I would really like to know who told this hiring manager it was within his rights, and advisable, to send me an email detailing everything that was wrong with me.
Of course, it included that I didn't seem "enthusiastic enough" about the position. And it also included a litany of reasons why my experience didn't make the grade. "Enthusiastic enough" seems to mean sucking up the fact that they were rude, and left me outside trying to figure out how to get into a locked building, and then somehow managing to come across as chipper when the hiring manager literally yelled at me for not having experience that wasn't in the job description.
I honestly was a little baffled, until I realized that employers now feel like they have the right to do these things. They are the arbiters of what is acceptable, "professional", and moral.
It's like employers are the new Parent. It's not the government, in spite of what some right-wingers fear. It is the employer -- who apparently is also allowed to have an opinion as to whether they should provide birth control, what I do on my own time, what I post on Facebook (nothing), and what I believe politically.
I've been interviewing for decades now. Because I work in nonprofit there is a lot of economic impact in the sector, and I frequently find myself looking for new employment. So I am well practiced in interviewing. As such, I have noticed a distinct increase in entitlement on the part of my interviewers. While lots of people talk a good game about "a good fit" (even though all the research shows that interviews are actually one of the least reliable ways of determining an applicant's ability to do the job), it's less about fit and more about whether this person will take whatever they get.
This applies to:
1) What you'll settle for in salary
2) What you'll settle for in workload
3) Whether you'll rock the boat
4) Whether you're just like them (this has always been kind of true, but I've found that aligning politics seem to be more and more important)
It used to feel a little more mutual. There was always a power differential in an interview, but now it feels like potential employers just push it. This might not apply to all industries, especially those in which skills are scarce. But it is definitely true in my sector. For instance, there has been lots of talk about employers' rights to ask for social media passwords and to have access to private Facebook and Twitter accounts.
Some of this is on the employee, of course, but there is a line between home and work. Employers have no compelling interest in what goes on at home unless it undermines work. Why do they feel like they can compel what they consider to be "acceptable" behavior?
There is no way in the past that anyone would have ever emailed or called me detailing everything wrong with me, especially focusing on nebulous, hard to quantify items like "not enthusiastic enough."
Yes. I admit I was not enthusiastic when your hiring manager looked pissed off that I didn't have skills that were not listed on the job description (and in fact were counter to it), and that the senior manager of the department left to go yell at that hiring manager for telling me that he was going to supervise me when the department manager thought he was going to. And then informing me that one was evaluated on "whether people like you."
I left knowing I didn't get that job. I didn't need their email telling me I suck, with the unspoken idea that if I were "professional," I would take my lumps and slink off.
This time I wasn't going to accept it, however. I sent them email telling them how they could improve their hiring process. In a very factual, non-emotional way.
Kind of like how I argue with my parents, unfortunately.