Apparently, being technically strong isn’t enough to get a job in India.

[u/Kind-Description779]

I had an interview today at a company in Noida.

The interview went really well. I answered every question they asked. At the end, the interviewer literally told me:

“You are technically fit and strong for this role.”

I thought, great, I’m through to the next round.

Then came the rejection.

Reason? I’ve worked at 4 organisations in 5 years.

What makes this even more frustrating is that 2 of those 4 organisations shut down.

So apparently, I’m being penalised for companies shutting down?

What was I supposed to do? Stay there after the company closed just so my resume could look “stable”?

If someone has changed jobs but kept learning, improving their skills and can actually do the work — why should the number of companies on their resume matter more than their actual capability?

Meanwhile, someone can spend 5–10 years in the same organisation, barely upgrade their skills, and still get the “stable candidate” tag.

Maybe we should start asking candidates what they can do instead of just counting how long they stayed at their previous company.

Curious to know what people here think — especially recruiters and hiring managers.

Would you reject a technically strong candidate purely because they changed 4 companies in 5 years?

[u/Neo-Tree]

There are lot of such companies with stupid HRs taking stupid decisions. You are better off not joining such companies with such regressive culture.