Sham Job Interviews

[bartman72]

www.forbes.com/sites/lizryan/2016/07/26/five-signs-your-interview-is-fake-because-theyve-already-hired-someone/#3eae75eb67f2

Summary: When filling job openings, companies may already know whom they’re going to hire, but in many cases, they have a policy requiring them to interview a certain number of candidates anyway. The author includes some ways to tell whether this is taking place. There are some good stories in the comment section.

I’ve suspected this was going on sometimes, but you can’t be sure without insider knowledge. And certainly, when I’m unemployed I interview with anyone who will have me.

Last year I interviewed with a large company where I temped earlier. In the 2nd round, the interviewer expressed concerns about how long I would stay. The manager who supervised me as a temp interviewed me for the 3rd round – she started out by telling me that she wouldn’t be making the final decision. Was that her way of telling me it wasn’t her fault I didn’t get the job? Employees were promoted there internally a lot and I suspect they brought in external candidates to satisfy some HR policy. I base this on the fact that I was brought in for a 3rd interview, when they clearly had concerns about my being over-qualified.  The truth is I was, but I simply wanted to get my foot in the door as it was a great company to work for at that point.

It worked out at least for me – the company has had a miserable 2016 and on top of laying people off, it isn’t replacing others lost through attrition. I am sorry to hear of this as I have friends still working there.

Aside from this article I never hear this topic discussed, so I’m hoping there are some good stories out there.

[chen35]

My company used to require this. One time I flat out refused to do it. It caused quite an uproar, but in the end I won out. I think it's rude to waste hopeful applicants time like that. That's not the kind of person/company I want to be.

[hoops902]

Aug 29, 2016 13:34:27 GMT -5 @sroo4 said:

I also don't know that this means too much: 

3. The interview may be bogus if the interviewer tells you, “If this job doesn’t work out, we may have other job openings that are a fit for your background.” Why would they dampen your hopes before the interviewing process is through?

I've interviewed a few people who aren't what I want for my position, but if I think they'd be good in a different position I'll pass on their resume to the other hiring manager.  I will say something like this if I want to start asking questions about the other position and to gauge their interest and ability in the other job.   

I agree, we do this a lot actually. It usually happens when we start asking someone about the kind of environment they want, the kind of work they want to do, and it ends up sounding a lot like another job posting and not much like the job they actually applied for. There's so much corporate-speak and trending towards common language for certain positions across the organization that sometimes the job isn't quite what the applicant thought.  Or perhaps more commonly, the same 2 jobs have roughly the same 5-6 tasks, and the candidate really seems to want to do tasks 1 & 2 which is a very small part of the job, but a very large part of another job. 

This seems to happen most often when a hiring manager has multiple openings across different areas and wants to transition to discussing another job they'd like to consider the candidate for.

[hoops902]

The entire process is kind of messed up sometimes. I remember applying for something internally with another department, not getting it. Then a month later a position opened up in my department, I applied, they told me I didn't have interview again since they could just take my other answers, and offered me the job. Then they went and interviewed a bunch of other folks that applied (all internal). Apparently the company policy is that if you're internal, they'll give you an interview...even if they've already given the job away to someone else. It's messed up, but I'm guessing it goes over a lot better to pretend they considered you and picked someone else than to tell someone "we wont' even interview you".

It's kind of a pain, because you end up with people who wouldn't bother applying if they knew who else was applying, then they go through the entire interview process knowing they wouldn't have a shot. I've interviewed for stuff internally where I didn't even really want the job, I wanted someone else specifically to get it. But I didn't know if they applied or not and we weren't friendly enough that I felt comfortable asking them.

[NomoreDramaQ1015]

Creighton requires that.   My former boss already had my replacement picked out and she was shadowing me but he could not hire her until he interviewed X number of internal candidates and X number of external candidates.    It's supposed to lessen the chance of a discrimination lawsuit they say.

He would have lost his job if he had told these people he was going thru the motions.  He had to keep up the appearance that they stood a chance of being hired. He was in a really foul mood those two weeks because he hated stringing people along.

I figured out that here if the posting says "internal candidate only" that is them telling you that they already have the position filled. 

[zibazinski]

It's extremely rude and I will have nothing to do with Wells Fargo because they pull that nasty trick on people.

[bartman72]

Aug 29, 2016 14:02:39 GMT -5 hoops902 said:

The entire process is kind of messed up sometimes. I remember applying for something internally with another department, not getting it. Then a month later a position opened up in my department, I applied, they told me I didn't have interview again since they could just take my other answers, and offered me the job. Then they went and interviewed a bunch of other folks that applied (all internal). Apparently the company policy is that if you're internal, they'll give you an interview...even if they've already given the job away to someone else. It's messed up, but I'm guessing it goes over a lot better to pretend they considered you and picked someone else than to tell someone "we wont' even interview you".

It's kind of a pain, because you end up with people who wouldn't bother applying if they knew who else was applying, then they go through the entire interview process knowing they wouldn't have a shot. I've interviewed for stuff internally where I didn't even really want the job, I wanted someone else specifically to get it. But I didn't know if they applied or not and we weren't friendly enough that I felt comfortable asking them.

It's not right to string anybody along, but at least those internal candidates didn't incur any additional expenses or have to lie to get off of work.

[Phoenix84]

A couple years ago, when I was interviewing for jobs, my current one among them, I did a interview with the Department of Energy and it only lasted about 10 minutes, not because of anything I did, they just didn't ask many questions.

It was obvious they were doing as you described, just "checking the box" on interviewing so many candidates.  They knew who they wanted to hire.

[Anne_in_VA]

I've interviewed at companies where it was obvious they were just "checking the box".  My former company did that when they promoted me.  They posted it internally and they interviewed 2 or 3 others, but I had already been told I had the job.  To be fair, the people that applied didn't really have the skill set for the job and I'd been doing it for a couple of months.

[Tennesseer]

I imagine a few slipped by but my former employer posted internally first and interviewed internal candidates before going external for candidates if no one internally met the qualifications.

[mroped]

I interviewed this year for a teaching position at the area's tech school. Wasn't sure if I wanted the job but I tought would be a good experience since I've never realy interviewed for one.
i have no idea how many applicants there were but I can tell you for certain that I was the most qualified. None of the Mason's within a 50 miles would have my background!
Nonetheless, the job went to a guy that use to work in a concrete precast plant where he had an office position and after that he worked for concrete trucks repair company where again he was in purchasing.
No idea what relevant experience he could've had but I might be wrong! He could have 5 years experience in all types of masonry which he acquired during his summer vacation before his senior year or something like that.

Again, I wasn't certain I wanted the job but when I found out whom did it go to it kinda ticked me. If it were to go to a guy that did masonry for a living I'd say " good for him! He needs that more than I do!" But this shmuck? No wonder the kids that come out of there have no clue about anything!

What was odd was the fact that the director of the institution who sat in the interview, mentioned at least four times " if your FBI background check goes through..."
I'm a citizen you dumb b...h! And I pay my taxes and I'm in good standing with the law you freaking racist!

Now I'm pissed! I'll go in a few weeks to check on the class and see how things are. 
I can enter any day durring hours because I'm in the department's board of advisors.
And then I'll have a talk with her!

[Artemis Windsong]

I have seen that happen.  They fully intend to promote the current employee but are just checking to see if anyone surpasses them.

I had my resume stolen and used by another person.  This was early 90s.  I was working in another job.  They called to do a final telephone interview at my place of employment.  When I told the HR person I never applied there and to give the woman a test in shorthand. 

The bimbo got up and walked out the door.  I blame the HR person on this.  The imposter surfaces still.