Most ridiculous job interviews (red flag?)🚩

[Scotch Mist]

I've had some appalling experiences in the past with job interviews and (unless you are desperate because you're out of work) then you should always remember that it's not just about what they want but if you would be happy there.

I've always been someone who would make sure that they arrived early as I hate being late. On one occasion I drove to an interview with plenty of time to spare. When I got near the office I found myself caught up in a one way system and my sat nat wouldn't direct me to where I wanted to go. After a couple of circuits (still with time to spare) I stopped and phoned the company to ask for directions and to assure them I was nearby.

I expected the manager to say something along the lines of 'yes its hard to find you have to do xyz' instead I got berated for being incompetent with a satnav and told that it wasn't their job to help me find my way, the woman finished off with a sarcastic 'when shall I expect you?' to which I replied 'never given how rude you've just been before we even met'. So I just turned the car round and drove home.

 

[emm]

Can we talk about stupid application questions too? I had one recently asking "if you were a biscuit which biscuit would you be", I mean, how is that relevant to any professional job?

I answered digestive - considered a bit boring maybe, but what you see is what you get. I didn't hear anything from them, so I guess they were looking for more of a hobnob or party ring .

The same application also asked "if you could have any super power what would it be", again pointless and irrelevant.

This sounds like a question from blind date I have been asked what animal I would be, i think they were taken aback by how quickly i answered

 

[no-no]

My most horrific interview was a full-day for a graduate scheme that I had to travel across the country to. We had to prep a presentation of our CV, but it couldn’t contain anything about your CV. Riddle me that. They didn’t care about knowledge/expertise, they just wanted entertaining. I was the only woman with 8-10 guys.

I remember doing a role-play in a tiny room with two interviewers for a sales job at M&S. She was a customer who wanted a certain houmous for her party but it was out of stock. I had to empathise, apologise, upsell and save the day I got the job but didn’t accept.

I’d never apply somewhere that didn’t list salary band. It’s a purple patch for jobseekers right now, long may it continue!

 

[maple1993]

Former HR person here. I used to have to hire for a number of roles in an Irish media organization. My manager told me I wasn’t allowed to disclose salary in interviews/initial phone calls (surprise surprise because it was shite). I swiftly left and have specialized in payroll as I couldn’t bring myself to work in recruitment much longer felt like a conman

 

[Inforapenny]

Hello everyone,
Not sure if anyone will see this but I have an interview on Wednesday.
Just reading through the interview request.
Got to put a 5 mins presentation together and then 10 mins for interview questions!!!

A 15 min interview?! Do you think this is a typo?
I've gone from one extreme to another

 

[Moonflower]

Is it 15 minutes to discuss your presentation?

I've just had an email to invite me to an interview for a really interesting job, but unfortunately I accepted a role just before Christmas so I've had to turn it down, gutted. But I've just had to send a really awkward email to my new boss as the money is wrong in my contract. Cross with myself for not picking up on it (part time so pro rata). Life was much easier when I was just having interviews

 

[Inforapenny]

Is it 15 minutes to discuss your presentation?

I've just had an email to invite me to an interview for a really interesting job, but unfortunately I accepted a role just before Christmas so I've had to turn it down, gutted. But I've just had to send a really awkward email to my new boss as the money is wrong in my contract. Cross with myself for not picking up on it (part time so pro rata). Life was much easier when I was just having interviews

Good luck.


It's a 5 min presentation. But what they're asking to include is a lot!!!! It could be a 40min presentation with the things they want covered.
Then after the interview they've said 'followed by questions for 10 mins'

And I've just had a look at the bonkers interview I've got ...ie the interview for the interview and a million rounds.
Just read the finer details. They state they will ask candidates their current salary but at no point discuss the salary they offer.
They have said they don't disclose salaries because they want a fairness BUT they want to know your current salary to base their offered salary on.

 

[Moonflower]

Good luck.


It's a 5 min presentation. But what they're asking to include is a lot!!!! It could be a 40min presentation with the things they want covered.
Then after the interview they've said 'followed by questions for 10 mins'

And I've just had a look at the bonkers interview I've got ...ie the interview for the interview and a million rounds.
Just read the finer details. They state they will ask candidates their current salary but at no point discuss the salary they offer.
They have said they don't disclose salaries because they want a fairness BUT they want to know your current salary to base their offered salary on.

I would read that to be questions about the presentation. Either way 10 minutes will be over in a flash so don't sweat it.

The second one, I'd be out. I'm sorry but if they don't disclose salaries but expect you to disclose yours? That's not ok.

 

[Scotch Mist]

Good luck.


It's a 5 min presentation. But what they're asking to include is a lot!!!! It could be a 40min presentation with the things they want covered.
Then after the interview they've said 'followed by questions for 10 mins'

And I've just had a look at the bonkers interview I've got ...ie the interview for the interview and a million rounds.
Just read the finer details. They state they will ask candidates their current salary but at no point discuss the salary they offer.
They have said they don't disclose salaries because they want a fairness BUT they want to know your current salary to base their offered salary on.

That's so unfair because they are going to look more favourably on the candidate with the lower salary and if your current salary is higher they might dismiss you thinking you don't want to take a pay cut. A job should be advertised with a salary so that everyone who applies knows what they will get. Sometimes people are prepared to take paycuts if the job has other advantages for them (like less travel time or better hours).

I once had to prepare a presentation for a job interview. It took me ages to put it together and I thought I did well. I didn't get the job though. The agency feedback was that apparently my presentation was the best on the day but they preferred someone else because that candidate had worked in exactly the same sector before. What a waste of time.

 

[Inforapenny]

That's so unfair because they are going to look more favourably on the candidate with the lower salary and if your current salary is higher they might dismiss you thinking you don't want to take a pay cut. A job should be advertised with a salary so that everyone who applies knows what they will get. Sometimes people are prepared to take paycuts if the job has other advantages for them (like less travel time or better hours).

I once had to prepare a presentation for a job interview. It took me ages to put it together and I thought I did well. I didn't get the job though. The agency feedback was that apparently my presentation was the best on the day but they preferred someone else because that candidate had worked in exactly the same sector before. What a waste of time.

The way the company has set it up is....we don't disclose a salary, we don't want to know your salary but we will ask your salary expectations....sneaky.
I might as well go in with 100k.
Say it's for a job that's 25k then I'll be laughed at.

For this job interview in 2 days time...It's become apparent that the presentation I've got to do is a bit odd. They've asked for 4 things to be included in the presentation but the four things are like a riddle.....words put together.
It's not clear or concise which means I don't think they know what they're looking for.
I didn't think I was stupid but I'm doubting myself now.
I've shown my friend who is in recruitment and she thinks it looks odd. Like they haven't got a clue.

 

[Scotch Mist]

The way the company has set it up is....we don't disclose a salary, we don't want to know your salary but we will ask your salary expectations....sneaky.
I might as well go in with 100k.
Say it's for a job that's 25k then I'll be laughed at.

For this job interview in 2 days time...It's become apparent that the presentation I've got to do is a bit odd. They've asked for 4 things to be included in the presentation but the four things are like a riddle.....words put together.
It's not clear or concise which means I don't think they know what they're looking for.
I didn't think I was stupid but I'm doubting myself now.
I've shown my friend who is in recruitment and she thinks it looks odd. Like they haven't got a clue.

Ugh salary expectations. That's really sneaky because they'll be hoping that you undersell yourself. Don't quote lower than any comparable jobs because a man wouldn't do that!

 

[Moonflower]

The way the company has set it up is....we don't disclose a salary, we don't want to know your salary but we will ask your salary expectations....sneaky.
I might as well go in with 100k.
Say it's for a job that's 25k then I'll be laughed at.

For this job interview in 2 days time...It's become apparent that the presentation I've got to do is a bit odd. They've asked for 4 things to be included in the presentation but the four things are like a riddle.....words put together.
It's not clear or concise which means I don't think they know what they're looking for.
I didn't think I was stupid but I'm doubting myself now.
I've shown my friend who is in recruitment and she thinks it looks odd. Like they haven't got a clue.

Does it have any relevance to the job you'd be doing?

 

[Inforapenny]

Does it have any relevance to the job you'd be doing?

Yes. I have the experience and I tick all the boxes (well the ones they have given on the job description).
It's one of those jobs you apply for and think yep I suit this and could do it (rather than tit I'll apply and hope for the best).
It's for a director position....which I haven't been before.
Glassdoor give the director role for this company as 77k -109k
I can't really find a comparative role, it's an American company so this makes it harder to know and the 'director' part is a more American/Canadian thing ....my husband (Canadian) said north America is more liberal using the term......see how confusing it is
The role is for a global organisation....if that helps?! And according to Glassdoor they pay better than most competitors.
I need to figure it out as I need a number by Friday.
I'm thinking duck it just pluck a number out of the air.....

 

[Scotch Mist]

Yes. I have the experience and I tick all the boxes (well the ones they have given on the job description).
It's one of those jobs you apply for and think yep I suit this and could do it (rather than tit I'll apply and hope for the best).
It's for a director position....which I haven't been before.
Glassdoor give the director role for this company as 77k -109k
I can't really find a comparative role, it's an American company so this makes it harder to know and the 'director' part is a more American/Canadian thing ....my husband (Canadian) said north America is more liberal using the term......see how confusing it is
The role is for a global organisation....if that helps?! And according to Glassdoor they pay better than most competitors.
I need to figure it out as I need a number by Friday.
I'm thinking duck it just pluck a number out of the air.....

Good luck

 

[Moonflower]

Yes. I have the experience and I tick all the boxes (well the ones they have given on the job description).
It's one of those jobs you apply for and think yep I suit this and could do it (rather than tit I'll apply and hope for the best).
It's for a director position....which I haven't been before.
Glassdoor give the director role for this company as 77k -109k
I can't really find a comparative role, it's an American company so this makes it harder to know and the 'director' part is a more American/Canadian thing ....my husband (Canadian) said north America is more liberal using the term......see how confusing it is
The role is for a global organisation....if that helps?! And according to Glassdoor they pay better than most competitors.
I need to figure it out as I need a number by Friday.
I'm thinking duck it just pluck a number out of the air.....

Sorry, I meant does the presentation refer to the role you'd be doing!

Salary I would go for the top end of Glassdoor. Let them knock you down rather than you feeling like you wish you'd asked for more.

 

[Inforapenny]

Sorry, I meant does the presentation refer to the role you'd be doing!

Salary I would go for the top end of Glassdoor. Let them knock you down rather than you feeling like you wish you'd asked for more.

Ah ok .....sort of ....it's slightly confusing their side. Lots of word salad.
The wording for the presentation and what they want is not concise or clear.
My friend was like it's not a great sign. And I tend to agree.
I've decided to decline the interview.
I've never done this before! But my heart isn't in it to waste my time.
I have to go with my gut and I don't feel it's for me. It's not the presentation it's the whole company/role I just don't feel I want to do.

Whereas the other role....I'll be asking for 150k see what they say also a tit sign that it's the first thing they're asking in the pre interview interview.

 

[tortfeasor]

Without salary information you can't know if you would even be able to afford to work for them / apply for a mortgage in the future. There is clearly a huge difference between £19K a year and £190K a year and I would want that information, as a minimum before I invested any time in the interview process.

Damn bloody right.

@Inforapenny for what it’s worth I’ve been an internal recruiter for 3 companies now. What you’ve described just stinks to me of an organisation that is wasting people’s time and stringing them along on the off-chance another candidate applies at a future date, who they like the sound of a bit better or who they can get on the cheap.

Call me a cynic but there is nothing to be gained in interviewing the same person up to 6 times for one role. What’s all this “plus interviews in between” nonsense about too? Are they on about telephone interviews with different people or more Teams/Zoom ones?

I think you’re right in your assumption about their stance of “we don’t advertise salary ranges. We make a decision on salary based on experience etc.” This was the stance at the second of the companies I’ve worked for as an internal recruiter too. It was a U.K. company that is part of an international conglomerate. They’re a big brand and you would think that they’d have salaries to match. Whilst what they offered me for my role was a few grand per year above the average for the area, their salaries for most other roles were so far behind market averages it was unreal. It made trying to convince external candidates to accept offers nigh on impossible.
From experience - and my own personal feelings - a lot of job hunters assume if no salary is advertised or they just use words like “dependant on experience” or “negotiable” on adverts, it usually means the company is going to try and lowball candidates.

My advice to anyone in this sort of a situation is definitely ask them outright what the salary range is during an initial meeting if they don’t ask you what your expectations are.
I’d go a step further too. If they don’t want to volunteer salary range, tell them what your minimum salary expectation is. There’s no point in wasting your time if you go through all of a company’s hurdles only to find they want you on the cheap.

I've been in the workforce for 30 years now and one day I'm going to write a book about the temp jobs I did back in the 90s and early 00s and the various bizarre interviews I've had over the years. One of the worst recruitment process experiences I ever had was for a local charity, it was so bad. A lot of employers fail to recognise that interviews are a two way process - it's not just about the interviewee impressing them, it's about the company impressing you as well. Nowadays I have a list of 'deal breakers' which is short but immovable and I am much more confident about reading red flags and not pursuing something that I feel would not be a good fit for me. I've even offered feedback to companies on their interview/recruitment process on occasion.

The company I work for now are going down the lines of an increasingly laborious recruitment process and also decided not to disclose the salary at the point where people apply. I'm quite friendly with our HR manager and I've pointed out to him that some of the stuff they've put in place would put me off applying and I'm not sure I would actually get my job if I applied for it now given the level of ridiculous hoop jumping they want. He doesn't entirely disagree but says that they've had such trouble recruiting and made a few quite high level mistakes in the last year that they are trying to be more thorough. I get it for more high level roles that require a certain skill set and experience, but putting PA's and Customer Service people through 3 interviews and a literacy/numeracy test while not disclosing the salary is ridiculous. I wouldn't even agree to go for an interview unless they were prepared to tell me the salary range at least. Then they moan they are having trouble recruiting .

It's a shame as my company is pretty good to work for, but their recruitment processes don't inspire confidence at those initial stages.

Genuine question here - would you be at all willing to consider pooling our combined experiences and having a co-author? I’ve been threatening to write a book about the bizarre and futile “exercises” I’ve been through since the mid-2000s for various jobs I’ve applied for. I think from your post we’d have a fair bit in common!

The HR manager at your current employer, respectfully, is going about things the wrong way and should be acting on your opinions. For jobs like customer service representatives/PAs/other admin functions etc they definitely don’t want to be having overly lengthy processes. I’ve seen a significant shift since about I’d say 2018ish of more companies streamlining their recruitment processes. The longer a recruitment process is - cough, cough, Civil Service especially - you will end up with the candidates who are either permanently unlucky or who no other organisation wants at the end of it. The best candidates are not on the market for long and will be snapped up. These candidates know their worth and if they’re regularly keeping an eye on the jobs market, they’ll be able to spot which application processes are worth their time pursuing.

I can bet you that “the high level mistakes” they made in the recent past were due to one or more of the following:
- not really having thought about what skills/experience they needed for the role, possibly conflating two or more jobs and when drawing up the person specification losing sight of the original purpose for hiring - an equivalent of “over-egging the pudding;”

- not deciding upon the right questions to ask during the interviews, possibly allowing hiring managers to be too conversational and not really making use of the interview to obtain information from the candidates that would actually flag up potential problems;

- hiring managers not really looking at CVs/applications properly against the person specification for the role they‘re hiring for;

- having people conduct the recruitment process, who are not really that good at reading other people;

- possibly placing too much emphasis/importance on psychometric testing - it astounds me how many organisations are still doing this. There are so many websites and books on how to ace pretty much any psychometric test these days that they’re all practically redundant. There’s even YouTube videos. I can remember having to do a Watson-Glaser test as part of the process for a job I applied for 6 years ago. I bought a book specifically for how to pass these tests and the author basically said that if you remembered a few key principles about how these tests were designed - basically the test is divided into 5 sections and you need to remember what the sections are aimed at “testing” as this will dictate the best statements from the multiple choice lists to select for each question - you’d ace the test.
Low and behold the author was spot on. I did so many practice tests and they were all the same. I’d scored over 85% for every I’d done after reading this book.


-

 

[Inforapenny]

Damn bloody right.

@Inforapenny for what it’s worth I’ve been an internal recruiter for 3 companies now. What you’ve described just stinks to me of an organisation that is wasting people’s time and stringing them along on the off-chance another candidate applies at a future date, who they like the sound of a bit better or who they can get on the cheap.

Call me a cynic but there is nothing to be gained in interviewing the same person up to 6 times for one role. What’s all this “plus interviews in between” nonsense about too? Are they on about telephone interviews with different people or more Teams/Zoom ones?

I think you’re right in your assumption about their stance of “we don’t advertise salary ranges. We make a decision on salary based on experience etc.” This was the stance at the second of the companies I’ve worked for as an internal recruiter too. It was a U.K. company that is part of an international conglomerate. They’re a big brand and you would think that they’d have salaries to match. Whilst what they offered me for my role was a few grand per year above the average for the area, their salaries for most other roles were so far behind market averages it was unreal. It made trying to convince external candidates to accept offers nigh on impossible.
From experience - and my own personal feelings - a lot of job hunters assume if no salary is advertised or they just use words like “dependant on experience” or “negotiable” on adverts, it usually means the company is going to try and lowball candidates.

My advice to anyone in this sort of a situation is definitely ask them outright what the salary range is during an initial meeting if they don’t ask you what your expectations are.
I’d go a step further too. If they don’t want to volunteer salary range, tell them what your minimum salary expectation is. There’s no point in wasting your time if you go through all of a company’s hurdles only to find they want you on the cheap.


Genuine question here - would you be at all willing to consider pooling our combined experiences and having a co-author? I’ve been threatening to write a book about the bizarre and futile “exercises” I’ve been through since the mid-2000s for various jobs I’ve applied for. I think from your post we’d have a fair bit in common!

The HR manager at your current employer, respectfully, is going about things the wrong way and should be acting on your opinions. For jobs like customer service representatives/PAs/other admin functions etc they definitely don’t want to be having overly lengthy processes. I’ve seen a significant shift since about I’d say 2018ish of more companies streamlining their recruitment processes. The longer a recruitment process is - cough, cough, Civil Service especially - you will end up with the candidates who are either permanently unlucky or who no other organisation wants at the end of it. The best candidates are not on the market for long and will be snapped up. These candidates know their worth and if they’re regularly keeping an eye on the jobs market, they’ll be able to spot which application processes are worth their time pursuing.

I can bet you that “the high level mistakes” they made in the recent past were due to one or more of the following:
- not really having thought about what skills/experience they needed for the role, possibly conflating two or more jobs and when drawing up the person specification losing sight of the original purpose for hiring - an equivalent of “over-egging the pudding;”

- not deciding upon the right questions to ask during the interviews, possibly allowing hiring managers to be too conversational and not really making use of the interview to obtain information from the candidates that would actually flag up potential problems;

- hiring managers not really looking at CVs/applications properly against the person specification for the role they‘re hiring for;

- having people conduct the recruitment process, who are not really that good at reading other people;

- possibly placing too much emphasis/importance on psychometric testing - it astounds me how many organisations are still doing this. There are so many websites and books on how to ace pretty much any psychometric test these days that they’re all practically redundant. There’s even YouTube videos. I can remember having to do a Watson-Glaser test as part of the process for a job I applied for 6 years ago. I bought a book specifically for how to pass these tests and the author basically said that if you remembered a few key principles about how these tests were designed - basically the test is divided into 5 sections and you need to remember what the sections are aimed at “testing” as this will dictate the best statements from the multiple choice lists to select for each question - you’d ace the test.
Low and behold the author was spot on. I did so many practice tests and they were all the same. I’d scored over 85% for every I’d done after reading this book.


-

What a brilliant post! Thank you this is super helpful. Thank you for all the tips and intel
Interesting you mention the civil service. My friend has applied for a role in the Irish civil service(currently works In the UK as a civil servant) and she said the process is so awful that you'll only end up with those who can't be employed.
It's seems a change has happened in the past decade from 1 or 2 rounds to a ridiculous jumping through hoops process.
I am happy to give you my experiences although this is the first time in 3 years I have looked/applied for jobs and wow it's so different.
I have my pre interview/interview for that ridiculous company on Friday.
I've decided when salary expectations are raised I'll say I don't know enough about the role and your expectations to be able to give a ball park figure....I'll ask them to tell me more so I can make a more informed (guess ) decision of the salary.
I'm not enamored or hold any expectations of this company but I can't wait to do my pre interview interview. Guarantee it'll be ridiculous and a waste of time.

 

[emm]

Ugh salary expectations. That's really sneaky because they'll be hoping that you undersell yourself. Don't quote lower than any comparable jobs because a man wouldn't do that!

I wish there were more regulations on things like advertising salaries of jobs it is such an unfair situation for potential employees

 

[Rxt156]

The only reason we do our jobs is for MONEEEYYY it shouldnt be such a taboo subject but it is