Latest news with #jobrejection
Fast Company
6 days ago
- General
- Fast Company
6 fast ways to bounce back from a job rejection
Sarah thought she'd nailed it. Three rounds of interviews for her dream marketing role, glowing feedback from the hiring manager, and a reassuring 'we'll be in touch soon.' So when the rejection email landed in her inbox two weeks later—a generic 'we've decided to move forward with another candidate'—it felt like a gut punch. If you've had a similar experience taking job rejection more personally than you'd like, you're not alone. You're also very human. In fact, research has found that 78% of professionals say job rejection negatively impacts their confidence for weeks or even months afterward. But as normal as it is to feel knocked down, we're also capable of using rejection to clarify our direction, refine our value, and accelerate the outcomes (and ideal roles) we want— not to let it define us. This isn't about building thicker skin. It's about building smarter systems and more empowered thinking. Here are six straightforward strategies to do that. 1. Use the 24-hour rule. You're human, not a robot. It's okay not to feel great when a rejection email lands in your inbox. Emotions may not always be rational, but they're still real. So cut yourself some slack and give yourself permission to feel disappointed without immediately trying to 'fix' it or bounce back. Set a timer for 24 hours, acknowledge the sting, then deliberately shift into learning mode. This prevents both endless rumination and what psychologists call 'emotional bypassing'—jumping straight to positivity without processing the real emotions. 2. Separate the 'no' from your self-worth. This rejection isn't a referendum on your value as a person or professional: it's simply a mismatch, not a verdict. Research has shown that people with a growth mindset—who ask 'What can this teach me?' instead of 'What's wrong with me?'—are more likely to bounce back from setbacks, stay motivated, and take constructive action. When Marcus, a software engineer, didn't get the senior developer role he wanted, he initially spiraled into self-doubt. But when he shifted from 'I'm not good enough,' to 'What skills do I need to develop?' he used the feedback to land an even better position six months later. You do yourself a disservice when you let the subjective evaluation others place on you depreciate the value you place on yourself. That Tom Brady was the 199th pick in the 2000 NFL draft is proof that sometimes those tasked with assessing others' future potential have absolutely no idea. 3. Ask for feedback—even if you don't get it. The simple act of requesting constructive feedback signals a growth mindset and helps you reflect more objectively on the experience. Even when companies don't respond (and many won't), the process of asking forces you to think strategically about your performance and what you might do differently next time. 4. Reframe it as redirection, not rejection. Jenny, a finance executive, felt incredibly disappointed when she didn't get a controller position at a startup. Six months later, when that company folded, she realized the rejection had actually protected her from a career disaster. Sometimes a 'no' is actually steering you away from a situation that wouldn't have served you well. Research from Glassdoor shows that 65% of people who stay in roles that weren't their first choice report lower job satisfaction within two years. 5. Don't personalize systemic issues. Sometimes hiring decisions come down to budget, internal politics, timing, or internal candidates being preferred—factors that have nothing to do with your qualifications. Other times, personal preferences, unconscious judgments, or stereotypes bias hiring decisions. According to research from SHRM (Society for Human Resource Management), 48% of HR managers admitted that biases affect the candidates they hire. Many hiring decisions are influenced by factors completely outside a candidate's control. Avoid interpreting rejection as anything more than a decision someone made—a decision shaped by a whole array of factors and biases—that simply wasn't the one you wanted them to make. You can't control those variables, but you can control your response. 6. Track your progress, not just your wins Top performers don't avoid rejection—they risk it regularly and treat it as no more than a hidden curriculum, mining any insights for their next opportunity. Create a system that tracks not only your wins, but also your courage: interviews taken, skills built, connections made, insights gained. Maybe you realized you need to clarify your value proposition. Maybe you discovered a role or industry isn't for you. These are all progress markers. These are all victories worth celebrating. It's not rejection itself that holds future potential hostage, but the emotions of unworthiness it triggers. The irony is that by avoiding rejection, we often reject ourselves—long before anyone else has the chance. So whether you're starting out or starting over, the biggest setback isn't being told 'no.' It's letting it stop you from showing up again. Just imagine the possibilities if you moved forward knowing that rejection is simply part of your individualized growth plan. Let rejection refine your clarity, not shrink your courage.
Daily Mail
09-07-2025
- Business
- Daily Mail
I received an AI-generated 'rejection email' after applying for a job. It included an embarrassing mistake
A recruiter has learned first hand how not to use AI in the workplace after sending an awkward auto-generated rejection email to a hopeful job candidate. The 'application update', which has since been shared thousands of times on social media, was uploaded to Reddit by the amused anonymous recipient. The message began innocently enough, with a polite 'thank you for replying, unfortunately we will not be moving forward with your application at this time'. Then things took an unfortunate turn for the sender, who had clearly opted to mass produce responses to save time. Instead of the planned sign-off, the email included the (very specific) AI prompt, aptly titled 'rejection message'. 'Write a warm but generic rejection email that sounds polite yet firm. Do not mention specific reasons for rejection,' the prompt read. 'Make the candidate feel like they were strongly considered even if they weren't. Remember to use candidate name and company name variables.' The original email then continued with a polite conclusion and well wishes for the recipient's 'future endeavours'. It's thought the sender was an independent headhunter rather than an in-house employee or recruiter as they would be more likely to be seeking roles on behalf of multiple companies. The email has since been mocked online, with many writing their own cheeky responses and others begging the original poster to reveal the company behind the mistake. 'Forward this to the CEO. Attach your CV. In the subject, write: "I can do a better job than your HR",' one suggested. Others debated whether the mistake was a better option than no response from the employer at all. 'You know what, at least there was the intention to respectfully let the candidate know. I'll take that over them not bothering at all,' one argued. Some employees were inspired to share their own recruiter fails, with automation glitches at the top of the list. 'I once for a reject email addressed to a completely different person, they repeatedly referred to me as Daniel,' one recalled. 'I got a rejection email that was CCed (not BCCed) to around 60 candidates, exposing all our email addresses to each other. I emailed the company to let them know their screw up. There was zero remorse in the response I got,' another added. 'The acceptance letter to my Masters program addressed me as Pam. I'm a dude and my name is not Pam,' one more wrote. Some also speculated that the post itself was fake and spread through forums as a warning to employers and applicants to think carefully about their use of automated templates and AI when dealing with each other. 'This is fake. No one writing that prompt would include the "even if they weren't" part, they would just tell ChatGPT to "make the candidate feel like they were strongly considered". The inclusion of the last bit makes it glaringly obvious this is fake.,' a man wrote. 'Even so,' one replied.
News.com.au
18-06-2025
- Business
- News.com.au
‘Why are you shaming me?': 30-year-old calls out stigma around ChatGPT
A young Aussie woman has revealed she was rejected from a job because she used ChatGPT during the recruitment process – unearthing a controversial new workplace trend. Alexandra Frisby-Smith, 30, works as a virtual assistant. She recently applied for a role that would pay $80 an hour for five hours a week on an ongoing basis, resulting in an extra $20,000 a year. Ms Frisby-Smith explained to that she was going through the process which involved an interview, a questionnaire and a trial task. She was then given a list of tasks her potential employer needs to complete daily and asked to streamline them. 'I was brainstorming and thinking, 'Can I do it this way?' Or that way, basically bending and stretching and working out what platforms would work best,' she said. 'Once I worked out an overview, I popped that into ChatGPT and it created a cohesive and beautiful way of representing my thoughts.' Ms Frisby-Smith explained that since she was given 30 minutes to complete the task she figured using the AI tool was smart. 'The most efficient way was to brainstorm everything and then put it into ChatGPT, and that can make it cohesive and easy to digest,' she argued. After completing the task, she received an email from her potential employer explaining that she hadn't been hired because of her 'heavy use of ChatGPT,' which Ms Frisby-Smith found confusing. 'I'm not trying to hide the fact that I use it. Everyone has their different views, and I can see why people dislike it because it takes the humanness out of writing, which I think is what she was concerned about,' she said. At the end of the day, Ms Frisby-Smith ultimately thinks ChatGPT is simply a tool that makes her 'more efficient', so it is ultimately helpful. The virtual assistant said once she posted about her experience on TikTok she was surprised to learn how many people were 'afraid' of ChatGPT. 'They are afraid because it is new and it is different but it can make us more efficient but people are also feeling threatened,' she said. 'It is like having an assistant, like a real-life person you're working with and collaborating with.' Ms Frisby-Smith ultimately stands by her use of the AI tool and doesn't understand why there's a stigma around it. 'Why are you shaming me? When are we going to stop shaming people who use it?' she asked. The 30-year-old might have embraced the online tool, but others on social media are far wearier and don't see using the program as acceptable. 'When are we going to start shaming people for being too damn lazy to do the bare minimum?' one asked. 'Girl, come on,' another said. 'I use it,' one admitted. 'Nothing wrong with using it, but it's the lack of attention to detail that would've been the reason,' someone else noted. 'I'm struggling to take this seriously,' another chimed in. 'Nah, I think being able to write correspondence yourself is an important communication skill,' one argued. 'When are people going to realise that employers need to know your capabilities and not AI's capabilities?' someone asked. 'Don't get me wrong, ChatGPT is super useful, but something you're submitting should always be in your own words,' another recommended. Recruitment expert Roxanne Calder told that ChatGPT has already become the norm in the job interview process. One big thing she's noticing now is people sending through resumes using the AI chatbot and not bothering to add their own flair. 'Resumes get sent through in third person now,' she said. Ms Calder is realistic about the new technology, saying there's no point ignoring it, otherwise you'll get left behind. However she does think it needs to be used wisely. 'These tools are really great, and everyone should get across them and work out how to integrate, but it is really obvious when someone uses it and doesn't add their own words,' she said. Ms Calder said Chat GPT is fine if it is treated like a tool but it shouldn't be relied on to do your work for you. 'If you are lazy and don't integrate your thoughts, then the work isn't yours. If someone presents a piece of work to you and you ask them questions about it and they can't answer them it is undeniable you've used ChatGPT,' she said. 'It should be used as a tool only.' If you're making the chatbot app do all the work for you, then in Ms Calder's eyes, you've 'lost credibility'. And of course, that is going to hold you back from securing jobs.
BBC News
09-05-2025
- Politics
- BBC News
Council refused to hire ex-MSP Tommy Sheridan over perjury conviction
Glasgow City Council refused to give former MSP Tommy Sheridan a job because of the "unacceptable level of risk" his perjury conviction posed, a court has former politician had applied to become a criminal justice social worker with Glasgow City Health and Social Care he was told in a letter that future applications for jobs with the organisation would not progress due to him serving three years in jail for perjury. In 2011 a jury at the High Court in Glasgow concluded the former MSP lied under oath during his successful defamation action against the News of the World newspaper. Mr Sheridan received a job rejection letter from the council in August 2024, which said his conviction presented an "unacceptable level of risk" to the organisation. He then instructed lawyers to go to Scotland's highest civil court in a bid to get the decision lawyer Mike Dailly told Lord Young the council acted unlawfully in its decision to permanently exclude Mr Sheridan from social work said the body which regulates social work in Scotland - the Scottish Social Services Council - had assessed Mr Sheridan as being a suitable candidate for working in the Dailly said: "It's a simple matter - the petitioner has been assessed as being a fit person for the profession by the statutory social work body. He has also been assessed as being suitable to work with children and younger people under the PVG scheme."The petitioner has been told he cannot be a social worker. However, the Scottish Parliament has allowed the SSSC the role and responsibility to determine who is a fit and proper person to be a social worker."The SSSC says the petitioner is a fit and proper person. I say the decision made by the council is irrational - it cannot say the petitioner cannot be a social worker." Mr Sheridan wants Lord Young to pass legal orders stating that Glasgow City Council's decision was "unlawful" as it "permanently excluded" him from working in social work at the local former MSP posted online last summer about graduating from Glasgow Caledonian University after undertaking a two-year master's degree in social work. Mr Sheridan used to lead the Scottish Socialist Party which won a number of seats at Holyrood in 1999 and 2003 before collapsing following his high-profile court then he has remained involved in politics as a supporter of Scottish independence group Hope over took the News of the World to court in 2006, alleging it defamed him after reporting claims about his private netted £200,000 but he was later convicted of perjury during this civil action, and was sentenced to three years in City Council's lawyer Paul Reid KC told the court the local authority acted lawfully and were legally entitled to refuse employment to Mr said the matter was an employment decision and could not be challenged by judicial Young told the court that he wanted time to consider the matter, and he would issue a verdict in the near future.
