how can I reject former coworkers applying for jobs with me?

by Alison Green on October 17, 2024

A reader writes:

Several past coworkers have reached out to me on LinkedIn asking about a job posting at my company. The only thing is … they don’t know that I am the hiring manager for the role, and they are under-qualified. I already know I would not hire them for the position.

I have good relationships with them from my prior jobs, and I am sure if I tell them the role is on my team they will feel they have a better chance at the position, even though that is not the case. But it is tough out there right now with the economy and I know at least one of them was recently laid off. I am worried they would take rejection personally.

How do I approach this? I don’t want to discourage them, but I also don’t want to mislead them. I’d ideally like to preserve the relationships in the process.

I answer this question — and two others — over at Inc. today, where I’m revisiting letters that have been buried in the archives here from years ago (and sometimes updating/expanding my answers to them). You can read it here.

Other questions I’m answering there today include:

  • My employee made an anti-Semitic joke in a meeting
  • Can I ask my office to stop announcing pregnancies at staff meetings?
You may also like:
{ 77 comments }

{ 77 comments… read them below or add one }

  1. HonorBox*

    OP2 – Better to address it late than not address it. And I like the suggestion of going back to everyone in the meeting and apologizing for not addressing it in the moment.

    That kind of joke is never appropriate and even if the guy knew in the moment that it was inappropriate and hasn’t said anything since, it is something you must talk to him about.

    Reply ↓
  2. Fluffy Fish*

    #2 I think you have to take it a step further than just stating you can’t make jokes about these things. You should also say something to the affect of “we don’t tolerate discrimination of any kind at this company”. Because that’s what those jokes are. Without calling it out as the discrimination it is it’s way too easy for people to still just mentally chalk it up as a joke.

    Reply ↓
    1. tina turner*

      What if the person making the joke is Jewish? That’s happened to me. Do you let them, w/no comment? Because some make jokes about their own group. Irish, whoever. Some jokes are affectionate, not abusive. Then what? If there are several people present of the same group, maybe they all laugh and it’s OK? Or is it self-indulgent?

      Reply ↓
      1. Anonym*

        At my company the policy and the training are super clear – it doesn’t matter if the person making the comment is in the group being disparaged, it’s still not permitted and it’s taken seriously. Same if everyone involved was of the group and thought it was hilarious, or whatever the details may be. No disparaging groups of people, especially on the basis of protected characteristics, but also just generally (e.g. “software developers are such idiots” or something would also be highly rude and unprofessional, though not verging into legally actionable territory, so your boss would pull you aside to make clear that’s not how we act here).

        I agree with this approach. There’s no makeup of participants that make negative comments about demographic groups okay, and that clarity actually makes it much simpler for everyone to navigate.

        Incidentally, or not, I’ve been here for many years in part because of the high degree of professionalism and people treating each other well.

        Reply ↓
    2. learnedthehardway*

      Agreeing – it’s the underpinning attitude that is truly problematic. The “joke” is just a symptom.

      Perhaps this individual needs some education so they address their attitude and realize that they are hurting other people. It’s possible (although less and less likely in this day and age) that they are unaware that stereotyping racial/religious/ethnic groups and making jokes about them is racist and bigoted. So, I would give them the benefit of the doubt (ONCE) and would direct them to educate themselves and / or would insist that they be sent to training by HR so they are taught how their attitudes are harmful.

      But I would also pay attention to how the person receives this feedback – if the person is confused or horrified that they said something racist, there’s hope that they’ll be able to be educated and improve their attitudes. If they are dismissive or hostile or double down, I’d be less optimistic about them.

      Reply ↓
    3. Not Tom, Just Petty*

      I think this brings up a good point about the employee’s words and actions in situations where he DOES know coworkers. See, the big laugh and the silence at the end indicates to me that he forgot to “code switch.” He realized he wasn’t with people for whom this is normal banter. OP should dig a little to find out if he forgot that Zoom meetings are virtual offices and he wasn’t with friends or if there is a cohort in the company who speak like this together.

      Reply ↓
    1. CommanderBanana*

      ^^ This. I’m Jewish and if someone made a joke like this in a meeting and their boss didn’t address it (first of all, I would say something, and yes, I have had people say anti-Semitic things to me at work because they either didn’t know I was Jewish so they thought I’d be fine with it, or they did know and are bigots) I would assume that their boss agreed with them and that this was not a place I wanted to be.

      One of the reasons I left my last org was because of anti-Semitic behavior from coworkers that went unaddressed and systemic anti-Semitism, like scheduling mandatory all-staff events on one of the High Holy Days and claiming they “didn’t know any Jews still worked here” at a 100+ person org in a major city on the East Coast.

      Reply ↓
      1. Ellis Bell*

        Why is it that the word “still” jumps out so much here? Like being Jewish, or employing Jewish people was some kind of a trend, or experiment.

        Reply ↓
        1. CommanderBanana*

          Our HR director’s reasoning was that the one guy she knew was Jewish had left and he was the one who gave her the Jewish holiday dates, and she just assumed that there were no other Jewish people at the org once he left. I don’t have a stereotypically Jewish last name so most people don’t realize I’m Jewish unless I mentioned it, but I think we had 4-5 Jewish employees at the time, including at least 2 who were very observant.

          Short answer is, the CEO hated Jews, the HR director was horrible at her job and also didn’t like Jews, and eventually all the Jewish employees (AFAIK, I left there over a year ago) did leave, because working at an organization where a big chunk of leadership are anti-Semites sucks when you’re Jewish!

          Reply ↓
          1. Ellis Bell*

            Ugh, deeply sickening to hear there are actually some significant implications there. A nice combo of 1) “You mean other people are Jewish too… here?” and 2 “Huh, maybe, if we behave ignorantly enough, all the Jewish people will go somewhere else…”

            Reply ↓
        2. MsM*

          The implication I got was “I thought we’d made this a sufficiently inhospitable environment that there were none of you left.” Which…yikes.

          Reply ↓
          1. Good Lord Ratty*

            I mean, this is a view some people genuinely do hold. I’ve been told to my face – both online, and in person – that “I thought they got rid of all of you” or “I thought you were just from the bible”. Usually it’s not that blatant, and to an extent it’s sort of understandable. We’re only .2% of the world’s population, so it’s very common for someone to have never met a Jew in their life.

            But we are real people, not a metaphor or a legend, and they didn’t manage to get rid of all of us… yet. (Lol.)

            Reply ↓
            1. CommanderBanana*

              But remember, even though we’re only .2% of the population, we’re somehow also the source of all the world’s problems! /s

              Reply ↓
          2. Peanut Hamper*

            The same thing happens to American Indians as well. Some people assume that they were all wiped out and no longer exist and are amazed to discover that they are, in fact, alive and still have vibrant cultures right here in 2024.

            Reply ↓
            1. Crencestre*

              …And don’t even get me started about what it’s like to be a White-presenting biracial person who routinely hears racist cracks from people who assume that anyone who’s White NATURALLY finds racism acceptable and racist jokes hilarious!

              Reply ↓
              1. Peanut Hamper*

                I’m right there with you on that one.

                Then when they find out, they often act like it’s my fault for not looking like the stereotypical picture of a Latinx person they have in their head and for having a “normal” name (which I inherited from my Anglo father).

                Reply ↓
  4. International Gravitas*

    In some cases, it would make sense not to automatically write them off. Ie, Not to assume on their experience until you have seen their resume. Several of my co-workers wouldn’t know all of my skills and career experience, even people I’ve worked closely with. For instance, there is someone who I am thinking of asking for a reference from, and I’m aware I’ll have to give her a heads up about all the job-relevant experience I have (from other posts) that she could easily assume I don’t have. I’ve never used those skills in the particular job I do with that person, because they’re not part of the job, so she doesn’t know about them at all. (Not that I’m saying she should praise me for these skills in a reference, but it wouldn’t be true if she assumed I didn’t have them.)

    Reply ↓
    1. HonorBox*

      That’s a really good point. Just because OP worked with people in the past, they may not have a full understanding of their skillset. There may be previous experience. And unless the OP literally just left their previous employer, they don’t know what these individuals may have done since.

      If their resumes don’t speak to their skillset, then you go through your process as you would with anyone else. But telling them not to apply simply because you don’t *think* they have it without reviewing relevant materials isn’t doing a service to the hiring process.

      Reply ↓
    2. Mountain*

      Also, people grow in their skill set. I did not perform well at my first job, but was quite good at my second job and a rock star at my third. How long has it been since OP has worked with them? Is it possible they have grown since you last worked with them?

      Reply ↓
    3. Khatul Madame*

      Point taken, but in this case the former coworker would write to the hiring manager and describe the relevant experience they acquired in the interim:
      “Dear Mookie, when we worked together at Augean Stables I was a mid-level scooper in the Oxen department. Since then, I have gained valuable experience across species and was promoted multiple times to lead cleanup and irrigation teams. With this experience I feel that I would be a good fit for Llama Hygiene Lead position advertised in your current organization”.

      Reply ↓
      1. Lady Danbury*

        I wouldn’t necessarily expect that in a casual inquiry from a former coworker, especially since the former coworkers don’t know that LW is the hiring manager. The LW also doesn’t specify the nature of the inquiries, which would also impact what would be appropriate for the coworkers to share at that point.

        Reply ↓
    4. learnedthehardway*

      Agreeing – people develop new experience and skills over time. I would evaluate candidates on their current merits – not on what I knew their qualifications were five years ago. They may have gotten a certification, completed a degree, gone into the specific area that you’re recruiting for, etc. etc.

      Get them to send you their resume, review it, and if you think it makes sense, interview them. If they really don’t measure up on paper, then reject them for concrete reasons (eg. your experience is all about teapot design and we really need someone in teapot finance – that’s specific and concrete).

      If you have serious doubts about them based on prior performance or your experience working with them, be fair about that as well. It’s entirely fair to reject someone based on these reasons (eg. they were a bully, lazy, incompetent, etc), but if you think their skills are good and that they may have matured or if they were going through a bad time or were in a bad situation when you knew them, ask them how they would handle that particular aspect of things today, and make a decision from there.

      In the end, you can reject someone based on concrete reasons or because you truly know that other candidates are stronger and a better fit. But you’ll have been fair and will have built good will, rather than having your contacts feel like you dismissed them out of hand.

      Reply ↓
    5. Smithy*

      This is a good point – more generally speaking, you may also end up with a relatively weak applicant pool overall.

      While you want to hire someone with an arbitrary level of senior expertise, the entire applicant pool is more at that mid-senior level. And if you’re left assessing experience plus potential – your former colleagues might make more sense.

      I will also add that being welcoming and professional to your former colleagues is helping with their professional growth – even if you don’t hire them. I know a lot of people who only work on updating their resume and interview when they NEED a new job. They’re miserable in their role, they’ve had to move, they’re laid off, they’ve hit a ceiling and have to move for growth, etc. Those times aren’t always when you have the most emotional bandwidth, and job hunting is hard. Applying for roles because you feel encouraged by a former colleague (i.e. they say it’s a good place to work, they’re the hiring manager, etc.) can make that process easier or provide extra encouragement. And then if you don’t get the job, their resume being up to date and have a solid chance to work on interviewing isn’t a waste of their time.

      Reply ↓
    6. possibly*

      Right. I was just speaking with someone who has a masters in X, got this job doing X. It turns out that she has a PhD in Y from 20 years before. It’s not used in this job at all, but could be relevant in other circumstances. You could work with her for a long time and not know about Y.

      Reply ↓
  5. T.N.H*

    For OP2, it’s both an issue that people might be upset and afraid to speak up because you let it go AND if you do have any bigots on the team, they just got a license to make inappropriate jokes in meetings.

    Reply ↓
  6. CommanderBanana*

    Also, can we retire the “Jews are so stingy” jokes? I live in one of the biggest, most populous cities on the East Coast and I work with a bunch of volunteer organizations, and a huge percentage of the philanthropic/aid/volunteer orgs here have a lot of Jewish members or are part of Jewish communities.

    And as a bonus, they are the only religiously-affiliated aid groups that will NOT try to convert you! Or will not try to kick you out of their shelter because you’re gay! Giving help to those who need it is a core tenet of Judaism and it doesn’t include trying to strong-arm people into converting to this religion or that religion, which is more than I can say for most Christian-based aid groups.

    Reply ↓
    1. Czhorat*

      Amen to this. While we’re at it, we can retire ALL jokes about Jews that aren’t told by Jewish comedians finding humor in their own culture and traditions in respectful ways.

      Reply ↓
      1. Justin*

        I think we should extend that to any minoritized group (I am not disagreeing I am adding to your comment).

        Cultures (or religions, or races) aren’t for external jokes.

        Reply ↓
        1. Czhorat*

          Oh yes, absolutely.

          No jokes about religious groups.
          No jokes about genders
          No jokes about LGBTQ people
          No jokes about ethnicities.

          It’s not hard, and shouldn’t be controversial anymore.

          Reply ↓
    2. Paint N Drip*

      Where I grew up, there were several significant religious communities densely packed together. The Jewish-affiliated organizations were ALWAYS the most… outward? They spread their support wider than the others seemed to, despite the constant media messages about how Judaism is so insular I’ve experienced the opposite.
      (Plus I will always support social philanthropy that is truly open arms, which is not what you’ll get at Salvation Army, etc.)

      Reply ↓
      1. CommanderBanana*

        ^^ This is accurate. It’s part of tikkun 0lam which is a core tenent of Judaism that means, basically, that you have an obligation to help anyone you can, whenever you can, regardless of their religious affiliation, without any expectation of any sort of action on their part.

        Most of the Christian aid groups I’ve worked with originally began with the explicit mission of converting people to Christianity through aid. Many of them have moved away from that, but not all, and we’ve had to remove some groups from our network because they would not stop proselytizing to clients.

        Reply ↓
    3. Peanut Hamper*

      And any sort of humor based on something about your life that you didn’t choose, like race, gender, or sexuality.

      You want to pick on me because I used to own a 94 Toyota Corolla and bring it up on a regular basis? I’m fine with that. Want to joke that my favorite team only loses when I watch them play? Also fine.

      But race, gender, religion, sexuality–all off the table.

      Reply ↓
      1. Radioactive Cyborg Llama*

        This seems too far–Amy Schumer can’t joke about periods and sexual harassment? Taylor Tomlinson can’t joke about her dating life? Bo Burnham makes jokes about women, minorities, and religion that are really about white men, patriarchy and religious oppression. Humor actually helps combat fascism.

        Reply ↓
        1. CommanderBanana*

          That’s not what that comment is saying – I think we’re all familiar with punching up rather than punching down, yes?

          Reply ↓
        2. Peanut Hamper*

          I think you are failing to differentiate between comedians using humor to combat certain stereotypes (as CommanderBanana points out below) and jokes made by everyday people in an ordinary workplace.

          Also, if I don’t like a particular comedian’s sense of humor, I can choose to not see their show. If my coworkers are making terrible jokes based on the things I described, I can’t just call in sick every day. Thus, the jokes are unavoidable.

          Reply ↓
          1. CommanderBanana*

            Yes, and, I don’t see how “Bob can’t make anti-Semitic “jokes”” translates to “well, now NO ONE can tell a joke that involves Judaism, thanks a lot!”

            This kind of reminds me of the whole “well now I’ll just NEVER talk to ANY of my female coworkers!” when someone is told to stop being a creep at work.

            Reply ↓
    4. Arrietty*

      I fully agree about the Jewish jokes needing to end, but I think Sikhs would take issue with your latter claim.

      Reply ↓
      1. CommanderBanana*

        Hmm…that’s interesting, I have yet to encounter a Sikh aid organization in the massive and very diverse city in which I live, despite working regularly with a huge network of aid and volunteer organizations.

        Reply ↓
        1. Generically*

          That’s both interesting and concerning, regarding the true nature of that diversity.

          Nonetheless, Sikhism both forbids proselytising and routinely provides free food to large numbers through the langar (community kitchen), regardless of religion, race, ethnicity, gender, economic status etc. Worth being aware of!

          Reply ↓
    5. Dancing Otter*

      Oh! I didn’t assume he was referring to Jews being stingy. I thought he meant there was something about their own organization that made him think they in particular wouldn’t be offered any special deals by a Jewish company.
      Not “THEY wouldn’t offer a deal” but “they wouldn’t offer one to US.”
      Intonation can make such a difference, can’t it?

      Reply ↓
    6. a trans person*

      > And as a bonus, they are the only religiously-affiliated aid groups that will NOT try to convert you! Or will not try to kick you out of their shelter because you’re gay!

      I was raised Jewish but this is much farther than I’d go. As a trans queer Pagan woman, I wouldn’t dare set foot in a Chabad charity, for example, in part because I WAS raised Jewish, and they think that licenses conversion attempts.

      Reply ↓
        1. CommanderBanana*

          There are lots of non-proselytizing religions; they just don’t happen to have a large presence among the aid organizations I happen to work with.

          The story of the last two Shakers in the U.S. is fascinating.

          Reply ↓
        2. Clisby*

          At least in my (admittedly limited) experience of living most of my 71 years in the US South, Roman Catholics don’t go in for proselytizing. Maybe it depends on what people mean by proselytizing, but at least where I’ve lived, Catholics aren’t going around trying to convert people. It’s kind of the opposite – they take the position that theirs is the correct Christianity, and if people want to experience it they can come knocking on the door asking for instruction. (Here, I think it takes 6 months to a year of religious classes before you can be accepted into a Catholic church.) It’s not like they’re rounding up new parishioners on street corners, or knocking on people’s doors.

          Reply ↓
      2. CommanderBanana*

        That’s fair – our aid groups are Reform, and some are so Reform they’re basically Jewish Unitarians. We don’t work with conservative or Orthodox groups, and they don’t want to work with us.

        Reply ↓
        1. a trans person*

          Then I hate to say it, but you’re stereotyping Jews. Philosemitism is just as harmful as antisemitism in tons of ways.

          Reply ↓
          1. a trans person*

            Oh, for example, in Judaism, “Conservative” means something completely different and I would generally be fine entering a Conservative charity. I would actually be shocked if you work with *no* Conservative groups and *only* Reform tbh.

            Reply ↓
            1. CommanderBanana*

              I find your earlier comment very offensive. Re: your shock, I am actually the expert on my own experiences; you, a random internet stranger, do not actually know better than I do about which groups I work with.

              I’m not engaging with your comments any longer.

              Reply ↓
              1. a trans person*

                And I find your statement “they are **the only** religiously-affiliated aid groups that will NOT try to convert you! Or will not try to kick you out of their shelter because you’re gay!” offensive as well. You started it.

                Reply ↓
  7. Crencestre*

    LW3: I am so, so sorry about your loss – how terrible that must have been for you! I hope that you’re getting the wise support and comfort that you need now, and that nobody’s minimizing what you went through.

    That said, though – no, you really can’t ask or expect people not to share news that they have or are expecting to have what you don’t. People who long to have a partner or spouse can’t realistically ask others to stop talking about THEIR engagements or upcoming weddings, for example.

    Trying to squelch all talk about such special, joyous personal news risks making you look bitterly envious of others’ good fortune and as if you grudge anyone anything that you yourself want but don’t have. This would be a very human and very common way to feel, but it can make others very resentful of you and can damage your reputation among your colleagues. Most of all, it would do nothing to reverse the loss you’ve suffered; it would only add to your problems, not mitigate them.

    Reply ↓
    1. Seashell*

      You might want to re-read the letter, because it didn’t seem like the LW wanted the zero talk of babies ever or never to have pregnancy information shared. They just didn’t want to hear it announced for the first time at meetings with other co-workers around. Sharing news via e-mail is still sharing it.

      Reply ↓
      1. EStein*

        Sharing it by email instead of in person does take away from the joy of the person announcing it. I think the original comment is both kind and true.

        Reply ↓
    2. Jessica*

      “People who long to have a partner or spouse can’t realistically ask others to stop talking about THEIR engagements or upcoming weddings, for example.” And they don’t. Likewise, if I said “I’m lonely and single (or even painfully divorced) so I can’t stand to see a wedding picture on your desk and have to avoid contact with married people and ask my friends not to mention that they’re dating to me,” people would think I was both unreasonable and nuts. Babies are the only subject where this behavior is normalized.
      I’m American and am really curious, and would love to hear from non-US commenters, whether this is similar in other cultures/places or not.

      Reply ↓
    3. Baunilha*

      I think the wedding analogy is a false equivalence. Pregnancy loss is a very delicate subject and it’s unlikely that OP is the only one bothered by the public announcements.
      I agree with Seashell that they could share the news by e-mail — that way, OP (and anyone else who has struggled with pregnancy and fertility) at least don’t have to put on happy face and can manage their feelings about it privately.

      Reply ↓
      1. T.N.H*

        I just can’t agree with this take and I’ve had multiple miscarriages. Of course, OP should get to opt out, but we should not decide that pregnancy announcements are verboten because someone might be struggling with infertility. It completely takes away from the excitement to send an email.

        Reply ↓
      2. Sneaky Squirrel*

        I don’t agree that it’s a false analogy. People go through divorces and death of a spouse which are delicate subjects as well. Some companies celebrate adoption of a pet which could be triggering to someone whose pet just passed away. I don’t think we should dehumanize the celebration of someone’s happy life events but instead allow for people who may not be in the right space to receive the news to have opportunities to opt out.

        Reply ↓
    4. Happy*

      I agree. I feel really bad for the LW – that has to be really hard to hear in public and try not to cry. But it seems pretty untenable to ask people not to share news of their pregnancies at staff meetings. What happens when someone new joins the team? Are they proactively warned not to say anything? And it seems likely that people would forget about the rule unless you plaster warnings all over the place.

      Reply ↓
    5. Frosty*

      As a non-American I find the idea of announcing these things at all to be quite weird. I might tell my actual friends at work about things going on in my life, but there has never been an “announcement” positive or negative about people’s lives. The only time I had something similar happen was when various family members passed away and my boss asked if he could tell my coworkers and they arranged for a card and flowers. It wasn’t a departmental thing, just my core team.

      I don’t see why anyone has to announce anything! For the exact reason that LW is saying here – it has the potential for unintended impacts. If I’m friends with that person, I will hear about it from them directly. Otherwise it’s not my business, nor do I care.

      Reply ↓
  8. Ellis Bell*

    For OP1, I’d probably go with referring to what “the company” or “we” want for the advertised role, rather than saying “I” or going into how you’re the hiring manager. It may seem weasely to omit this, but if you look at it from their perspective they probably don’t want an awkward encounter where they are personally rejected by a former colleague either! What they’re looking for is the skinny about the role, about whether they’re in with a shot, and if you have any tips. If there’s no point in their applying because of x, y or z requirements then lay it out for them and save them some time. If it’s more nuanced and hard to describe them try to manage their expectations if you can; though I realise that’s not always possible.

    Reply ↓
    1. Not Tom, Just Petty*

      I thought not the opposite, that using “we” did show that OP is a decision maker in this but OP is hiring for the company, not for him or herself,…so more of a corrollary. That yes, am connected to this position, but no, contacting me directly is not going to give you a legup. If OP were, OP would have reached out to a previous coworker and recruited him/her, not waited to be contacted.

      Reply ↓
  9. Hendry*

    This wouldn’t excuse it, but if the guy were Jewish himself I’d be a little more forgiving. Otherwise it could be a firing offense at many offices

    Reply ↓
    1. Czhorat*

      I’m still not OK with it, especially given this particular joke.

      Are there jokes a Jewish person can make about their traditions that wouldn’t be offensive? I’m sure there are. Is any variant of “Jews are cheap and/or greedy” one of them? ABSOLUTELY not.

      Reply ↓
    2. Sneaky Squirrel*

      My favorite saying about this is from RuPaul and goes something like “a joke is a joke only if both parties are in on it”.

      Reply ↓
  10. Bilateralrope*

    Inc is doing something stupid with the URL. Take a look at these:
    https://www.inc.com/alison-green/how-can-i-reject-former-colleagues-who-apply-for-jobs-with-me.html
    https://www.inc-aus.com/alison-green/how-can-i-reject-former-colleagues-who-apply-for-jobs-with-me.html

    The first one is the link Alison put on this page. I’m in New Zealand, so I can understand why I’d be redirected to an Australian server. If it mirrored the content of the URL I had tried to go to.

    But there is no mirroring. So the end result is a Page Not Found/404 error.

    Reply ↓
  11. mango chiffon*

    Am I the only one who think announcing staff member’s pregnancies in an all staff is a little…weird? Is this like an opt-in situation? I sure hope so. It just seems like too much private information to share in such a strange and public way.

    Reply ↓
    1. mango chiffon*

      Maybe I just work with a bunch of introverts, but most of the time I don’t even know until someone goes on parental leave or they are very obviously pregnant. Sometimes there’s a staff organized baby shower, but nothing all staff.

      Reply ↓
    3. Peanut Hamper*

      Very weird. I like my colleagues very much, but stuff like this is none of my business unless they want to tell me personally.

      Reply ↓
  12. Gray Lady*

    I’m a big fan of simply being “too busy” to respond to every unsolicited message on a platform asking for something. Most people don’t even look at their LinkedIn very often.

    Unless you have already established a reputation with these particular people of frequently engaging and responding on LinkedIn, then it’s a little trickier, since you want to maintain good relationships with this people and ignoring their messages would not help with that. But otherwise, just wait until the resume comes across your desk and give it the evaluation it deserves, like any other.

    Reply ↓

Leave a Comment

Before you comment: Please be kind, stay on-topic, and follow the site's commenting rules.
You can report an ad, tech, or typo issue here.

Subscribe to all comments on this post by RSS