Hello! I have a question about rejection emails and I welcome all feedback, thanks in advance.

How are we handling rejection emails?

Sometimes candidates ask for feedback but there are legalities around what can be and can’t be said, or am I wrong about that? I was trained to be careful to not say too much.

Sometimes candidates push back and explain certain topics from their interview, but the HM is not willing to change their mind. How many “back and forths” do you give the candidate?

There aren't really any "legalities" about providing feedback. It's just one more of the many ways that lawyers have terrified people into not being honest.

There's literally nothing illegal about telling a candidate that their skill set is insufficient, or that their answers to the questions in the interview were not as good as other candidates'. If the feedback focuses solely on the interview and the candidate's background, the legal risk is minimal.

Now, if a stupid manager says something like "we just decided it would be best to have a man/woman/White person/POC/childless woman, etc., then "legalities" will come into play.

I typically just say that they decided to proceed with another candidate whose [practice group specialty] skills were better aligned rather than we are passing because you are not a fit. It’s safer.

There’s absolutely legalities about feedback. You can’t say this person is to young.. you say, they don’t have enough relevant experience.

The reason some don’t give too much feedback is because if you tell one candidate that they don’t have enough experience and then six months later you lower your standards because you can’t hire someone for the role, so you hire someone with even less experience than the person you shot down for not enough experience, legally someone could come after your company for favoritism if you haven’t documented well the reason why you lowered your standards.
You also don’t give too much because some applicants want to argue with your feedback to try to change your mind. It’s not an argument or a discussion, it’s a rejection.

Great question — and to address the “legality” concern: there’s no law that prohibits giving candidates feedback.

What exists is litigation risk if feedback is inconsistent, discriminatory, or contradicts the hire decision. That’s the real reason companies go silent, it’s risk management, not a legal mandate.

A few practical guardrails:

On feedback: Keep it role-based and objective. “We selected a candidate whose experience more closely aligned with the technical requirements” is defensible. “You seemed nervous” is not. Stick to the job criteria and you’re on solid ground.

On candidate pushback: One response. One. You can acknowledge their perspective without reopening the decision. Something like: “I appreciate you sharing that context. The decision has been finalized, but I wish you well in your search.” Then close the loop.

The hiring manager doesn’t owe a debate. Neither do you. Your job is to communicate the decision with professionalism, not to convince the candidate it was the right one.

Bottom line: Build a standard rejection template, train your HMs on what to say (and not say), and create a clear policy on how many touchpoints you allow post-rejection. That protects everyone.

Denise

I try to keep rejection emails respectful and honest. I have found candidates value clarity more than generic responses, even if it is brief.

One rejection email is enough. To be honest feedback is not necessary but you can put it into the rejection letter and make a recommendation on how to improve it you can do so legally. I appreciate getting rejected over being ghosted. Hope that helps.

I have had enough candidates try to argue their qualification after feedback that I no longer provide it. Yes they are qualified, that's why they got an interview. But another candidate was chosen due to more aligned experience, more complete answers, better questions etc.

It is noble to help rejected candidates, but how much time would you like to spend, for how many candidates, and back and forth? It may never end.
Some people do not take "no" for an answer, whatever your explanation is, and will argue again and again, and this is when you may say something that you may regret.
You should definitely not reconsider a rejected candidate if they provide additional explanations, because it would become a "new" interview, and may be seen as unfair by other candidates who may not have had the chance. Imagine that you finally hire the candidate who pushed back, against another candidate who is a protected class. They will have a case that it was an unfair process, with the other candidate being given more chances and insight.
In short, do not enter into a discussion, as another person said "we moved forward with other candidates who better fit our needs at this time".

I don’t believe there’s any legalities for rejection emails. Normally what I say is; we’ve decided to move forward with another candidate. You can check our website for all new positions that come available and are welcome to apply.

Understand and you are correct about HR Legal coverage. IF the recruiter feels strongly about the candidate experience, SELL THAT to the client, they are only people and there's a chance that Mgr may consider to review the resume and reflect back to that experience and see IF there is a chance or that Mgr will tell you WHY NOT. I want a strong Rectr to fight in my behalf if I'm a strong qualified candidate

I absolutely believe candidates should be able to ask for and receive feedback after an interview when possible. Constructive feedback can be incredibly valuable for a candidate’s professional growth and future interview success. It gives them insight into what they communicated well, where they were strong, and what they may need to improve or develop moving forward. That information can make a real difference in how they approach future opportunities.

There is also a common misconception that companies legally cannot provide interview feedback, and that is simply not true. There are no laws preventing employers from offering professional, factual, and appropriate feedback to candidates. Most hesitation comes from internal company practices, risk avoidance, or consistency concerns; not actual legal restrictions.

Transparency in the hiring process also leaves a lasting impression. Even when a candidate is not selected, thoughtful feedback demonstrates respect, professionalism, and a positive candidate experience. Candidates recognize that level of transparency, and many will speak positively about a company that treats people with honesty and professionalism throughout the process.

Of course, feedback should always remain constructive, job-related, and professionally communicated, but when handled appropriately, it can be beneficial for both the candidate and the employer brand overall.

Rejection emails need to be simple, consistent, and liability‑proof. If someone asks for feedback, I stick to role‑based criteria and avoid anything that can be read as personal judgment.

And on the “back and forth” question—If the hiring manager’s decision is final, additional exchanges don’t add value for either side.

I find feedback is easier to provide when hiring through an agency, this way you can work with the recruiter, they then work with the candidate and help them with another role if this isn’t the one and can coach them on the feedback.

Be careful because legalities can vary by state or country - and in a global recruiting role you’d want to know what you can/can’t do.

My suggestion is don’t write or document it, but you can do a call and provide feedback for the candidate - however I would only do this with a candidate you wanted to hire but didn’t get the role. Otherwise you’ll be spending A LOT of time providing feedback.

Personally - I provided recruiting feedback very few times and only when it was someone we almost hired. Otherwise, it doesn’t add much value to the process. I think it’s nice to want to do this - but try it for a candidate and you’ll see how much work it is.

Also, you never know how the candidate takes the feedback, they could start harassing you for more feedback or for subsequent interviews for roles. It just opens a Pandora’s box which isn’t worth it - at least as a blanket approach.

I feel that it is better to reject by phone, especially after interview when a candidate has actually spoken to a person or people from your organisation. A rejection email seems blunt and harsh to a candidate.

If a candidate doesn't fit, it needs to be about what skills/experience they did not demonstrate, not their personality or that they don't fit with the team. It really must be a rejection based on what skills they don't have to take them into the next round of interviews.

Maybe respond with something like this, but this would be the last email. Even if they respond with something nasty. It happens on occasion.

Thank you for reaching out. We appreciate your interest in the role and your engagement throughout the process. (Adjust as needed, or just open with Thank you for reaching out.)

I want to be clear that our decision was not related to your skills, experience, or how you presented yourself in the interviews. You demonstrated strong capabilities and professionalism, and you interviewed well. (Edit as appropriate to reflect the interview experience.)

In this particular case, the decision came down to our specific team needs at this moment in time, including how the role would complement existing responsibilities and projects already underway. These factors were unique to this situation and weren’t something that could have been influenced through different interview responses.

There isn’t a specific area we would suggest you change or improve based on this process, as every role and team has its own unique needs.

Thank you again for the time and care you put into your application. We truly wish you all the best in your career journey.


Don't poke the bear.

Well, basically you don't need to explain to an applicant why they were rejected. You can simply say we have filled the position, or you can say after careful consideration we have decided to move forward with other applicants whose qualifications more closely match our current needs.

I have been looking unsuccessfully for a job for 6 months. I would be the most loyal, dependable employee who is a personable, a team player, a college graduate and someone who always gives over 100 percent. As hard as rejections are, I appreciate any feedback given. I have a family, willing to learn new skills and really need and want to work

There are a number of reasons to be cautious about how to respond. Yes you could tell someone their skillset doesn’t align but unless that is clearly evident in the documentation and unless the selected candidate perfectly aligns (rare) it is absolutely NOT a clear case. That is why people in the industry stay away from giving specific answers. It also becomes a back and forth where the rejected candidate gets the false impression the decision can be turned around if they justify themselves once you respond. It’s crummy and being rejected is terrible but it’s a part of the business. Be kind and compassionate and use language your company aligns with. Move on from there.

It’s not our job to do career development for candidates. I don’t send rejections and don’t respond to requests for feedback from the interview process.

Personally, I think it's best to be transparent in regards to why they were denied. Whether the hiring manager said no or they lack XYZ in their skillset. It's allowing the candidate to find those things to help them get to where they want to be. This current opportunity may not be the right one at this time, but once you gain the experience/knowledge, reapply.

But it needs to be normalized telling the candidate why, especially if they reach back out to us asking why they aren't moving forward.