I call this the "Boris Yeltsin rule." As he moved up the ranks, all the apparatchiks thought he was a good Communist. And maybe he was, but by waiting until he was on top to turn the ship, he made a much bigger mark on history than he would have as a young dissident.

"Exited" was morally correct in letting the former employer know that they had been unethical. Unless we all stand up for what is right, bad men will continue to do bad things.

But, he was morally incorrect in seeking re-employment with them. He cheapened himself - why work for evil?

Burn all bridges to foul territory, but never attempt to swim the moat afterward. Don't look back. The world is large, and there are plenty of ethical employers.

$teve

As "Exited" I agree with Steve on his first point, but want to point out that I reapplied to a different organization. The CEO-equivalent has left as have my nemesis and many others. I had forgotten that the HR head was a buddy of Nemesis!
C'est la guerre.

Employee: Noun "A worker who is hired to perform a job."

All the jobs I have held had nothing to do with making sure that advancement practices were fair for other employees. Nothing in any job description ever mentioned that I was supposed to criticize management.

The second you put in your notice, you became excess baggage, and anything you had to say was unimportant. Just by the act of resigning, you made it clear to your employer that you didn't care one way or the other whether or not they succeed. Why would they ever want you back? Especially when you bad-mouthed one of their other employees (who had not resigned).

Get with the program, man. Find a place to work where you can make a visible contribution. If you are just salary hunting, put up with the way the company rewards you. After all, you aren't really wanting to make a difference, right? Your goal is to amass wealth.

Sorry if this seems too brutal, but I come from a military background, and still feel that one should try to be the best at their job, and to help his or her peers do the same. I had several jobs after I retired, and saw the "bottom line" attitude ad nauseaum for 10 years. I hated it then, and I ended up resigning from a place I had worked for five years because of ethical considerations. After a year of unemployment, I ended up where I am now, 60 miles away, and loving every minute of it.

Good luck.

I disagree with your blog, but perhaps my circumstances were different.

I worked at a company as a senior network administrator (cisco/microsoft).

One of the senior management staff irritated me so much, I looked for a job and found one within four days.

One of the VPs took me out to lunch and asked me why ever was I leaving--and I told him specifically. He said tell HR--it won't help matters to say I found a job closer to home for more money--I had to be honest.

I did so--my 15 minute HR exit interview was 90 minutes, and HR took detailed notes.

Within 30 days, that senior manager was asked to leave. The president of the company had said that if I ever wanted to come back, they would certainly work to make me happy again.

Later, numerous co-workers grilled me to work with them again--the problem person was gone.

However, I in reality DID find a job closer to home and for more money.

I did end up working for them--as a consultant. They were eager to have my skills back, even though they hired an entire network consulting firm to handle day to day tasks, I was brought back as a consultant to handle key architecture improvements.

So in the end, my honesty was appreciated.

I had never heard of that manager before he was hired and never would work for him again. It may come back to haunt me in the future, but right now I am very happy and the company I left is paying me as a consultant.

I doubt that the reason Exited has been out of work for 7 months has anything to do with his exit interview. Nowadays, other companies calling his previous employer will get nothing except the dates of his employment. Telling a prospective employer the guy is a troublemaker will only get them sued. Besides, it's in their interest to get bad apples into a competitor's barrel.

Of course, criticizing the very person who set up the shutout of a deserving employee for political reasons was, well, just stupid.

I worked at a leading national finance industry firm (5,000 employees, 500 IT staff) as a group leader. My boss had a management style that I just could not live with (not unethical, just too much of a micromanager). Realizing that my bonus potential was nonexistent, I looked for and found another position. When I resigned, the head of HR asked me to reconsider as my manager was getting a rep for bad relations with his staff, so I was due to be moved over to another manager (the CIO). The CIO was in every respect a lose-lose guy to work for (political hack). I told him I'd stick with my decision to leave.

My manager refused to even let me say farewell to my development team and had me marched straight down for my exit interview. During the interview, my team appeared outside the window in an impromptu demonstration of loyalty and pride. The interviewer suspended the session and invited my team into the room so we could say our goodbyes properly.

The CEO of the company called me several times at home to lure me back. I took that opportunity to alert him to the dangers he faced from his bum of a CIO. The CIO was toast not long after.

I've since returned to the company as a consultant at double the pay from before and continue to enjoy great relations with the company.

So, speak your mind, but be VERY mindful of the ears you're filling.

Danger lies in wait for the unwary person who actually speaks their mind in an exit interview. I agree with most who say, you've already implicityly indicated your disloyalty by leaving.

Why in the world would they want an honest opinion. Anyone who really thinks the employer wants honesty should ask themselves, "If they were not willing to fix things before I gave notice" WHY in the world would the lightning bolt "hit" and they'd want to fix them now.

A lose lose for the exit interview candidate. Smile, say nothing and leave. If they'd really wanted to know they'd have asked a long time ago.

"out and up" had the best approach..he was careful, but very VERY mindful of who he was speaking to.

"exit interviewed" made a fundamental mistake, he took his employer at their word that they wanted an honest opinion... they didn't!

The thing that surprises me about Exited's case is that the exit interview was conducted by someone in his chain of command. More typically, this is done by an HR proffessional, or at least someone from another branch of the organization.

The fact that the exit interview was kept within the affected department seems like a perfect setup for filtering the feedback received, in order to insure that everything looks rosey to those higher up the company ladder. In this case, it seems like an absolute "lose-lose" situation for the person leaving the company.

"Exit"/Rand:

Short answer .. you are not employed with THIS company because of how you left. Perhaps you are not employed with someone else because of the personality defect that led you to fall on your sword here.

I am wondering what you hoped to accomplish with the parting shot. From your description ("they") others knew what was happening, so you weren't exposing an unknown misdeed. All you were really doing (it seems) was being superior. It seems like a needless burning of a bridge.

In reality you have no idea why they are ignoring you. Perhaps the HR rep who OK'ed the funny business is still there. Perhaps there is an "eligible to rehire" check box on the termination paperwork that was checked NO in your case and cannot be easily overridden. But it should be no surprise. the writing was on the wall when the person you accused of malfeasance was giving you the exit interview!