<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Bait-and-Switch is Still Out There</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ere.net/2008/04/16/the-bait-and-switch-is-still-out-there/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ere.net/2008/04/16/the-bait-and-switch-is-still-out-there/</link>
	<description>Recruiting News, Recruiting Events, Recruiting Community, Social Recruiting</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 23:35:23 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Doug Tikkanen</title>
		<link>http://www.ere.net/2008/04/16/the-bait-and-switch-is-still-out-there/comment-page-1/#comment-5158</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug Tikkanen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 15:50:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ere.net/2008/04/16/the-bait-and-switch-is-still-out-there/#comment-5158</guid>
		<description>Interesting article. Question is this. Will companies really make a change away from their deceptive ways? I doubt it. There is too much legal fear for a company to honestly even answer why they select one candidate over another candidate and so the use of vague information keeps everything from being spelled out and thus less likelihood of a lawsuit. If you ever read SHRM&#039;s articles the focus is constantly on the law. Not on what should be right just to the person/candidate but what is the safest legal way to handle even the selection of who to interview. So if you don&#039;t define the position ever for the candidate, guess what? No reprocussions. Doesn&#039;t mean I agree with it but in reality it hits the market every day.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting article. Question is this. Will companies really make a change away from their deceptive ways? I doubt it. There is too much legal fear for a company to honestly even answer why they select one candidate over another candidate and so the use of vague information keeps everything from being spelled out and thus less likelihood of a lawsuit. If you ever read SHRM&#8217;s articles the focus is constantly on the law. Not on what should be right just to the person/candidate but what is the safest legal way to handle even the selection of who to interview. So if you don&#8217;t define the position ever for the candidate, guess what? No reprocussions. Doesn&#8217;t mean I agree with it but in reality it hits the market every day.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric Walker</title>
		<link>http://www.ere.net/2008/04/16/the-bait-and-switch-is-still-out-there/comment-page-1/#comment-4884</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Walker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 05:10:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ere.net/2008/04/16/the-bait-and-switch-is-still-out-there/#comment-4884</guid>
		<description>Dr. Kannisto, 
I totally agree.  Being honest with potential candidates has worked best for me, along with proper planning from management defining the need before the job is even advertised.  But wait, it took me about 8 hours to buy my vehicle from the dealership.......:)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dr. Kannisto,<br />
I totally agree.  Being honest with potential candidates has worked best for me, along with proper planning from management defining the need before the job is even advertised.  But wait, it took me about 8 hours to buy my vehicle from the dealership&#8230;&#8230;.:)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
