive, ongoing process that needs to be managed within the scope of employment, not a reactive measure to hang onto someone who's found a reason to leave.

Throwing money is at best a stop-gap, and both parties know that too. Proactive retention earns loyalty, reactive retention buys time.

[IndieGooner]

Originally Posted by NPV

I personally don’t like this counter-offer thing because if someone has really decided to move on and gone to the stage of interviewing and getting offers, it’s better to let them go.

I too don't like these practices. Unfortunately, recruitment in Indian IT space is a bit like old wild west. At least from an employee point of view, someone who can crack multiple interviews in a short span of time holds all the cards.

[evil_grin]

Here's the story you've been told

1. The pandemic increased demand for online products and services.
2. Tech companies over hired to meet this demand.
3. The end of the pandemic reduced demand.
4. Tech companies started firing.

Have you ever paused to think do you really need more people to just scale up existing services?

Look at the graph of the fed interest rate below. I'll tell you the real story.

1. The pandemic slowed down the broader economy.
2. The fed rates were reduced to stimulate growth.
3. Tech companies used free money to over hire.
4. Once the Fed interest rate was raised to deal with the inflation brought due to excessive note printing, tech companies started firing.

The tech job market will only improve once the Fed interest rates fall again. That's the strongest force affecting it.

[ninjatalli]

Originally Posted by NPV

That may backfire for the employee if the HR give some bad feedback to the new (potential) employer, right?

Doesn't happen as the employee will never give the hiring manager / HR contacted. The hiring firm generally will have a process to do background checks and some even ask for contacts from previous/recent firms to assess the individual so unless the HRs of both firms are in good touch, I don't believe the information flows.

Also there are opposing needs - in many or most firms, the business determines if the candidate is good enough and has the final say. Now if the HR still gets visibility on some negative feedback even from a trusted source, s/he still has to get the hiring manager to agree. Plus the headache of figuring out a second candidate so it never really goes that far.

I personally don’t like this counter-offer thing because if someone has really decided to move on and gone to the stage of interviewing and getting offers, it’s better to let them go.

On paper, yes. But many folks especially in low paying jobs use this means to get the hikes. It's a tried and tested approach to get the salary hike and/or promotions. I have even seen cases where the individual got what he asked (a promotion) for with the argument of a job offer from a competing firm; A few months down the lane, we got to know that job offer wasn't even a done deal (he got his line manager convinced during the interview process itself).

Basically, it's a very imperfect system. Too many parties involved and the processes aren't always set in stone; way too many exceptions allowed.

Originally Posted by Chetan_Rao

No upside. An org with scruples won't be playing the poaching game to begin with, an unscrupulous one won't care beyond getting the candidate they want. No recruiter wants to get a 'tattle-tale' reputation, esp. in an industry as predatory as recruiting where a candidate of value often has more viable choices than the recruiter trying to place them. Finding a good-fit candidate is a long-drawn, tiresome and often expensive process, and no recruiter wants to lose one playing saint.

[IndieGooner]

TCS is apparently delaying onboarding for lateral hires by several months. People who were supposed to join in a matter of few weeks were called up by the HR and informed of their joining date getting postponed to Jan/Feb.

LinkedIn is awash with stories of people who got this shock treatment. Pertinent to discussion going on in past several posts here, those who didn't/couldn't source alternate offers during their notice period are the ones who are now facing potential joblessness.