A manager got rejected for his own team’s senior associate vacancy after applying with a fake name. He found the automated system rejected his CV in six minutes because he wrote React instead of React.js. He said, "The CV of the person who wrote the job description," was ignored.
A manager's experiment with his own company's job vacancy has sparked debate about automated recruitment after he claimed his application was rejected within six minutes because his CV listed React instead of React.js.
A manager has claimed that his company may have been rejecting qualified candidates for months because their CVs did not match a technical keyword exactly. He made the discovery after applying for his own company's senior associate vacancy under a fake name and receiving a rejection within six minutes.
The manager shared his experience on Reddit's r/recruitinghell forum. His Reddit post shared on X claimed that his team of nine needed a senior associate since April, but HR repeatedly told him the candidate pipeline was thin and applicants were failing the screening process.
He decided to test the system himself. He created a new email address, changed his name, adjusted some dates and applied with a CV based largely on his own experience.
The company rejected his application in six minutes, he claimed. A week later, he identified a possible reason: the screening filter required applicants to list "React.js", while his CV mentioned "React".
The manager said the difference came down to a full stop. His experience has since prompted questions about how companies screen technical candidates and whether strict keyword requirements are eliminating suitable applicants before recruiters assess their skills.
Manager says filter rejected his own CVThe manager said he had written the job description for the very position he was trying to fill. Despite his familiarity with the role and its requirements, his application did not pass the initial screening stage. "The CV of the person who wrote the job description," he wrote while describing the irony of the rejection.
He wrote that HR had spent months telling him the company could not find suitable candidates. His own application then exposed what he believed was a possible explanation for the repeated rejections.
The manager said he took a week to work out why the system had rejected him. He eventually found that the filter required "React.js", while his CV used "React".
He questioned whether the company had been rejecting qualified candidates over the same difference since April.
'HR should have tested this': Reddit users question recruitment processSeveral commenters questioned why the company had not tested its screening rules before using them to reject applicants.
One user called the alleged error a serious oversight and said the manager should show the findings to senior management. The commenter argued that the person responsible for HR should face consequences because the problem could have been caught with a simple test.
Another user criticised HR teams for screening applicants for technical jobs without understanding the work involved.
"Recruiters who lack technical knowledge may rely on what they believe is correct instead of evaluating whether candidates actually have the required skills', the comment said.
One user wrote, "HR doesn't hire applicants," suggesting that recruitment teams could keep repeating the hiring process without solving the underlying problem.
A commenter questioned whether the HR team had been paid for doing little while the vacancy remained open.