Question asked during interview

[bcla]

At one point I was on unemployment and looking hard for another job. But you can't really turn down a job on unemployment so I would just respond to questions weirdly if I didn't like the role.
One interview asked me "Where do you see yourself tomorrow?"
It was one of those jobs that looked horrible and luckily I was doing something the next day so I responded, "Tomorrow I'm going to the horse race track."
So he asked again "No, where do you see yourself 'Tomorrow'". he emphasized with hand quotes.
So I responded with handquotes, "Tomorrow I see myself at the 'racetrack'".
He then said, "We don't have a sense of humor around here."
I didn't get the job.

When I was on unemployment after being laid off, I theoretically had to have some sort of job-seeking contact at least every calendar week. The paper form I filled out (later was available online) had a place in the back to list job-seeking contacts. But it could be as simple as just applying for a job or even receiving a phone call from a prospective employer. Theoretically I could lose the benefits if I turned down a job offer within reasonable commuting distance, but it was near impossible for them to find out.

If you didn't really want a job (just applied to say you applied), you could have just turned down the interview. I don't believe there are any rules about turning down an interview.

 

[RedAngie]

I was in one of my company’s stores and saw two employees overjoyed to see each other. Apparently neither knew the other worked there. Different shifts/days etc. kLater I asked one how they knew each other.

“ We met in jail.”

 

[bcla]

The eligibility for rehire question is odd because I know of a few giant organizations who declare a person isn't eligible to rehire if they take severance so this question is meaningless.

Sure. That's not all that unusual in large companies. There are those notorious policies where employees' annual performance reviews go into a rating where the "bottom 10%" (or something like that) are summarily laid off every year. It's not considered being fired for cause, so everyone is eligible for unemployment. But then they often tag such employees as ineligible for rehire whether or not they take severance.

I've interviewed at such companies and asked about these policies. Some managers said it was tough dealing with it because these were generally valuable to their teams even if they weren't their top performers. One mentioned that she fought hard to keep people in her group. It was highly disruptive with projects where they would have to find someone quick, even though the hiring process at these companies were often really slow. I've also been told that quite a few groups at such companies hire contractors (who actually cost more than permanent employees) because they can be onboarded quickly and then let go once they max out their time or they're not needed.

Sorry about rambling.

 

[_19disnA]

^^I agree with that. Those 'would you rehire that person?' are subjective types of questions our company won't answer when someone is seeking a new job. In some cases, there will also be a difference of opinion on exactly why that person was let go.

Our company started hiring temp employees many years ago to get around headcount totals allowed by Personnel. At that time, temp employees didn't count toward your totals, so it was a way to game the system. In the long run, I think it costs the company more money to have temps since there is the need to train them on the specific job and it takes time to become proficient. Temp employees also tend to jump jobs more often since there is little incentive for them to stay and if another employer offers a few dollars more, they move on.

No one ever thinks they can run their department with less people, so everyone is always trying to add people. During any kind of economic slowdown, all departments are asked to cut x%. Those who have been through downturns several times know it is wise to 'pad' their headcount so when a cutback comes along, they just let go a few of the extra people. Many salary jobs are very difficult to quantify in terms of productivity, so Personnel likely has no idea how many people you actually need to do the work you are assigned.

 

[bcla]

Our company started hiring temp employees many years ago to get around headcount totals allowed by Personnel. At that time, temp employees didn't count toward your totals, so it was a way to game the system. In the long run, I think it costs the company more money to have temps since there is the need to train them on the specific job and it takes time to become proficient. Temp employees also tend to jump jobs more often since there is little incentive for them to stay and if another employer offers a few dollars more, they move on.

Are these workers legally considered to be temps, or is there another way to describe them?

I've heard all sorts of terms. Some contractors are actually full-time employees of a company given assignments from client to client. Many are are referred to as a "contingent workforce" where they're directly interviewed by the client and are essentially direct reports to a manager.

I've worked one as a contractor, and it was a little bit different. At least at that company I was pretty aware that I wasn't treated like a permanent employer. Not only did I have a different badge that made it clear I wasn't a full-time employee, but I also did get the few perks in the company that FTEs had. But in my case, they wanted a specific area of expertise where there would be minimal training. I was told that I was costing them a lot - possibly more than an equivalent FTE who might have been given more time to come up to speed.

I had an opportunity once where I would be a full-time employee of a contracting agency, but it was considered a permanent role working for the company. I didn't take it because the location wasn't ideal, but it did seem rather strange to me that this company was willing to pay a really high salary and then the commission on top of that to the contracting agency. It was probably as you stated - that they had limits to the number of "employees" they had but could get around that even though it cost more.

I did find it interesting when there was a report of group at Salesforce where someone died (drowned in a lake) during a "team building" event. But later it was reported that he was a contractor. I found it rather interesting that contractors joined in on these sort of events because that was never the case for me.

 

[ronandannette]

Not private employer. Civil service means government job.

Thanks, I missed that. Sort of explains why there is a slight general disdain for government workers though - who else would even consider demanding their jobs back under the circumstances mentioned? And if this is the quality of employee in civil service, then that explains some things too.

 

[CaoilinnsMom]

This is a pretty standard question in the employment application for many jobs...

 

[gotomu212]

Asking if you are eligible for rehire is extremely common in early, entry level positions (food, retail, general customer service) where people move in and out of jobs on a regular basis and employees are typically younger and don’t have a large body of work experience to evaluate.

While individual companies may have policies where they don’t provide references, they are only legally REQUIRED to confirm employment dates. They are not PROHIBITED from sharing any information that they care to as long as it is factually accurate.

A hiring company can’t discriminate by race, religion, gender, pregnancy, or age but can base their decision on anything else (including a did not like the green shirt they wore).

 

[MillauFr]

What if you worked at Enron back in the day and got fired because you refused to go along with their shenanigans. I suppose you you could have been deemed unfit to be rehired. I wouldn't have any qualms about hiring someone like that who has morals and refuses to go along with nonsense.

 

[GreatLakes]

Legally, your former employer can say anything that is a true fact. It is not true that they can only reply with your dates of employment. Many companies have a policy to do only that but it isn't law, at least not in my state or any I know.

The termination question in an interview to an applicant is perfectly fine and something often asked for entry level positions if cash handling or handling of PII is involved. We have similar questions but don't rely on the answer for much. We have detailed background checks including pulling credit and have a minimum credit score eligible for hire.

 

[barkley]

Are these workers legally considered to be temps, or is there another way to describe them?

I've heard all sorts of terms. Some contractors are actually full-time employees of a company given assignments from client to client. Many are are referred to as a "contingent workforce" where they're directly interviewed by the client and are essentially direct reports to a manager.

we had 2 kinds of 'temps' at the government agency i worked for-

'acting'- which was when an opening came up but it couldn't be filled either b/c of a hiring freeze (inside and/or outside of house), expired hiring lists (most often for promotional opportunities), or whomever left had a s--- ton of vacation so their resignation or retirement date was months out (only certain classifications could cash out). these were filled in house but it was a risk to take one b/c if it exceeded 89 calendar days you lost YOUR existing assigned job location w/no guarantee of keeping the better job if it became permanent/available (not at all unheard of). in an agency that covered 716 square miles you risked getting transferred to god knows where.

'agency temps'-strictly hired through a temp agency. all personnel/pay/benefits through their agency. these were almost entirely entry level/clerical who were assigned tasks the clerical union would never permit their members to do, or we had dozens and dozens of vacancies but the board of supervisors were up for reelection and trying to show that they were 'cutting the fat' with a hiring freeze (yet paying out WAY more per hour to the temp agencies per temp we employed).

 

[bcla]

'agency temps'-strictly hired through a temp agency.

That's usually the way it's worked where I've been employed. But when I was looking for a job I saw it all. I once interviewed for a "contractor" job directly with the company where there was no intermediary. I wouldn't have been an employee of the company, and I believe I would have been considered a consultant. But this company usually has contractors through a staffing company where the name of the company is actually on the worker's badge. As for seeing it all, I've been discussed contract opportunities that were salaried, hourly, self-employed, etc. Most don't come with any benefits, but some companies insist on their contractors getting vacation time, regular holidays, and benefits. But there is no consistency. And the worst part is somewhat arbitrary limits on how long someone can work as a contractor.

Security is usually contracted out but without any limits. They're generally not going to be considered to be the same as people doing industry jobs.

 

[SteveH]

While we don't come out and ask that direct question, if the candidate scores high we do let them know we'll be calling a mix of their personal references, employer references and one family reference. We do ask if there is anything we should know before calling their employer references. It's a bad sign when a prospective employee says no and we get an earful. Being ineligible for rehire is not an automatic disqualification but does make us to a lot more background checking.

When an employee leaves us our separation paperwork makes a couple things clear; employees can sign a release for us to provide employment history or not. If they opt not to have us share then we state that the employee has requested we not share employment information. For many that end their background check fast, so they usually call and ask to change that. If they allow us well answer most any verbal question we're asked within the law. The other is if they are eligible for rehire; if they give less then two weeks notice its pretty much an automatic ineligible to rehire and we will share that, if it's another reason we only share if it's legal to do so.

 

[EACarlson]

What if you worked at Enron back in the day and got fired because you refused to go along with their shenanigans. I suppose you you could have been deemed unfit to be rehired. I wouldn't have any qualms about hiring someone like that who has morals and refuses to go along with nonsense.

What we used the question for was a quick check on the honesty of the applicant. If the applicant admitted they were non-rehireable it would trigger additional questions and at that point it was at the discretion of the interviewer and manager. If the applicant said they were rehireable and the previous employer said they were not, then they were removed from further consideration immediately.

 

[tzolkin]

I run an anesthesia staffing company so I am credentialing providers at new sites all the time. I think every single one has a version of that question both on the application for the provider as well as on the reference forms.

There’s usually a full 1-2 pages of these types of questions. Have you ever failed a board exam? Have you ever been denied membership in a professional society? Have you ever withdrawn your application? Etc.

I do know that the large hospitals’ HR departments will only verify the dates of employment, but the new sites are asking the applicant and their references these questions.

Good Lord - in what crazy system are private employers compelled to hire anybody? Just because an individual applies (be he embezzler or murder or just plain not suitable for the job) doesn't mean they are automatically entitled to the job, does it? If every applicant had the "right" to be hired how would that possibly work?

My husband had this issue at his previous employer. It was something in the wording for the union. I remember they had an incompetent nurse that they had a very difficult time getting rid of due to the union. I think eventually they did away with her position. But then when another job at the hospital became available they were told that this nurse would have to be offered the job before they could open it up to other candidates.

 

[_19disnA]

Are these workers legally considered to be temps, or is there another way to describe them?

At our company, there is only one classification for temporary/contract employees. I can only speak to how our company handles them and clearly from the various comments so far, many companies have their own set of guidelines. HR has various requirements in how they are categorized or treated. I am not a lawyer or HR person, so when they talk about the requirements/policies for our company, some of those are from a legal perspective while others are company policy.

 

[bcla]

At our company, there is only one classification for temporary/contract employees. I can only speak to how our company handles them and clearly from the various comments so far, many companies have their own set of guidelines. HR has various requirements in how they are categorized or treated. I am not a lawyer or HR person, so when they talk about the requirements/policies for our company, some of those are from a legal perspective while others are company policy.

At some point it gets rather odd how many people working for a company aren't considered employees. Google is a name that comes up a lot when it comes to contractors. I've heard that they actually have more contractors working for them than full-time employees. And they're mostly positions where they could hire someone full-time, including programmers and engineers. Not all would be drivers, security, or food service. I have heard of some people signing up to be contractors with a possibility that they could be converted to full-time, direct employees. But that usually requires a buyout, unless maybe that person hits the time limit. Still - I haven't necessarily heard of contractors being considered second-class workers at some companies where they get a lot of the same perks. I've heard that they might not be able to get free transportation (which may be prohibited for non-employees), but that's usually taken care of with something like a $1 fee.

In other companies they can be second-class workers even if the company makes efforts to avoid that. In one large company, anyone who is a contractor gets a dash with a letter attached to their email address to specify what type of contractor. At least in the past there was an unfortunate nickname for such workers - "Dash Trash". Still - I've also heard that in this company if a manager hears someone referring to contractors that way, it could be grounds for at least a good talking down to, and even a formal reprimand.

 

[_19disnA]

^^ Those online taxi companies are good examples of using 'contract employees'. Some companies use this as a way to avoid paying their people benefits, vacation time, etc.

 

[goofyernmost]

Different states have different rules about what can and cannot be asked during during job interviews, but I know from personal experience some companies don’t follow those rules. I don’t imagine many people would admit to being fired and probably wouldn’t list a job they’ve been fired from on a resume so that question is probably not very helpful to the hiring manager.

The rules are designed to prevent forcing a third party to answer a question that has a negative possibility. Leaving them open for a possible lawsuit. However, they can ask the applicant anything they want. It may or may not harm the chances of getting the job, but there is no law against a business trying to protect their property, employee's or reputation. Have you ever been fired is a common question. And it is an excellent opportunity for someone that has been fired to tell their side of the story before the employer checks the references. That's why when you call past employers you will usually find them responding with the same answers. Like dates of employment, salary (not always) or would you hire them again. That answer says a lot, which is why it is better for a applicant to give their side of the story. One has a much better chance is the prospective employer at least understands the reasons why. It might not be a problem for them. Many get fired because they were lazy, unreliable, insubordinate, dishonest or hard to get along with. These are things an employer should be able to find out.

 

[bcla]

^^ Those online taxi companies are good examples of using 'contract employees'. Some companies use this as a way to avoid paying their people benefits, vacation time, etc.

There's no specific requirement in most states that any employee gets vacation time or benefits. There are a lot of companies (especially in retail) that don't provide benefits to hourly employees but do so for salaried employees. There are other things like scheduled breaks, etc. that have to be provided to employees, plus assorted costs like paying into Medicare and unemployment insurance.