An Indian startup founder has stirred a nationwide debate after withdrawing a lucrative job offer from a highly skilled candidate. Mohammed Ahmed Bhati, the founder of Jobbie, revoked a ₹22 lakh per annum offer due to derogatory LinkedIn comments made by the candidate targeting religious communities. Although the candidate impressed the team with his work ethic, resume design, and ideas for improving the platform, Bhati said the company prioritized values over talent.
This bold move has sparked a clash of opinions online. Some praise the founder’s ethics, while others criticize the decision as cancel culture gone too far. Let’s explore what led to this controversy, how Bhati justified the action, and what it says about values in modern hiring practices.
The Build-Up: A Standout Candidate Emerges
Jobbie, a job-tech startup, recently gained attention with a Reddit post about its hiring journey—450 interviews and 12,000 applications without selecting anyone. This viral story led to increased visibility and a wave of new applicants. Among them, one candidate stood out.
The candidate didn’t just submit a standard resume. He created it using Jobbie’s own tools and gave feedback on the platform itself. His creativity, proactive mindset, and clear technical skills impressed the team. Bhati and his colleagues believed they had found someone special, even though his salary expectation exceeded their budget.
Despite that, the founder remained open-minded. The company prepared to extend a formal offer with a ₹22 lakh per annum package—clearly above the startup’s usual hiring range. Everything pointed toward a successful hire.
The Turning Point: A Background Check Reveals Disturbing Content
Before making it official, Bhati initiated a routine background check. That’s when the team stumbled upon the candidate’s LinkedIn activity. His public comments included language that disrespected religious communities. Screenshots posted by Bhati show that the posts weren’t old or taken out of context—they were recent and unambiguous.
In response, Bhati wrote a detailed LinkedIn post explaining the decision. He said, “Impressed with the interview, we were ready to roll out an offer above our budget. But during the final background check, we found recent public comments that were derogatory towards religious communities. No matter how skilled someone is, respect and basic decency matter to us more. Talent gets you in the door. Values decide if you stay.”
He also shared the offer and rejection letters, making the situation transparent to the public. The rejection letter reads: “We came across some recent public posts on LinkedIn that included comments from you, which will deeply hurt the religious sentiments of certain communities.”
Social Media Reacts: Divided Opinions Flood In
Bhati’s decision triggered a wave of reactions across platforms. Supporters of the move applauded the emphasis on ethics and cultural fit. They argued that values like respect, empathy, and inclusivity should not get compromised in the name of talent.
One user commented, “This is the kind of leadership we need—leaders who care about the environment they create, not just the output their team produces.”
Others, however, accused Bhati of bowing to cancel culture. Critics labeled the decision as immature and reactionary, questioning the fairness of judging a candidate solely by their social media activity.
A dissenting voice wrote, “Revoking an offer letter based on social media activity shows how this cancel culture affects organizations when the wrong people lead. This is virtue signalling and insecurity masked as leadership.”
Another asked, “Were the comments genuinely hateful, or were they critiques of religious practices? There’s a difference. If it’s the latter, canceling the offer doesn’t feel right.”
The Dilemma: Should Companies Monitor Candidates’ Online Behavior?
This case raises essential questions about modern hiring norms. Should a company care about what an applicant posts on their personal account? If those views never affect their professional behavior, is it fair to deny them a job?
Some argue that public social media activity reflects a person’s judgment, communication style, and alignment with company values. If someone openly makes offensive remarks, what’s to stop them from creating a toxic environment at work?
In this case, Bhati’s choice aligns with the growing emphasis on “culture fit.” Many companies today consider soft skills and emotional intelligence as vital as technical expertise. A brilliant coder who lacks respect for others can damage team morale and create conflicts that outweigh their output.
However, critics counter that this mindset can get misused. It risks turning workplaces into echo chambers where dissenting voices get silenced. They argue that unless the comments involve hate speech or incitement, companies should not use them as disqualifying factors.
Legal and Ethical Implications
From a legal perspective, Indian employment law doesn’t prevent a company from rescinding an offer before a formal contract begins. The decision to revoke the offer remains valid unless discrimination or unlawful bias is involved.
But the ethical angle remains contentious. Some HR experts believe that using social media as a filter promotes better cultural alignment. Others warn it can encourage excessive monitoring and unfair profiling.
What matters most is transparency and consistency. If a company openly states that values form a part of its hiring criteria, and if the same standards apply to all candidates, then such decisions become easier to justify.
Bhati’s Stance: A Message Beyond Hiring
By making the rejection public, Bhati hoped to send a message—not just to potential hires but to the entire startup ecosystem. He made it clear that Jobbie doesn’t chase performance at the cost of principles. For them, a healthy workplace depends on mutual respect.
He wrote, “This wasn’t easy. We were excited about this hire. But every decision shapes our culture. And culture is built on values, not just vision.”
Such clarity helps set the tone for future applicants. Jobbie wants candidates who align with its ethos, not just those who tick technical boxes.
Conclusion: Talent Opens Doors, But Values Keep Them Open
The Jobbie controversy goes beyond one revoked offer. It speaks to a larger debate about how companies evaluate talent, ethics, and online presence. Can someone be brilliant at work yet harmful to company culture? And should companies police public opinions to maintain internal harmony?
Mohammed Ahmed Bhati made a tough call—and he stood by it. He chose values over skill, ethics over expediency. Whether one agrees or not, the decision sets a precedent. Startups, especially in India’s booming tech space, will watch this closely.
In a world where social media blurs personal and professional boundaries, candidates and companies must ask themselves: What truly matters—skill or character?
Also Read – Soham Parekh Exposed: Startups Hit by Fake Techie