Company waited two months for candidate to join; candidate quit on day one, wanted to use personal laptop

company-issued laptop. She suspected the recruit preferred using his own device because he had not formally stepped down from his previous role and was secretly managing two positions simultaneously.

The HR manager explained that she had finalized the appointment and patiently awaited the candidate’s joining date. When onboarding commenced, she informed him that, as per company protocol, he would receive an official work laptop. The announcement appeared to unsettle him immediately. He attempted to persuade her to permit the use of his personal computer instead. She clarified that organizational policy required employees to operate strictly on assigned systems. Although he outwardly agreed, accepted the device, and proceeded with induction formalities, the discomfort lingered.

Later that same day, shortly before closing hourseros, he returned to her office carrying the laptop. He stated that he had brought his own computer and could not manage transporting both machines home. She accepted the device without protest and assumed the matter had ended. However, that evening she received a message informing her that he would not be continuing with the role—despite the lengthy wait invested in securing him.

Reflecting on the abrupt withdrawal, the HR professional concluded that the candidate likely remained employed elsewhere. She believed the mandatory use of a corporate laptop would have exposed his dual commitments, making it impossible to discreetly juggle responsibilities across two organizations.

Online reactions were divided. Some commenters argued that seasoned professionals can handle multiple remote roles seamlessly using a single device without raising suspicion, suggesting the candidate lacked finesse. Others admitted they routinely complete freelance assignments on employer-issued systems, noting that performance often outweighs scrutiny if work standards remain high.