Got job but now due to headcount I might not have one!

t0rt0ise

OP, I don't know what you mean by 'headcount'.

ironlady2022

tOrt0ise - I believe it's when they set aside a budget for new people and then when it's low someone just says put all recruitment on hold. It's difficult really, it's a global firm with 300 locations all of which would be recruiting.

an9i77

Often it can be because they are planning to make redundancies, so need to keep any vacancies 'vacant' for displaced employees. They would be on dodgy ground legally if they took on new staff when there was the potential for someone at risk of redundancy to take that role. Not to mention the effect on staff morale, etc. Not saying that is definitely gonna happen there but it could be a reason.

mountainofdebt

an9i77 wrote: »

If you really wanted to play hard ball you could go back and say that you are at final stage interview with another organisation and what would happen in the event that company 2 offered as you really want to work for them, etc - depends how much you want to go down that route..

Sorry but this is a stupid tactic.

If I was company 1 I would simply say that due to the uncertainty then the OP had to make the decision what would be in her best interests herself and if that meant they went to work for company 2 then so be it.

Personally if I was the OP then I would be continuing to look for another position - if this position works out then great but if I personally wouldn't be ignoring any other opportunities just in case

an9i77

mountainofdebt wrote: »

Sorry but this is a stupid tactic.

If I was company 1 I would simply say that due to the uncertainty then the OP had to make the decision what would be in her best interests herself and if that meant they went to work for company 2 then so be it.

Personally if I was the OP then I would be continuing to look for another position - if this position works out then great but if I personally wouldn't be ignoring any other opportunities just in case

mountain of debt I was not suggesting she says she has another job, just that if there was any way to influence the timescales of them coming back to her it would be to suggest she is interviewing elsewhere more in a 'what would I do if I got another offer' way, this might just encourage someone 'up on high' to make a decision in days rather than weeks as her other post suggested it would be 2 weeks before they come back with a decision. Of course it may have no effect at all, but she did ask if there was anything she could say. It must be torture for her to have to wait 2 weeks to find out if the offer is going ahead!

mountainofdebt

an9i77 wrote: »

mountain of debt I was not suggesting she says she has another job, just that if there was any way to influence the timescales of them coming back to her it would be to suggest she is interviewing elsewhere more in a 'what would I do if I got another offer' way, this might just encourage someone 'up on high' to make a decision in days rather than weeks as her other post suggested it would be 2 weeks before they come back with a decision. Of course it may have no effect at all, but she did ask if there was anything she could say. It must be torture for her to have to wait 2 weeks to find out if the offer is going ahead!

But can't you see that my response would be the same - there is no way that the OP is going to make the powers that be of a multinational company to make a decision any quicker by saying what you are suggesting - in fact it would make the OP look ever so slightly childlike!

The people that the OP are speaking to are not the people making the decisions - they will be taking their orders from higher up and there is nothing that the OP can either say or do to influence the situation.

Yes I agree it must be hard for the OP but given that they can't influence either the length of time or the final decision I feel that it would be amiss of the OP not to keep looking.

an9i77

mountainofdebt wrote: »

But can't you see that my response would be the same - there is no way that the OP is going to make the powers that be of a multinational company to make a decision any quicker by saying what you are suggesting - in fact it would make the OP look ever so slightly childlike!

The people that the OP are speaking to are not the people making the decisions - they will be taking their orders from higher up and there is nothing that the OP can either say or do to influence the situation.

Yes I agree it must be hard for the OP but given that they can't influence either the length of time or the final decision I feel that it would be amiss of the OP not to keep looking.

I agree she should keep looking for alternatives. OK as this is a multinational we're talking about maybe it wouldn't be possible for her to influence any decision making (or to be specific not the actual decision, but the timescales), the local recruiters/managers are just too far removed from whoever is making the decision to freeze or unfreeze the vacancy. I wish her luck in getting it sorted.

duckandcover

t0rt0ise wrote: »

OP, I don't know what you mean by 'headcount'.

It's the number of employees in an organisation, but doesn't include temps or contractors which can (in certain cases) be a good way for companies to get around restrictions on headcount increases from higher up.

ironlady2022

It is agonising having to wait but in the meantime I'm going ahead looking for other jobs and updating my linkedin profile. They did ask me if there was any other offers and I stupidly said 'Even if there was, I wouldn't go elsewhere'. I have waited for this one chance, and it could be taken away from me. It's not just about taking time off, but all the effort and time I've put in to preparing myself mentally. It's exhausting really. Wouldn't wish this on anyone!