Yes of course. But what specifically in this story do you think constitutes abuse? The situation could at worst be described as a lack of tact by some of the interviewers. If your bar for abuse is that low, you're going to have a bad time in this industry. Or any industry for that matter! Pulling the ripcord because, surprise, a few 20-something engineers don't have flawless social skills is simply a mistake. Far better to figure out how to navigate the situation to mutual advantage, as Patrick's straightforward algorithm demonstrates.
It's not just tech. If you're not able to take criticism during an interview, or deal with a company culture that appears to be different from your expectations, you're have to have a difficult time getting job in any industry.
The only remotely questionable thing in that entire account was a criticism for "not following very dogmatic principles to the letter of the law". And even that may not be completely questionable, considering that we don't know the question the interviewer asked, nor the answer that the interviewee gave. Without context, this is pure hearsay.
You do realize that, in the vast majority of all interviews, regardless of industry, the interviewee went to the company and asked for a job? They're hardly in a position where that kind of criticism is warranted, especially as an outsider who wants to be hired.
I've never gone to an interview "asking for a job". I've gone to a few interviews to see if we could mutually benefit from me working with them. I have a good idea of my worth and I have the technical skills and background to demonstrate that giving me money in exchange for the use of my time is a net positive to an employer.
The servile mindset is not necessary, and a company that would get pissy if you did what they would if they decided you weren't what they wanted to hire is a company with (no, not 'for', not really) whom self-respecting people need not work. Our time spent living is more valuable than catering to people desperate for asymmetric power-trip relationships.
How do you know that the interviewee wasn't contacted first?
Does 'hardly in a position' dictate what is a reasonable and polite way to treat people?
If company needs programmer and programmer needs job, the relationship is more or less symmetrical. If the company doesn't really need a programmer that much, I guess you are right that the programmer is not in a position to do anything except lick boots.
>If company needs programmer and programmer needs job, the relationship is more or less symmetrical. If the company doesn't really need a programmer that much, I guess you are right that the programmer is not in a position to do anything except lick boots.
Only if there's one programmer for the job. If there are many equally skilled programmers applying and interviewing for the position, then the company absolutely has the power.
And to be clear, I never said that the interviewee should be willing to take abuse or insults. However, it is perfectly valid for an interviewer to see how the interviewee handles constructive criticism of their work. That can tell a lot about an applicant, especially on how they might fit in your company's culture.
Only if there's one programmer for the job. If there are many equally skilled programmers applying and interviewing for the position, then the company absolutely has the power.
The programmer may have multiple job openings to choose from too, as well as (presumably) an existing job.
You know, your comment really hit me for some reason. I'm working at a place now where the boss is really quite rude to some of the junior devs. It's gotten to the point they are afraid to ask questions for fear of his response. As a senior I see this and make an effort to talk and sympathize with the junior guys but feel powerless to stop my boss acting this way - he is very defensive and argumentative whenever I bring this stuff up.
So your comment about watching people being treated a certain way really hit home. Perhaps it's time for a more frank (and private) discussion with my boss, or even a new job.
Get a good job offer first. It'll be him asking you why you consider leaving. If the talk goes bad he suffers his own inflicted wound and perhaps will learn a lesson, while you land on your feet.
I wouldn't call it abusive as such, but I would expect to be told upfront if an interview is going to take more than a couple of hours, and would consider it fair game to leave if I haven't been.
Yes of course. But what specifically in this story do you think constitutes abuse? The situation could at worst be described as a lack of tact by some of the interviewers. If your bar for abuse is that low, you're going to have a bad time in this industry. Or any industry for that matter! Pulling the ripcord because, surprise, a few 20-something engineers don't have flawless social skills is simply a mistake. Far better to figure out how to navigate the situation to mutual advantage, as Patrick's straightforward algorithm demonstrates.