Company rejects contractor of 14 months from permanent position for lacking relevant experience, demands she train two new hires: 'You're literally doing the job'

Ally Perry • Writer and Editor

Nov 10, 2026 8:00 AM EST

She had put in the work, but the system didn't want to give her any recognition.

While plenty of people prefer to job-hop these days, there are also plenty of employees who still value climbing the ranks in the same place for a while as they try to build legitimacy in their careers. So long as a workplace provides the training, salary, and experience that align with their goals, it usually makes sense to see how far they can take things before they start sending out applications elsewhere.

The reality is that a lot of employers have a tendency to undervalue their employees and not give them the recognition that they deserve, and that is one of the most common reasons for a talented worker to look further afield. If they feel like they are given enough opportunity to grow where they are, they are much more likely to stay.

Almost all companies approach their hiring process slightly differently, whether that is internal or external. One quality that many of them share, though, is certain inefficiencies that make going for a job or a promotion more difficult than it needs to be. Although they sometimes do this on purpose to disqualify more candidates, it can also be the case that their system just doesn't work properly. For somebody who wants to continue bringing their expertise to a particular workplace, this is frustrating. A fully qualified internal candidate should not have to fight to be seen as somebody who can do the job.

*_{An employee talks on her phone while gesturing at the laptop in front of her. Model portrayal.}*

An employee had been working for a distribution company for over a year through a temp agency. Her supervisor encouraged her to apply for a permanent position as soon as it came up, so she did, listing herself as a temp.

She thought that she was sure to get noticed, but instead, she received a rejection that claimed she did not have enough relevant experience. HR said that she hadn't been selected for an interview because she had been processed as an external applicant. She didn't think this was fair, especially as she was experienced enough to be training new hires. She didn't know how to move forward.

A company rejected my application for lack of relevant experience. I've been doing that exact job for them for 14 months.

I've been working at a distribution company for 14 months through a staffing agency. Same building, same schedule, same supervisor, same responsibilities as the permanent employees. The only difference is whose name is on my paycheck.

About three weeks ago, a permanent position opened up in my department. Same job I've been doing, but with benefits, better pay and actual job security. My supervisor encouraged me to apply. Said I already knew the systems and wouldn't need training.

I was genuinely excited about it. The application itself was a little weird. It asked whether I'd ever been employed by the company. Technically, the answer is no, because my employer of record is the staffing agency. So I selected no.

She filled out the application in the way that she thought was correct.

I listed the company on my resume as "Inventory Coordinator (Contract via [Agency])" and described exactly what I do there. A week later, I got the standard rejection email saying they were moving forward with candidates whose experience more closely matched the position.

I figured maybe they'd found someone better. Disappointing, but whatever. Then my supervisor asked if I'd applied because he hadn't seen my name on the candidate list. I showed him the rejection email.

He looked at it for a minute and said, "That's ridiculous. You're literally doing the job." He contacted HR, and apparently my application never reached him. He was told I had been processed as an external applicant and didn't meet some of the screening criteria.

They didn't seem in a hurry to appoint someone to the role.

I don't know which criteria. Nobody has explained that part. The position is still open. The person training two of the new hires this week is me.

I'm trying to figure out whether I should push harder to have my application reconsidered or take this as a sign that I need to start looking elsewhere. It's a strange feeling to be considered qualified enough to do a job every day, but not qualified enough to get an interview for it.

Has anyone dealt with this when trying to move from temp to permanent? Is there a better way I should be applying, or is this something only the hiring manager can fix?

Her manager may have been rooting for her, but she got tripped up by the faulty system in place. There is no doubt it was a demoralizing experience, especially since she was only taking on more responsibility in her current role.

*_{An employee works on her laptop in a modern office. Individual pictured is a model used for illustrative purposes.}*

She needed to bring more attention to herself.

AMrSocial Worker 100% push harder. It sounds like you would really value the permanent position. Absolutely worth the risk.

ElevatorSiri Qualified enough to do a job everyday AND TRAIN NEW HIRES but not enough to get an interview? It sounds like someone needs to reevaluate whether HR is qualified.

Perhaps there was some more admin to wade through.

Imaginary_Spell6885 My bf went through this with another company, and it turned out that company had a contract with the staffing agency to keep people as temps for a certain time period (I think it was a year?) before they could be considered for f/t hire. I think he learned

about it after going through this same recommendation process as you are and then finally talking to her about it directly

Practical-Split4340 I've been working in my industry for more than 25 years. HR are a bunch of idiots and know next to nothing about the rest of the company. They know HR. Your resume was filtered by some random system, or one of the HR personnel. Push harder if you want the job, the rejection means nothing until the position no longer exists.

She had the opportunity for malicious compliance.

Puzzleheaded_Ad3024 I would object to training someone to do a job I was rejected for because of no experience.

Want More? Follow Us and Add Us as a Preferred Source on Google.