brennan
Argumentative Brit
Yes, again, in an entry level job they're not really looking for the sort of behaviour they look for in a manager. If you act like you could run the place they're not going to hire you to serve burgers.
How to get a job (or not)
- Thread starter Birdjaguar
- Start date
I treat them like I am the interviewer because just as they are trying to see if I am a good fit for their company, I too am trying to see if their company is a good fit for me.
GenMarshall
High Elven ISB Capt & Ghost Agent
I've been having no luck at trying to land a better job. I'm starting on debating on going into a temp agency like ManPower. Is it possible for someone who already has a full time job switch to a temp agency? Even if it's a way to change careers?
CommonKnowledge
Warlord
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2011
- Messages
- 190
This might be a bit of a weird question but is it some sort of interview strategy to be deliberately rude? Normally my phone interviews boil down to about twenty minutes with a brief introduction, an overview of the company, job and then some technical or scenario based questions. However this morning I got told to hurry up at several points which really threw me off my stride as I'm used to giving complete answers and if I don't know I'll just say so rather than trying to bluff my way out. I also got the impression that the guy was doing other things as well because I could hear him typing and doing the classic 'uhuh' to try and show that they're listening.
Overall the guy seemed impatient and not interested in me at all despite the fact I had several questions prepared so I was wondering if this was some sort of interview strategy? Perhaps I was meant to show my initiative and call him a numpty or something. It's not like it was management position though so the need for me to be assertive towards servers seems a bit flimsy - I can always alias sudo to something a bit more explicit for that.
Overall the guy seemed impatient and not interested in me at all despite the fact I had several questions prepared so I was wondering if this was some sort of interview strategy? Perhaps I was meant to show my initiative and call him a numpty or something. It's not like it was management position though so the need for me to be assertive towards servers seems a bit flimsy - I can always alias sudo to something a bit more explicit for that.
If it was a deliberate strategy, it's a pretty stupid one, because if one assumes it isn't a deliberate strategy, it's simply an interviewer effectively encouraging a candidate not to take the given job, thus wasting everyone's time.
brennan
Argumentative Brit
Yes. The idea is too see how you respond under stress.
Stress interview.
I had a boss once who actually recieved written letters of complaint from people he had interviewed. He was a total a-hole by the way, I wouldn't particularly want to work under anyone who thought it was an effective interview strategy.
There are interview strategies that are designed to see how you operate under pressure, but that person just sounds like a lazy impatient jerk to be honest.
Indeed. Having the first contact with the company be a "disinterested interviewer" stress interview via phone doesn't make a lot of sense to me, unless the job is telesales or something similar, where dealing with hostile people over the phone is a vast majority of the job and you don't want to bother with talking to anyone who can't easily deal with it.
CommonKnowledge
Warlord
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2011
- Messages
- 190
Handy to know for the future I guess but it still seems like a weird style to adopt over the phone when you're mostly just trying to get to know the candidate. Not to mention that the job wasn't customer facing at all so I think he probably was just being rude. In the past if I've wound up with a rude person on the phone I put them on hold to chill out or send them the way of the complaints department. I've never been paid to deal with that sort of behaviour and don't plan to any time soon.
brennan
Argumentative Brit
Employers have been spoilt for choice for several years now with an excess of labour supply competing for jobs. It's led to some very lazy behaviour from interviewers, essentially forcing candidates to make an effort to prove beyond doubt that they really, really want this job at this company (even for entry level jobs like working at a till or serving coffee). If you're not prepared to jump through all their silly hoops they don't feel it's their loss i'm afraid.
Nobody
Gangster
Do you put your references on your cv? I normally do but after recently changing my cv i took them off. Employers dont want references until after you interview anyway so why not just give them then?
brennan
Argumentative Brit
"References available on request."
There's no point putting the full details on - and you're wasting valuable space for other stuff.
There's no point putting the full details on - and you're wasting valuable space for other stuff.
Don't even bother with that, of course references are available on request.
aelf
Ashen One
So I had a pretty horrible experience applying for a few positions at the same organisation. I was recommended by a friend and had made it to the final round of interview the first time (there were 4 rounds), talked to the directors and everything seemed to be going well.
However, about a week later, I was told that someone internal had popped up at the last minute to take the position. I was skeptical that this was the real reason I got rejected, but my friend checked and confirmed that internal people do get priority and there was indeed someone internal who took the position. I asked for feedback but was told that I was fine and it was just bad timing for me.
Anyway, presumably because they were interested in hiring me, they recommended I apply for some other positions in another department. So I did, but I also wanted to make sure I wouldn't get screwed over again, so I asked the new HR person handling my case if she could let me know if there were internal people being considered for these roles. I also wanted to know if I could skip some steps as I didn't see the point of doing the presentation test again, for example.
After the phone interview for these new positions, however, the HR person replied saying that my interest in the previous department was noted and they felt that I was more suited to it. She said they'll keep my CV on file and notify me if anything there opens up, which is probably a typical lie. This really riled me up because these roles I am now being rejected for were recommended to me (and the HR person knows this) precisely because they fit my background.
Now, my question is, did I get the rotten treatment from this organisation, in which case I should just not bother applying again despite what my friend says? Or is this whole story pretty much normal when it comes to the hiring process? Why would anyone do this to people they seem to want to hire?
However, about a week later, I was told that someone internal had popped up at the last minute to take the position. I was skeptical that this was the real reason I got rejected, but my friend checked and confirmed that internal people do get priority and there was indeed someone internal who took the position. I asked for feedback but was told that I was fine and it was just bad timing for me.
Anyway, presumably because they were interested in hiring me, they recommended I apply for some other positions in another department. So I did, but I also wanted to make sure I wouldn't get screwed over again, so I asked the new HR person handling my case if she could let me know if there were internal people being considered for these roles. I also wanted to know if I could skip some steps as I didn't see the point of doing the presentation test again, for example.
After the phone interview for these new positions, however, the HR person replied saying that my interest in the previous department was noted and they felt that I was more suited to it. She said they'll keep my CV on file and notify me if anything there opens up, which is probably a typical lie. This really riled me up because these roles I am now being rejected for were recommended to me (and the HR person knows this) precisely because they fit my background.
Now, my question is, did I get the rotten treatment from this organisation, in which case I should just not bother applying again despite what my friend says? Or is this whole story pretty much normal when it comes to the hiring process? Why would anyone do this to people they seem to want to hire?
brennan
Argumentative Brit
Human Resources in an extremely risk-averse industry.
Internal candidates are a known quantity in terms of attitude, reliability and capability. External candidates are not - and references are close to being considered worthless these days. Thus external candidates can find it hard to get into a company in the face of internal competition.
So yeah, this is normal i'm afraid.
Internal candidates are a known quantity in terms of attitude, reliability and capability. External candidates are not - and references are close to being considered worthless these days. Thus external candidates can find it hard to get into a company in the face of internal competition.
So yeah, this is normal i'm afraid.
aelf
Ashen One
Sure, I get that. But the second rejection feels like a slap in the face, so to speak, since they already had to screw me over the first time. Especially in view of the reason given for it (more suited for the department that had rejected me). I mean, do they expect me to still want to apply again after this, even though they had initially judged me qualified and suitable for a position? Seems like terrible PR to me, but I don't know what the norm is.
Mise
isle of lucy
HR departments being crap and dicking you around is fairly normal, yeah.
That is sort of HR's job.
hobbsyoyo
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2012
- Messages
- 26,575
Is it though?
I've had some terribad experiences with HR - such as signing an NDA for a company I didn't particularly want to work at only to get an offer from my #1 company a few days before I started at the not-so-great place. Turns out HR just drug their feet at the other company even though they planned on hiring me pretty early on.
Does HR have to suck?
The HR paradigm is "cover management's butt from liability." Not "foster a healthy productive workplace." It's infected the industry at a deep foundational level. Few HR consultants have the courage to train rank and file that fostering happy healthy workers is actually the safest protection from lawsuits. Also HR consumers (employers) actively seek out the guys who offer the so called tips and tricks to avoid lawsuits because they think that is what they need.
Similar threads
