Insulted at an Interview

HandsomeBob

TrustedApple wrote: »

Considering OP I am in my 20s and I would consider must my age to be extremely lazy and won t everything yesterday
. So when I will be hireing someone else for my team in the next few months I don't care about age and if I think you won t be lazy and do your job I am happy out.

Aye, and so many will jump around from place to place to do the exact same job for more money, because whoever is offering at the time is desperate enough to get staff in.

Doesn't look great on the cv in terms of ambition and attitude towards the work.

TrustedApple

To be fair I have jump hop quite a lot.

But each role is a role up higher on the ladder.

I have went from inturn to head of a dept for the EU in 31 months and have been in 4 company's........

You just have to see the jobs to and to give faith in your workers as well. I am now doing endless projects and can see how people who have been in management for 15 years are doing mistakes and costing money after 30 mins

Diziet

I have had 6 jobs in the past 10 years, and it did me no harm at all. I built up great experience.

realdanbreen

insultedatinterview wrote: »

Hi All,

Just looking for a bit of advice.

I should probably let this go, however it really upset me and I am wondering what to do. Now I know by making a complaint it won't benefit me in anyway, but having been looking for work for a few months now with no luck, I have been astounded at the amount of smug, ignorant interviewers (usually high up managers).

An interview the other day was particularly bad. And I do not know if I should make a formal complaint or just grin and bare it and continue to let people speak to me in such a manner , as I need a job.

The interviewer asked me my age.

She then said " I am always concerned about people who are later in life and haven't had it happen for them yet"

I did not know what to say. I just finished a masters and I have a lot of work experience.

At the end of the interview she reiterated again her concern about my age..and asked me "why hasn't it happened for you yet?"

I didn't know what to say, and was left bumbling like a mortified idiot, and I am ashamed to say the comment really upset me, feeling depressed and embarrassed following the interview.

I would also like to say this is a large Multinational IT company.

Does anyone have experience of this in interviews? If so, how can you deal with it/ respond to offensive interviewers?

I am exhausted from dealing with these kinds of people at interviews.

Thanks for any advice.

You are not alone in that experience. A good few years ago I got called for interview with a multinational in Shannon. I was working at the time but this job had better salary and conditions. There were two guys interviewing me. The interview took place in the canteen and there were other workers coming and going. I was well qualified for the job and handled all questions well. However during the interview one of the interviewers kept talking back to a guy eating at a nearby table about some match that had been on TV the previous evening. The other interviewer asked me a question that I had answered for his buddy minutes earlier, this resulted in great merriment among them with fellas at nearby tables joining in the mirth. Basicly I knew shortly into the interview that the job was already going to another guy within the company and that I was only there to window dress this process.
When asked at the end if I had any questions I said(I had the benefit of already being in employment) that I had never come across such an ignorant pair of assholes in my life. As it happened the company went to the wall months later leaving the employees high and dry with minimum redundancy.

HandsomeBob

TrustedApple wrote: »

To be fair I have jump hop quite a lot.

But each role is a role up higher on the ladder.

I have went from inturn to head of a dept for the EU in 31 months and have been in 4 company's........

You just have to see the jobs to and to give faith in your workers as well. I am now doing endless projects and can see how people who have been in management for 15 years are doing mistakes and costing money after 30 mins

That's fine as each jump was to go one further step up the ladder and wasn't just salary that was being considered.

I've worked with people who couldn't hack the job and start to blame the conditions around them. They jump ship to do the exact same job but for more money.....and they still couldn't hack the job, only now they have the added pressure of an employer that knows they're paying top dollar and expect their money's worth.

It ties in to what you said about people in their 20s and even 30s expecting the cart before the horse.....and I say that as a 30 year old.

storker

davo10 wrote: »

Some might think that if you are so easily offended, it would be a huge risk employing you.

Interviews are a two-way process. They're interviewing you, and you are (or should be) interviewing them. I find that a lot of people on both sides of the desk forget this. In a case like the OP's, the company failed its side of the interview.

One of the more memorable interviews I had was an "informal chat" with the MD of a small managed services company. He stressed the possibilities of the job, but also the downsides, as he was eager not to have someone join who would get fed up after a short time and leave, as the role could be pretty high-pressure at times. So we discussed how we might be a good fit for each other and a day later I was invited back for a second interview, which I declined as I had decided that the job wasn't for me and I didn't want to waste his time. There were a few things that fed into my decision, not just the pressure of the role, which I still thought was a good one.

The MD came back to me to say thanks for my time and asked if the I had any feedback for him about how their hiring and interview process could be improved. All I could suggest was maybe to dial back the downside a tiny bit lest he scare someone off who would otherwise be a very good fit. But that's a lot easier said than done, of course, and I could see why he wanted to e up-front about it. As far as I was concerned, it was a very useful and respectful interview from both points of view, even if a job offer wasn't the outcome.

The best interview I ever had was a second interview where a few minutes into the interview, the receptionist came in with coffee and doughnuts...and yes it did end with a job offer.

storker

davo10 wrote: »

Jeez. One question in an interview and it's a breeding school for cage fighters.

Yes, not unlike, say, "...one loose tie and they have you down as someone who doesn't care about their work..."

.......

This post has been deleted.

server down

hots wrote: »

Exactly, it's an easy one to spin into talking about anything positive at all from your CV.

"Why did it take you so long to get here" quickly becomes "tell me about all the great stuff you've ever done"

Xterminator wrote: »

Hi Op

you made the choice to be offended by this remark.

It was a question that you could have aced and turned it around to show how your passion for education had led you to a masters ... or any other slant on this comment you chose.

its an opportunity to reflect on why it hit a nerve, and how you would handle such a situation next time.

Either you guys didn't read the OP, or you can't read in general.

She wasn't asked a question. The interviewer made two ageist statements. One at the end of the interview where no response was possible, a clear signal that she was thinking about discriminating on age.

The question that you all think is legal ( why are you still in that position) isn't recommended either - following this thread I looked at my companies interview guidelines. It is only ok to ask someone in a technical junior position for a long time why they haven't become a senior, as that can be a competence issue in the role you are actually interviewing for.

You don't get to ask somebody who is coming in to interview as an accountant why they aren't a Vice President.

Also it recommends not using the term "over experienced" which is fairly loaded and probably a proxy for age. Its not like people refuse to go to over experienced doctors.

givyjoe

....... wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Had something similar happen to me, without the specific admission of discrimination. Got the intro to the current, 100% female staff and later the rejection with 'nothing' between us, no constructive feedback as interview was 'excellent'.

In another was also asked by a female interviewer, for another role.. 'The office is predominantly women, will you have a problem with that/working with them..'

As for the Op's scenario. It's a prima facie case of discrimination (assuming the interview would admit making the statements) and the employer would then have to prove that they had not discriminated against the employer on the grounds of age. e.g. interview notes including comments on why the candidate wasn't successful.

hots

server down wrote: »

Either you guys didn't read the OP, or you can't read in general.

She wasn't asked a question. The interviewer made two ageist statements. One at the end of the interview where no response was possible, a clear signal that she was thinking about discriminating on age.

The question that you all think is legal ( why are you still in that position) isn't recommended either - following this thread I looked at my companies interview guidelines. It is only ok to ask someone in a technical junior position for a long time why they haven't become a senior, as that can be a competence issue in the role you are actually interviewing for.

You don't get to ask somebody who is coming in to interview as an accountant why they aren't a Vice President.

Also it recommends not using the term "over experienced" which is fairly loaded and probably a proxy for age. Its not like people refuse to go to over experienced doctors.

She most definitely was asked a question. Your company guidelines =/= legal or otherwise.

You absolutely can ask someone about their job history, especially if it doesn't match the role they're applying for...

If someone took 10 years to get to the second level when it normally takes 5 you'd be a pretty poor interviewer to not try and find out if it's because they're sh/te or if they were on a career break/havingkids/climbing mountains or whatever.

I still think this interviewer was a dick but people are getting very precious about questions being asked of you. You have the right to be asked them (as someone corrected me earlier, you can be asked anything, just not discriminated on based on your answer) and the same right to be offended too.

server down

hots wrote: »

She most definitely was asked a question. Your company guidelines =/= legal or otherwise.

You absolutely can ask someone about their job history, especially if it doesn't match the role they're applying for...

If someone took 10 years to get to the second level when it normally takes 5 you'd be a pretty poor interviewer to not try and find out if it's because they're sh/te or if they were on a career break/havingkids/climbing mountains or whatever.

I still think this interviewer was a dick but people are getting very precious about questions being asked of you. You have the right to be asked them (as someone corrected me earlier, you can be asked anything, just not discriminated on based on your answer) and the same right to be offended too.

This isnt a question, it is a statement.

I am always concerned about people who are later in life and haven't had it happen for them yet

she did ask a question ( re-iterating the ageism) later but at the end of the interview, where it was largely rhetorical.

It's a statement on intent to discriminate based on age. And "happen for them yet" is pretty ambiguous.

There are ways to ask people why they are not on level 5 rather than level 2 ( whatever that means) and here is how you would do that.

"Why are you not on level 5 rather than level 2?".

As I said just above that is the only possible legit question there -- why a junior technical role hasn't become a senior technical role - and it wasn't asked in that fashion. I read, and I think most people read, the senior manager as asking the candidate why they are not a senior manager like her.

And company guidelines are designed to make sure that the company cannot be sued, and are based on US laws. Irish laws are fairly similar.

pilly

The amount of people on here who seem willing to show an interviewer what colour knickers they're wearing just to get a job is unreal.

Why on earth would you want a job working for someone who asks such a pretentious question.

20/20 hindsight is great but what I like to think I'd say is "it very much depends on what your definition of "made it" is doesn't it?" I've always answered difficult or dickhead questions with an equally difficult or dickhead answer. "Why do you ask?" is a great reply.

hots

server down wrote: »

This isnt a question, it is a statement.

I am always concerned about people who are later in life and haven't had it happen for them yet

she did ask a question ( re-iterating the ageism) later but at the end of the interview, where it was largely rhetorical.

It's a statement on intent to discriminate based on age. And "happen for them yet" is pretty ambiguous.

There are ways to ask people why they are not on level 5 rather than level 2 ( whatever that means) and here is how you would do that.

"Why are you not on level 5 rather than level 2?".

As I said just above that is the only possible legit question there -- why a junior technical role hasn't become a senior technical role - and it wasn't asked in that fashion. I read, and I think most people read, the senior manager as asking the candidate why they are not a senior manager like her.

And company guidelines are designed to make sure that the company cannot be sued, and are based on US laws. Irish laws are fairly similar.

Can you point out in irish law (or any other sure) where I can only ask a candidate "why a junior technical role hasn't become a senior technical role"? Nonsense of the highest order. And you must have a far more imaginative grasp of reading than I do, I don't believe there was a rhetorical question asked.

I would hope your guidelines are designed to teach you how to conduct a productive interview, not just being legal.

Ambiguous questions aren't illegal. Offending questions aren't illegal. In fact questions at all aren't illegal (to be clear "how old are you?" and "why haven't you made it yet?" are 100% questions no matter how you interpret them).

givyjoe

hots wrote: »

Can you point out in irish law (or any other sure) where I can only ask a candidate "why a junior technical role hasn't become a senior technical role"? Nonsense of the highest order. And you must have a far more imaginative grasp of reading than I do, I don't believe there was a rhetorical question asked.

I would hope your guidelines are designed to teach you how to conduct a productive interview, not just being legal.

Ambiguous questions aren't illegal. Offending questions aren't illegal. In fact questions at all aren't illegal (to be clear "how old are you?" and "why haven't you made it yet?" are 100% questions no matter how you interpret them).

The laws around discrimination and subsequent cases, mean it's been interpreted that you cannot ask 'how old are you' unless there is a specific, non discriminatory valid reason for asking.. age simply isn't relevant unless you need to be >over 25 for insurance purposes for example.

Asking someone's age, followed by the interviewers statement.. is a clear indication that the interviewer was considering not hiring the OP, with their age being a factor. That is quite simply discrimination on the grounds of age.

hots

givyjoe wrote: »

The laws around discrimination and subsequent cases, mean it's been interpreted that you cannot ask 'how old are you' unless there is a specific, non discriminatory valid reason for asking.. age simply isn't relevant unless you need to be >over 25 for insurance purposes for example.

Really? I was leaning that way in the first place but another poster's "it's only a questions..." vs proven discrimination sounded plausible. Any source for it?

givyjoe

hots wrote: »

Really? I was leaning that way in the first place but another poster's "it's only a questions..." vs proven discrimination sounded plausible. Any source for it?

Sorry, i don't quite follow?

server down

hots wrote: »

Can you point out in irish law (or any other sure) where I can only ask a candidate "why a junior technical role hasn't become a senior technical role"? Nonsense of the highest order. And you must have a far more imaginative grasp of reading than I do, I don't believe there was a rhetorical question asked.

AS described the woman originally made a statement. To work this out in print look for the ?.

I would hope your guidelines are designed to teach you how to conduct a productive interview, not just being legal.

Thats right. And interviewing for the actual position they apply for is one of the guidelines.

Ambiguous questions aren't illegal. Offending questions aren't illegal. In fact questions at all aren't illegal (to be clear "how old are you?" and "why haven't you made it yet?" are 100% questions no matter how you interpret them).

theres nothing ambiguous about asking someones age and then stating that you worry about people of that age interviewing for that position.

can you actually tell us your credentials, because you are positioning yourself as an expert here - yet you seem to know bog all.

hots

givyjoe wrote: »

Sorry, i don't quite follow?

I was wondering if you have a source for where asking how old someone is has been deemed as discriminatory? I thought it wouldn't be allowed initially but then when another poster pointed out it's just a question I flipped the other way...

hots

AS described the woman originally made a statement. To work this out in print look for the ?.

Can you answer my question? Also she initially asked how old the woman was. Which is definitely a question.

theres nothing ambiguous about asking someones age and then stating that you worry about people of that age interviewing for that position.

You're making things up now.

can you actually tell us your credentials, because you are positioning yourself as an expert here - yet you seem to know bog all.

Sure, you first. Can you answer my earlier question "Can you point out in irish law (or any other sure) where I can only ask a candidate "why a junior technical role hasn't become a senior technical role"?" with your superior creds too please?

givyjoe

hots wrote: »

I was wondering if you have a source for where asking how old someone is has been deemed as discriminatory? I thought it wouldn't be allowed initially but then when another poster pointed out it's just a question I flipped the other way...

Studying/Employment Law Case and first hand experience from Solicitors teaching my class. The logic behind it being intent, i.e. you have to justify asking such a question..

Think about it, why would you ask someone their age if you were't going to use it in deciding whether or not to give them a job. SO unless there are clear, objective grounds for asking e.g. a legal requirement i mentioned already, you 'cannot' ask it as it will potentially lead to a case being taken should the candidate not be hired. Of course I'm sure many people do get asked such questions and don't do anything about it.

There is what the law allows you to do and what companies and staff actually do.

In short, it is 'just a question', but its a question which could well land you in court.

pilly

The below is from Enterprise Ireland's website:

Age Discrimination
Asking a candidate questions during an interview which may suggest that they could be prejudiced by their age has been found to be less favourable treatment on the ground of age. In Hughes v AerLingus, the complainant, a candidate aged over 50, was asked how she would cope with younger people being in charge, and how she would feel about starting “at the bottom of the ladder”. The Equality Officer found that, although the respondent did not discriminate against the complainant because of her age in its failure to offer her a cabin crew position, it had discriminated against her in the manner in which she was questioned at interview. The Equality Tribunal considered that such questioning could have hindered the complainant’s performance at interview and ordered the respondent company to pay her compensation of €5,000 for the distress she suffered in relation to the discriminatory line of questioning. The Equality Officer also ordered that the complainant be given an opportunity to be interviewed again by a different interview panel or, alternatively, offered a cabin crew position.

CalamariFritti

server down wrote: »

I actually joined up ( as a long time lurker, one time poster a while back) to respond to this thread.

Either the people defending the interviewer are thick, or not conversant with the laws. Or both.

I am a middle manager with an multinational US based IT company of renown. Quite simply, whatever the actual practices of any of these companies, their stated company laws and ordinances are clear. You don't discriminate on grounds of race, age, marital status, disability etc. And you will get training about this. They will say don't ask about those topics. Don't mention those words. I will explain the reason for the training after. It isn't necessarily to stop all discrimination, it is to give the appearance of it and to cover butts.

Some examples of what you can't say.

whatever the genuine reason for not hiring a black man, saying "Sorry, are you black - you look rather tan" will leave you open to discriminatory lawsuits. The only reason to ask that question is to work out the persons race. Why would you need to know? Except to discriminate. The courts will assume the latter if he is not hired.

Whatever the reason for not hiring a disabled person saying "Sorry, are you disabled. You hobbled in, but I don't see a wheelchair?". There is no reason to ask except ( courts will generally assume) to discriminate.

Whatever the reason for not hiring a pregnant woman, saying "Sorry, are you pregnant. You look up the bubble". There is no reason to ask that question except ( courts will generally assume) to discriminate.

ill leave how you deal with age as an exercise to the user, but -- since this isnt a very bright thread -- let me explain how you would word a question about over experience.

"You seem over experienced for this role? Have you ever thought of getting promoted in any previous job". You will note the missing word there. Rhymes with cage.


People get training in these things not to stop all discrimination, which is impossible ( you can go back to your desk and whisper "Too old" all you like or do it in a locked room -- but do not send an email). The training is so that the company can deny charges of systematic discrimination, that a single suit doesn't become a class action suit.

The company wants to say "Sure, this woman was ageist but -- look she did the training. She signed off on the training. This is a once off"

( I've never had interview training where you haven't had to sign off and I do that training every year).

Advice to OP. Send an email to corporate HR in the US. HR in Ireland is glorified receptionists. Over there they have legal training. Take a case to the WRC. I can't see you losing. They will almost certainly settle before that. The interviewer is toast. HR Dublin may be toast if they didn't enforce the training.

Haha

hots

givyjoe wrote: »

Studying/Employment Law Case and first hand experience from Solicitors teaching my class. The logic behind it being intent, i.e. you have to justify asking such a question..

Think about it, why would you ask someone their age if you were't going to use it in deciding whether or not to give them a job. SO unless there are clear, objective grounds for asking e.g. a legal requirement i mentioned already, you 'cannot' ask it as it will potentially lead to a case being taken should the candidate not be hired. Of course I'm sure many people do get asked such questions and don't do anything about it.

There is what the law allows you to do and what companies and staff actually do.

In short, it is 'just a question', but its a question which could well land you in court.

Cool, that makes far more sense. I've often wondered how hiring-discrimination could be "proven" when all an employer would have to do is make up any old nonsense... It sounds like being stupid enough to ask it blatantly would be enough to have them in trouble.

Tony EH

hots wrote: »

I was wondering if you have a source for where asking how old someone is has been deemed as discriminatory? I thought it wouldn't be allowed initially but then when another poster pointed out it's just a question I flipped the other way...

https://www.hays.ie/career-advice/handling-inappropriate-interview-questions-402603

Such a question is subject to interpretation as discrimination and any interviewer worth his/her salt wouldn't enter into such an area, as it could lead the company (and the interviewer) into some serious hot water with legal proceedings.

It's utterly pointless anyway and not at all relevant to hiring someone for a job.

I've had to interview people for roles on teams I've lead and as part of an interview course, the stress on not asking questions regarding age, race, religion and sex was front and centre.

In short, you simply don't do it.

givyjoe

hots wrote: »

Cool, that makes far more sense. I've often wondered how hiring-discrimination could be "proven" when all an employer would have to do is make up any old nonsense... It sounds like being stupid enough to ask it blatantly would be enough to have them in trouble.

Eh, not quite. That's the tricky part, proving that the question was actually asked. Being stupid enough to ask, admitting it and then having evidence to incriminate yourself is what will probably need to happen before the trouble begins.

That would be the biggest problem the OP would have. It would, or rather could essentially be a case of he said, she said.

davo10

givyjoe wrote: »

Studying/Employment Law Case and first hand experience from Solicitors teaching my class. The logic behind it being intent, i.e. you have to justify asking such a question..
t.

I'll gladly bow to your knowledge on the subject.

I suspect the intent in the ops case was to assess why the ops career hadn't progressed. Many applicants ask at interview about the prospects for promotion based on experience, qualifications and ability. Surely the same is allowed to asked by the employer, given your age/experience and qualifications, why weren't you promoted?

.......

This post has been deleted.

givyjoe

davo10 wrote: »

I'll gladly bow to your knowledge on the subject.

I suspect the intent in the ops case was to assess why the ops career hadn't progressed. Many applicants ask at interview about the prospects for promotion based on experience, qualifications and ability. Surely the same is allowed to asked by the employer, given your age/experience and qualifications, why weren't you promoted?

Perhaps, but in this case (lets say the interviewer admitted the question as asked) it would likely be judged to be a prima facie case of discrimination, meaning the employer would have to prove they didn't discriminate.

Even if they could do that, they would still likely have some sort of award made against them, like the one quoted in the Aer Lingus case.

Asking questions based on experience qualifications and ability are fine, but the interviewer didn't do this.. they asked the OP's age, and then made a comment on it re: their lack of progression.

The interviewer could have said, 'you have experience in a number of different roles/or one (whatever the case is) but it doesn't look like you have been promoted in any.. can you tell me why this is?' or something to that effect.

Something like that probably wouldn't give rise to a prima facie case and is asking a fair question as to why they haven't secured any promotions in their career to date. The interviewer may have had a legitimate concern as to why this person wasn't getting promotions, but they made an absolute balls of communicating their concern.

In short, be prepared (including proper interview training!), prepare appropriate questions relevant to the job that allow you to make an objective decision.. ask every candidate the same base questions (obviously you can expand where needed).. dont ask questions relating to age, race etc and take detailed notes.. seriously detailed notes on the candidates answers and also detailing your reasons for hiring/not hiring.

Sounds like and is a lot of work, which is why **** goes wrong, and wrong so often.

server down

givyjoe wrote: »

Eh, not quite. That's the tricky part, proving that the question was actually asked. Being stupid enough to ask, admitting it and then having evidence to incriminate yourself is what will probably need to happen before the trouble begins.

That would be the biggest problem the OP would have. It would, or rather could essentially be a case of he said, she said.

If its 1-1, yes it is hard to prove. If the interview panel is bigger than that its one truthful statement against a number of lies (or perjuries) Not everybody is going to conspire, and in general HR won't ask them to.