NationStates Jolt Archive

OK, I had a job interview the other day with a company that will remain unnamed. It went really well until the end, in which case I was given a survey based on my "opinions". Now, I automatically thought "Hello, this is odd..." and from the looks of some other people taking the test, I wasn't the only one. Another person spoke up and said "uhh...does this actually affect our chances of getting employed?" to which she received a curt "Yes." I was quietly seething after reading the questions and out of spite, refused to lie. I don't care, I've been offered another job anyway.

Now, if it was remotely job based, it wouldn't be so bad. But the majority of the questions were on personal views which I believe they have no right to discriminate against. For example:

"Does an employer have the right to discipline an employee that uses drugs in their spare time but does not have their work performance impaired in any way?" Well, you said it yourself dumbass- Their work performance isn't impaired, so if it was me, hell no you cannot intervene in my personal life.

"Many people experiment with drugs, so it must be fine to try them at least once?" Personal choice again and not the employers business provided it doesn't affect the employees work.

"Do many businessmen succeed financially only through cheating?" Umm. Yes. Many of them do. I wrote down the name of a person recently convicted of insider trading in Australia.

And on the flip side of that one, "Many businessmen get to where they are today through hard work and diligence. Do you agree?"

"Is it right to question people in higher positions?" Umm. No. I should jump off a cliff if i'm told to. :rolleyes:

"Individuals in large companies are not important. Do you agree?" Umm, I'm applying for a casual position, and if you like you can fire me at any time you decide. Yes, really important :rolleyes:

Just to name a few of them...

I got lucky apparently. I only had to do 60 questions like this, when people applying for office positions have 150. I bet they have to answer questions about gay marriage. Hah. I'd love to see what's on that one, because this one was primarily targeted at people still in school.

Is this practice normal? Is it right for it to be? Should I be denied a job simply because of my social views?

Does being left-wing mean that I am naturally lazy, and i'll turn up to work every day an hour late, hungover and stoned, barely able to speak let alone work? Bullshit.

Anyway. What do you enlightened people think?

In the United States, such questions would be illegal to ask, I believe.

The only case in which I can see drug tests being an absolute must where it does not APPARENTLY affect one's work would be for someone whose job provides or affects safety for others -- pilot, bus driver, truck driver, police, etc.

I think the employer should be able to hire and fire anyone for any reason he or she wants to.

In the United States, such questions would be illegal to ask, I believe.

The only case in which I can see drug tests being an absolute must where it does not APPARENTLY affect one's work would be for someone whose job provides or affects safety for others -- pilot, bus driver, truck driver, police, etc.

I thought they were illegal here as well- it's a breach of privacy. I was stunned.

And yes, ditto for drug tests in those positions.

I think the employer should be able to hire and fire anyone for any reason he or she wants to.

But does he or she have the right to know everything about me if I don't want them to?

In the US, it's legal for companies to employ or not based on the very kinds of things you described, and in my opinion, as long as they're up front about it before they hire you, it's ethical too.

There was a story I read a few days ago about a company in Florida ownd and run by conservative Muslims. They hired a woman and told her that the fact that she wasn't a Muslim wouldn't be an issue, but subsequently fired her because--get this--she ate pepperoni pizza for lunch one day, and their religion considers pepperoni to be an unclean food because it's made from pork. She's suing, and she'll win, not because the company wasn't within its rights to restrict what food could be eaten on company property, but because it wasn't mentioned before the woman was hired and because it wasn't a condition of her employment. In that case, I think the employer's actions were unethical.

However, had the company told the woman of their feelings on certain food products, and had a stated policy on it, and the woman violated that policy, then the company would have had a right to terminate her employment.

Well let's say I'm in charge of hiring. I'm going to grill you like a steak! I'll ask you dozens of question about political ideology, social beliefs, economic beliefs, etc. You'd better answer enough of them the proper way or else you don't get hired. That's how it is. I won't help the enemy by employing them. Besides, who would want spies in their company? You hire people you can trust. A right-wing employee is more likely to help me cover something up than a left-wing employee.

But even considering that CM, I'm not in a position to cover up anything anyway. I would be stacking shelves in a supermarket so I fail to see how my social views make any difference.

But even considering that CM, I'm not in a position to cover up anything anyway. I would be stacking shelves in a supermarket so I fail to see how my social views make any difference.

Yes well we'd be working out tax scams to save me money, so you'd have to help me. I don't believe in paying taxes to support this government or this system of government for that matter. :D

Yes well we'd be working out tax scams to save me money, so you'd have to help me. I don't believe in paying taxes to support this government or this system of government for that matter. :D

Heh, well no offence, but that company won't have much of a future so it doesn't matter if I don't get the job. lol.

But does he or she have the right to know everything about me if I don't want them to?

I you want to work there you should have to tell them every thing they want to know.

I you want to work there you should have to tell them every thing they want to know.

I disagree. If it doesn't affect them in any way and I am a capable worker what inherent right do they have that lets them know everything about me?

I can almost forgive the drug questions, because I can sympathize with a company that doesn't want to hire drug users. Still, the questions about questioning authority? Waaaaayy out of line. Your political views won't affect your job (especially yours specifically, Sir Shelf-Stacking Man), and hence you shouldn't be questioned about them.

Heh, well no offence, but that company won't have much of a future so it doesn't matter if I don't get the job. lol.

I know plenty of people involved in labor law violations, tax scams, etc, they're all good people.


I mean one guy used to let his son work for him on the construction sit, doing riveting starting at age 14-15 up until he was about 18. The stuff the government doesn't know won't hurt them.

I can almost forgive the drug questions, because I can sympathize with a company that doesn't want to hire drug users. Still, the questions about questioning authority? Waaaaayy out of line. Your political views won't affect your job (especially yours specifically, Sir Shelf-Stacking Man), and hence you shouldn't be questioned about them.

I'm glad you agree.

I can understand where the drug questions are coming from at least...but the rest I certainly couldn't see the relevance.

(And shelf stacking is one of the only jobs I could find that fits in with uni. And it pays 30% more than fast food. So don't knock it :p)

Actually, questions like that are an up and coming trend. The rationale is the actual answers may not particularly affect your chances of employment, but the over all profile is what employers are looking at. We're starting to use it where I work, but we don't have a quiz. Instead, we ask essay questions in order to get a better idea of the candidate's skill set and methods. We're also considering putting in a personality profile. Get used to it, it's the hot new rage in HR circles. You can not only weed out unqualified candidates, but those that wouldn't mesh well with the corporate culture.

Actually, questions like that are an up and coming trend. The rationale is the actual answers may not particularly affect your chances of employment, but the over all profile is what employers are looking at. We're starting to use it where I work, but we don't have a quiz. Instead, we ask essay questions in order to get a better idea of the candidate's skill set and methods. We're also considering putting in a personality profile. Get used to it, it's the hot new rage in HR circles. You can not only weed out unqualified candidates, but those that wouldn't mesh well with the corporate culture.

What I had to do, was a group problem solving test, a maths based skills test, and the damn survey.

I think what this comes down to is the fact that the only way to get even the simplest form of employment will be to be an unflinching conservative who does everything that you're told. Big brother is watching you. Maybe this test would make more sense if I was actually applying for a position in the corporate infrastructure- but I only want to stack shelves!

What I had to do, was a group problem solving test, a maths based skills test, and the damn survey.

I think what this comes down to is the fact that the only way to get even the simplest form of employment will be to be an unflinching conservative who does everything that you're told. Big brother is watching you. Maybe this test would make more sense if I was actually applying for a position in the corporate infrastructure- but I only want to stack shelves!

Not necessarily. For instance, I work for a not-for-profit and in the survey we're considering putting in, we don't really care what organizations you volunteered for or what political causes you've championed, just that you've done so. We skew the questions to find out what sort of motivations you have and why you're applying to our organization. We're currently plauged with employees that are here not because they want to be or particularly believe in the cause or charitable work in general, but because they're waiting for something better to come along. The hope is that by putting in a profile survey, we can better establish which candidates have a mindset that indicates they are with our organization because they are dedicated to the mission. I'm sure some companies indeed skew their questions to do exactly what you describe, but I don't think it's a majority. The simple issue is that for every open position nowadays there are so many applicants and, even after you weed out the unqualified ones, you're left with a substantial pool of equally qualified individuals in most cases. There has to be a further criterian for deciding which candidates will make good, long-term hires.

In your particular case, it does seem like overkill, however I imagine they're profiling for illegal tendencies and work ethic.

In your particular case, it does seem like overkill, however I imagine they're profiling for illegal tendencies and work ethic.

Perhaps. There were a few questions about stealing on there, so that's a fair point. (Of course, I didn't justify that :))

Well, I think it is certainly ethical to ask any question they want (provided that you don't need to give an answer should you decide not to) and to hire and or fire based on those questions.

However, from an economical standpoint, it is almost in the worst interests of the company to employ this practice...I mean, c'mon, your only limiting your employee pool by doing this, and when the job is the local mail boy, or some other less than high school diploma job, what does it matter if they think God exists, or that there are some sort of pandimensional beings on a 5th plane, 2.76 galactic soundyears away in some hyperdrodonous galaxy in Zorthon the Maximillius!!!


By the way...I don't believe that...

However, from an economical standpoint, it is almost in the worst interests of the company to employ this practice...I mean, c'mon, your only limiting your employee pool by doing this, and when the job is the local mail boy, or some other less than high school diploma job, what does it matter if they think God exists, or that there are some sort of pandimensional beings on a 5th plane, 2.76 galactic soundyears away in some hyperdrodonous galaxy in Zorthon the Maximillius!!!


By the way...I don't believe that...

Suuuuuuuure you don't. Someone's displaying potentially Mormonistic behavior.

I believe it is. Of course, I'm not sure this is actually legal where I live (actually I don't think it is, technically, although there are many ways around it).

Regardless, I think it is fine, because if *I* were the person looking to hire people for a company, the more united everyone is (similar beliefs, or all very open minded, etc.), the better the company is likely to function. Employees that argue politics with each other during the election are NOT going to be productive employees (at least not as productive). It's the same idea that you'd want to hire attractive people for something like customer relations.

In relation to the questions about drug use, I think that should be clear why they would want to know....

Well, I think it is certainly ethical to ask any question they want (provided that you don't need to give an answer should you decide not to) and to hire and or fire based on those questions.

However, from an economical standpoint, it is almost in the worst interests of the company to employ this practice...I mean, c'mon, your only limiting your employee pool by doing this, and when the job is the local mail boy, or some other less than high school diploma job, what does it matter if they think God exists, or that there are some sort of pandimensional beings on a 5th plane, 2.76 galactic soundyears away in some hyperdrodonous galaxy in Zorthon the Maximillius!!!


By the way...I don't believe that...

Actually there was a question on there about religion, something about whether it's right to disagree with your company on religious grounds.

And yes, I had to answer every single question, because there was one in particular that I did not want to answer and I spoke up and got told to answer it. (That probably blew my chances at the job)

The question I didn't want to answer (one of the first ones on the sheet): "Is it right to say negative things about the company you work in to your peer group?"

Actually there was a question on there about religion, something about whether it's right to disagree with your company on religious grounds.

And yes, I had to answer every single question, because there was one in particular that I did not want to answer and I spoke up and got told to answer it. (That probably blew my chances at the job)

The question I didn't want to answer (one of the first ones on the sheet): "Is it right to say negative things about the company you work in to your peer group?"

It sounds like you were the victim of a bad survey and a horrible HR department. Frankly, you're probably better off not working for that company.

I believe it is. Of course, I'm not sure this is actually legal where I live (actually I don't think it is, technically, although there are many ways around it).

Regardless, I think it is fine, because if *I* were the person looking to hire people for a company, the more united everyone is (similar beliefs, or all very open minded, etc.), the better the company is likely to function. Employees that argue politics with each other during the election are NOT going to be productive employees (at least not as productive). It's the same idea that you'd want to hire attractive people for something like customer relations.

But politics doesn't have a place in most work environments anyway, so my views aren't important in the context of things and therefore I should not be denied a job simply because of them. I'm not going to waste time arguing at work- thats what NS is for (hehe)

In relation to the questions about drug use, I think that should be clear why they would want to know....

Yes, but the way they structured the questions leaves some doubt. For example "Provided it does not affect their work" See, I truly believe that if it's not affecting the work, then it's none of their business. On the other hand, if the employee regularly turns up to work intoxicated and unfit to work, then they should be fired.

It sounds like you were the victim of a bad survey and a horrible HR department. Frankly, you're probably better off not working for that company.

I agree. I've been offered another job anyway so no big deal.

Imho "business" and "ethical" definitely do not together in one sentence!
This test you had to make was simply immoral.

Why do people work? Money. Simple as that.
So either you give up your pride and principles and lie on the test or you end up unemployed. It is totally understandable for me if one lies about those things, just to get the job. I don´t judge about it. I could never do so. I studied economy, but I´d rather dig holes than actually apply for a job in the "big business". Yes, I realized too late, how dirty business can be. But I decided not to be a part of it.

Nowadays (especially where I live) the unemployment rate is quite high. So the bosses can choose to hire about anyone they like, for about any money they wish to give. "You won´t do the job? Well, bye, and send the next one in on your way out."

Today´s companies are not looking for loyal workers. They want slaves. Brainless humans who are just doing what they are told. This is very sad. Of course, there are exceptions, but I am talking about the majority.

I could go on for hours on this :headbang:

--------------------------------------------
Sorry for my bad english, but don´t blame me! Blame my teachers.

But politics doesn't have a place in most work environments anyway, so my views aren't important in the context of things and therefore I should not be denied a job simply because of them. I'm not going to waste time arguing at work- thats what NS is for (hehe)

Yes, but the way they structured the questions leaves some doubt. For example "Provided it does not affect their work" See, I truly believe that if it's not affecting the work, then it's none of their business. On the other hand, if the employee regularly turns up to work intoxicated and unfit to work, then they should be fired.

IMO, politics has a place EVERYWHERE. You're political beliefs are likely to show what type of person you are, what you value, how you will act in certain situations. These would of course, not apply to EVERYONE, but it is certainly is a very very good indication. I know this will sound like stereotyping, and in a way it is, but in my own life (and this isn't one of those cases where you only see the "facts" you want to see, I've looked at it quite objectively), I can tell very accurately (well, if you'd call 9 out of 10 times accurate) how someone would feel about an issue or about a situation or such based on their political beliefs, even on things not normally related to politics.

That also answers the thing about how they phrased the drug questions....

I personally think the existance of wage labor is unethical, but that's just me. This is wrong because it gives them a powerful weapon against socialists, basically starving them.

I personally think the existance of wage labor is unethical, but that's just me. This is wrong because it gives them a powerful weapon against socialists, basically starving them.


You mean like the people of Ukraine were starved by the leader of the Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics, Joseph Stalin.

You mean like the people of Ukraine were starved by the leader of the Union of Soviet SOCIALIST Republics, Joseph Stalin.

You can't be dumb enough to take a name at face value. Do you think China is "people's republic"?

I think the employer should be able to hire and fire anyone for any reason he or she wants to.

Even if they are blatantly discriminatory?
(based on sex, race, religion, etc)

You can't be dumb enough to take a name at face value. Do you think China is "people's republic"?


Of course. People= People in the upper echelons of the communist party.

Of course. People= People in the upper echelons of the communist party.

Don't take advantage of ambiguity. If you want to redefine words to suit your views, fine, but don't expect us to take your claims based on them seriously, racist.

In the US, personality tests of that nature are legal and are given by employers all the time. It is illegal to use the results of such tests on the decision to hire or not hire the employee.

The test results are used for future employee evaluations to better help direct the course of the employee's career. They are a very effective tool.

The question I didn't want to answer (one of the first ones on the sheet): "Is it right to say negative things about the company you work in to your peer group?"
Wow. Point me to the person who doesn't whinge about work and their boss to their peers, and I'll give you a shiny nickel.

Is it ETHICAL? I can't say no. I wouldn't work there, however. If one is going to be judged, have them be judged on their skills and work ethic--not personal opinions (this goes for the majority of jobs--I can see that if one is a Republican that they might be rejected as a campaign manager for a Deomcrat--those sorts of jobs are based on beliefs).

Uhh. Well heres a weird update. I just got a call from this company and got offered a one on one interview next week. So I guess it didn't count for much? That, or they want to run my choices on that survey by me. Or something.

In the US, personality tests of that nature are legal and are given by employers all the time. It is illegal to use the results of such tests on the decision to hire or not hire the employee.

The test results are used for future employee evaluations to better help direct the course of the employee's career. They are a very effective tool.

Heh, well, that would probably make sense in the context of things. It's really not like I want to work there for too long though.

I can almost forgive the drug questions, because I can sympathize with a company that doesn't want to hire drug users. Still, the questions about questioning authority? Waaaaayy out of line. Your political views won't affect your job (especially yours specifically, Sir Shelf-Stacking Man), and hence you shouldn't be questioned about them.

Still, the drug questions are not okay. In the first place, they don't ask "do you use drugs" rather the questions as presented in the original post asked about a person's political/social stance on the drug issue.

It is unfair, as well as incorrect, to say that supporting the idea that drug use is a personal choice means that the holder of this idea chooses to use drugs.

It is unfair, as well as incorrect, to say that supporting the idea that drug use is a personal choice means that the holder of this idea chooses to use drugs.

EXACTLY what I thought at the time.