A man was rejected by an ATS. Three days later, he sent the recruiter a message that read less like a follow-up and more like a plea. A few days after that, he was hired.The message surprisingly wasn’t about the applicant’s achievements. It read, “Please help me. My financial condition is not good. I am an immediate joiner.” He was hired, not out of pity, but merit—something that the ATS missed.Harshit Srivastava, a former talent acquisition leader who now runs Hiring Insider, a platform that helps mid-career professionals understand how recruiters actually think, shared this exchange on LinkedIn.
The system said no
For any given job, an average of 257.6 people applied in 2025, according to a recent HR Dive report. And only a handful of them make it to the interview stage. With the arrival of the Applicant Tracking System (ATS), the numbers have gone further down. The rest of the applications are filtered out long before a human ever opens their resume. The software was never built to notice why someone applied, only whether their resume matched.In a post shared on LinkedIn, Srivastava revealed how a single message from the applicant made him relook at the resume.“I went back and reviewed his profile. Not because I felt sorry for him, but because I wanted to make sure we hadn’t missed someone worth interviewing. We interviewed him. A few days later, I sent one word: ‘Congratulations’.”The ATS software that recruiters use checks a candidate’s profile through the usual filters—keywords, formatting, whatever criteria the ATS has been fed—and it came back rejected. That’s where most applications end.For large companies, the software is indeed useful, as a single opening receives thousands of applications. An ATS exists precisely because no team could manually read all of them, so it scores and ranks based on rules set in advance. While those rules are sensible, they are also rigid. A candidate whose resume is phrased slightly differently, or whose experience doesn’t map neatly onto the listed keywords, can be filtered out even when they’re a genuine fit.
What the algorithm misses
Srivastava’s point is valid, which is exactly why his post has resonated with many. An ATS is built to filter volume. It’s fast, consistent, and blind to context—which is exactly the problem. It can reject the right candidate on a whim, just because the resume wasn’t ATS-friendly. He also revealed the conversation he had with the man after hiring. “His final words on the phone call hit harder than anything else: ‘You saved me from unpaid EMIs and my parents’ medical expenses.’ That day reminded me of something I’ll never forget. An ATS filters resumes. It doesn’t understand human struggles. Technology should help us hire faster. It should never stop us from looking twice,” he said.
In this day and age, technology can speed up hiring, but it shouldn’t become the final word on who gets a chance. And unfortunately, that’s what happens today. Recruiters skim hundreds of profiles a week. It would be easy to treat every rejection as final and move on. “Every resume has experience. Some resumes also carry the weight of an entire family. That’s why every now and then, it’s worth giving someone a second look,” he said.For job seekers, the scenario has dramatically changed, especially with AI. According to a new research report by Criteria, more than half—53%—of job seekers experienced ghosting last year. That’s the highest level in three years. In 2025, 48% of applicants were ignored, and 38% in 2024.
“We’re seeing a surge in application volume, largely fuelled by AI tools that make it easier than ever to apply and tailor résumés at scale. The result is that hiring teams are spending more time reviewing applications, but getting less meaningful signals from each one,” Josh Millet, the co-founder and CEO of Criteria, told Fortune.Amid mass layoffs and cost-cutting, the hiring process is becoming even more brutal. More candidates are competing for fewer roles, and recruiters seem less interested in follow-up, which leaves many applicants ghosted and hanging.