Body the explanation you gave doesn't answer the question.. rather than getting into a defensive mode by giving reasons that candidate applied for multiple roles let's accept that a recruiter does miss out on screening the entire set of candidates who have applied for a role!! The point which shankar makes a lot of sense!!
I don't mean to be defensive - if a recruiter misses out screening candidates, that's the recruiter not doing their job - no two ways about that. I am only trying to say that applying randomly to ALL possible jobs (some people apply without even reading the JD) - sends the wrong signal to the hiring team, and can hamper a candidate's chances of getting hired - or even screened.
Body the explanation you gave doesn't answer the question.. rather than getting into a defensive mode by giving reasons that candidate applied for multiple roles let's accept that a recruiter does miss out on screening the entire set of candidates who have applied for a role!!
The point which shankar makes a lot of sense!!
I don't mean to be defensive - if a recruiter misses out screening candidates, that's the recruiter not doing their job - no two ways about that.
I am only trying to say that applying randomly to ALL possible jobs (some people apply without even reading the JD) - sends the wrong signal to the hiring team, and can hamper a candidate's chances of getting hired - or even screened.