Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Being Honest In Exit Interviews Is Pointless 550

Esther Schindler writes "Say that you're leaving a job, either on your own volition or because they decided it was time for you to 'pursue other opportunities.' Before you leave, the HR department wants to chat with you about the employment experience, in an exit interview. 'Oh goodie,' you think. 'Now I can really tell them what I really feel.' Don't do it. If your employer couldn't find the time to ask you what was good or bad about working at the company while you were still working there, writes Lisa Vaas, why bother with honesty and potentially burned bridges now? (If they did ask, give them constructive feedback before you leave this job; they deserve it). Discuss."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Being Honest In Exit Interviews Is Pointless

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 23, 2012 @08:45PM (#40744151)

    HR are part of the executive, disguised as employees, basically a corporate Trojan horse. Never trust HR. They are there to advance your employer's interests, not your interests. In all your dealings with HR, only ever do and say things that will advance your own interests.

  • by jaxtherat ( 1165473 ) on Monday July 23, 2012 @09:35PM (#40744509) Homepage

    I don't normally reply to anon or trolls, but what the devil are you smoking? What a total misuse of "THE exception that proves the rule" you blithering monobrowed goatbanger. This instance the exception BREAKS the rule, making it not a rule. Dear lord.

    Here, read up on it: []

  • by honestmonkey ( 819408 ) on Monday July 23, 2012 @11:46PM (#40745245) Journal
    I believe that this is what the person above was referring to: []

    You should never talk to the police, for any reason, other than to identify yourself. If something happens and you are a witness, or worse, involved in a crime, wait for the trial. Never tell the police anything. It NEVER benefits you.
  • by tripleevenfall ( 1990004 ) on Tuesday July 24, 2012 @12:08AM (#40745357)

    Most of the time today there is a standing HR policy that says they will only confirm dates of employment. The only thing I have heard differently is that my prior employer would say whether the person was "re-hireable" or not, if asked.

    As far as exit interviews go, if you do want to say something negative, it's good- as with any other time in the business world - to never say anything negative about an individual. You can usually get your point across without it.

  • by No Tears In The End ( 452319 ) on Tuesday July 24, 2012 @01:12AM (#40745755)

    Law abiding citizens that work to help the community have nothing to fear from Uncle Leo.

    You, sir, are either dangerously naive or simply an upper-middle class white guy with no perspective. Law abiding citizens of color or lower economic status have plenty to fear from law enforcement.


  • by overlordofmu ( 1422163 ) <> on Tuesday July 24, 2012 @02:30AM (#40746133)
    The only argument you give is a single anecdote and only credential you give is revving engines at hate addicts.

    You have entirely failed to convince me. However, this law professor and police detective have me convinced of their argument.

    Don't Talk to Cops, Part 1 -> []
    Don't Talk to Cops, Part 2 -> []

    (I realize that forty-eight minutes of video versus your seventy-five words is certainly not balanced but you have the ability to respond if you something more to add. Sorry, some lessons don't fit into a tweet.)
  • by HnT ( 306652 ) on Tuesday July 24, 2012 @08:25AM (#40747699)

    Even then, there are ways to say bad things without saying bad things

    There is a particular "code" used in references or certificates of employment you get when leaving your job here in central Europe - basically employers are not allowed to hinder you from finding a new job in any way, so they cannot say anything bad; instead they rely on very subtle differences and certain phrases to the point where you can read about this "code" in books and hear about it in trainings. An example would be saying you "always tried to do a good job", which sounds alright, right? But the code here is that is does not say "you always did an absolutely outstanding excellent job" so what they were actually saying is "you were frakking horrible", you never really did anything (hence "tried to.."). In another examples, there are certain key phrases, so if they are saying that you "always associated with your fellow employees" or something like that, then that can mean you are a mean drunk and/or sexually harassed colleagues. And there are techniques to leave things out, like not mentioning you were always polite to your superiors and customers but you were to your colleagues, then that could mean there were issues there.

    See also:

  • by jeko ( 179919 ) on Tuesday July 24, 2012 @02:50PM (#40753695)

    Marry into a cop family and the world works VERY differently ;)

    There. Right. There. That's the problem. The favoritism you describe is EXACTLY the corruption we're all complaining about, and is a direct violation of the oath your law enforcement friends took.

    "On my honor,
      I will never betray my badge,
      my integrity, my character,
    or the public trust.
      I will always have
      the courage to hold myself
      and others accountable for our actions.
      I will always uphold the constitution,
      my community and the agency I serve."

    "Professional courtesy" and the "Blue Wall" ARE the problem, and the routine instances of corruption you wink at, like letting another cop's wife slide on a speeding ticket, eventually lead to letting her slide on a DUI, and then to looking the other way when her husband beats some little girl into a coma. []

All laws are simulations of reality. -- John C. Lilly