u/Alive_Curve4632

So i was shortlisted for a role that was literally my dream role the only issue was it was a fix term role which i am not sure would get renewed and because i am on a tricky visa. I just asked would it be ok to do a research masters because it would give me a longer work visa later ( which in hindsight I think I shouldve brought it up later) , I am now replaying the conversation again and again and would love some input in how to bring other commitments in employment conversations and avoid this situation . Thanks

I wanted some honest input from people in recruiting/HR because I’ve been overthinking this situation.

I recently progressed to the background screening stage for a role in New Zealand. During the process, I accidentally uploaded an older copy of my student visa that stated a 20-hour work limit.

However, my current visa allows 25 hours, and during the interview I mentioned 25 hours. As soon as I realized I had uploaded the older document, I immediately emailed HR clarifying the mistake and sent the updated visa.

After that, I got rejected with the reason:

“we need someone with more availability for the role.”

My question is:

- Do you think the rejection was mainly because they wanted someone with more unrestricted availability anyway?

- Or would the old visa upload + clarification have created concern/red flags from a recruiter perspective even though I corrected it myself?

I’m trying to understand whether this was just an operational decision or whether I accidentally made myself look unreliable.

Would genuinely appreciate honest recruiter/HR perspectives so I don't make the same mistake again.

Hey everyone,

I’m a bit confused about how background checks work legally and wanted to see if anyone here has experience with this.

If a company decides not to hire you because of a negative reference during a background check, are they actually required to tell you that? Or can they just reject you without giving a reason?

I’ve heard mixed things some people say employers have to disclose if something in a background check impacted the decision, while others say companies can just send a generic rejection and leave it at that.

Also:

Does it make a difference if it’s a formal background check vs just calling references?

Are there any situations where they must share what was said?

Is this different depending on the country (I’m in NZ, but curious generally too)?

Would really appreciate any insight or personal experiences especially if you’ve been in this situation.

Thanks!