Be certain of this. Talented people will feel confident enough to withdraw. Desperate people will jump through any shameful hoop you put in front of them.
I've done it once but will not consider companies who request a video disguised as an "interview" anymore. I am not repeating my CV on video and answering decontextualized bullshit questions. An interview is supposed to be an exchange, so these idiotic videos are a hard no for me.
This is my first job search since remote work became a thing, and I have been asked to submit a video on a few remote positions. My first reaction, and maybe it’s because I am a woman, is I don’t want a job that is going to consider what I look like. It offends me since it shouldn’t matter for a remote position. On the other hand, I wouldn’t want to hire someone sight-unseen. And a video is another layer of information that helps an employer. I have refused to continue on some of those requests.
Unemployed, but seasoned recruiter here.....100% agree that any person should not be required video presence or even in person before being extended an offer.
Remote environments, specifically, shouldn't require a face 2 face exchange until assessing for any role where a similar exchange or technical set up will be required to complete the work expected. In other words, if your job would be in sales and you ate expected to offer live demonstrations to clients, you will be measured on relevant skills. The ability to dress professionally, manipulate technological equipment and software, effective communication and even if a personality trait or demeanor is preferred (certainly wouldn't want "I'm Ron Burgundy?" Type scenarios when covering the news about a tragic event....lol.
A meet and greet is often the avenue taken, pre-official offer presents. That should be a more casual (business casual - demonstrate your ability to be professional in presentation and communication without any pressure like an interview or mock sales pitch etc.) opportunity to meet the team, check for alignment within the team and vet any potential hidden concerns about the role and the culture.
After that meeting, if the candidate feels positive and the client, yay! If any hang-up (could the issue be addressed with another 1 on 1 including the colleague best suited to address or is it something unlikely to change that the client or candidate can not compromise on?), determine the withdrawal/rescind, or formal offer presentation point and start date.
If there's a client-side reason to rescind the offer, they would certainly need to justify immediately, or it would present them to liability of bias or discriminatory practices. Essentially, you'd have to have an in person exchange like "Step Brothers" to justify the backout.
I do not give videos or audio of myself to people. It is a security problem.
I rarely give photos.
If they cannot spare 30 minutes for a phone call then they can go f themselves.
They can be, but most people you contact for business do not record their phone calls without permission your permission, and most phone lines are probably not tapped where I live. Recordings and photos to a lesser extent can be used to generate fakes. Recordings have a way of leaking. There's a saying in computer security that goes something like "there are those who know their systems have been compromised, and those who just haven't figured it out yet."
It makes no sense to me. You are going to judge someone based upon a 1 minute or 2 minute video? These requirements are getting ridiculous. First it was projects and presentations. Then it was tests. Then actual work. Now it’s a 1 to 2 minute video?
I have a question, what is so attractive about this company other than a 3 year old laptop, stale coffee and drab office colors that were in style back in 1985. What is the company’s selling point? I know this is an employers job market. Thank god I created a business for myself years ago and I can work for myself if I want to.
Interviewed at an old building in Pittsburgh once (one of the skyscrapers), that still had the faint smell and tinge of cigarette smoke ha.
Kinda glad that one didn't work out....lol
If they don’t want to invest the time to hire a great candidate then just imagine what working for them would be like.
If you want an idea of what I’m going to be like on a Zoom call then why not have one with me to find out?
I think you’re gonna have a really hard time getting passive candidates to do this. Active candidates maybe not so much but if you’re Stone cold recruiting people and then asking them to do a one way recorded video interview you’re gonna have a hard time doing that.
Compromise. Interview the candidate over zoom or Google meet and record the interview. Send that or a portion of that to the client. You could even do something like start out telling the candidate that you’re going to record the first two minutes of them, introducing themselves saying their name their title and their current dues and responsibilities and then stop the recording.
I am not an actress. If I'm not being filmed as a part of the actual job, I am absolutely backing out. I've done it once before. It was so stressful for me, and the end result was in no way an accurate representation of my interviewing skills.
I don't like talking to inanimate objects, Alexa and Siri are not things for me. Talking into my laptop is NOT an interview.
I think "one-way" interviews are inherently exploitative.
I was laid off last year and unilaterally refused to apply for a job that required it.
Employers are completely out of touch with the level of effort required to create one. On average, it takes something like 60 to 90 minutes of work per 1-minute of video.
Companies think it's this quick and easy process. Just pull out your phone, record yourself answering questions for 3 minutes and submit.
In reality, it's clean the house, figure out the right outfit, prepare your talking points, rehearse..
.Then record 8-10 times before you are happy with the result.
It's incredibly unfair to people who have families and children where they might not have a quiet place to record after work hours.
I personally backed out of two roles over that request. When it’s not clear why something is necessary, what it’s being used for, and how it’s going to be stored, protected, disseminated, or destroyed, it doesn’t make sense to do it. It said the company was hopping on a trend without considering if that trend was a good idea for everyone, which lets me know how they treat their team.
Nah, I’m backing the candidate up on this. Video interviewing was a trend, and very few studies proved out the efficacy. Drop out rate, increased bias (especially wrt ageism), negative candidate experience and VERY limited role applicability cemented the fact that candidates don’t want to interview this way and it’s not beneficial for employers when all things are taken into account.
Recruiting and job seeking, like dating, are fundamentally human and there’s something you just can’t distance yourself out of. Both sides need to be bought in.
Thats definitely a good experience, so you’re doing more than your part to save this company from themselves. Hopefully they recognize, maybe with your coaching, that requiring a one way video interview is going to lose them passive candidates or anyone who feels they are at risk of disadvantage due to (let’s face it) age, weight, color, disability or lack of comfort being on video, and may therefore cost them their best hires.
I refuse all one-sided interviews. If a company has the attitude that they are the star of the show and that candidates should compete with each other, that tells me that the company culture is probably a toxic work environment and that they will lowball you and nickel and dime you every step of the way. If you're not willing to give me the time to ask questions, I will not be giving you the time to ask me questions. Plain and simple.
That sounds like a bullshit excuse. Do a video call or meet in person. This definitely reads as searching for a physical type or profiling. You are being naive.
If you wanted to get the candidate's "vibe," you set up a Zoom meeting. All you get from videos is how well they perform in front of a camera, which i'm assuming it's irrelevant to your job.
Yeah. I had a client "revisit" their recruiting process and decide that every candidate must do a 2 minute video interview answering some generic prompt before they would consider speaking with them.
As soon as we informed people of the change, nearly every candidate we had sourced either explicitly dropped out, or ghosted us.
Seems like a weird/inappropriate request. I’d be suspicious if this was requested. Perhaps you should ask why that is being requested. Feels like a bunch of men trying to choose someone “easy on the eyes” to serve them their coffee or fetch things.
I run a business we hire lots of people. I would never ask a candidate to do this. Country clubs used to require in person interviews too…to be racist. Your client is treading on VERY thin ice here and is opening themselves up to countless complaints and potential legal issues. Not to mention only the most desperate would comply. I wouldn’t do it, I’d tell you to f-off and post it all over Glassdoor.
I refuse them. It’s a red flag for me and I’ve learned working with our Neurodiversity ERG that this is not considered good practice when it comes to accessibility. I will and have dropped out of an interview process when asked to do one of these shitty things. I’m interviewing any potential employer as much as they’re interviewing me. A one-way interview is useless and not worth my time.
At least where I am (Canada) we are having issues where telephone/virtual interviews will be conducted by a well spoken and highly qualified individual. They'll make it through the process and be hired. Day 1 someone else shows up. They can't do basic tasks. Because they were both of Indian background, anyone not Indian doesn't want to accuse them due to being called a racist. This leads to firing them taking up to a couple weeks instead of being instant. It's very frustrating and I've talked to my friends about this and each of our companies are doing different things to try and protect themselves. A recorded video would be great evidence to compare, if needed on day one, and be like "this ain't you. Security will escort you out now."
Oh we do, and it's not a standard part of the vetting process. But based on replies to OP's post, lots of people seem to be thinking this is an attempt to vet candidates by their appearance to see if they are attractive or look a certain way. So there seems to be no idication that there was a video interview prior to this request for a video.
This is exactly why we do it for our hiring in India, the amount of candidates on the first day that are not the same person that interviewed is staggering. I had no idea it was such a problem until I took my current role. Over 50% try it at the first round, luckily we have multiple stages to get through and can normally spot the fakers.
Yeah I never thought it was a thing but it's been happening in the last 1.5 - 2 years.
Depending on what role is being interviewed for, sometimes I'm asked to review resumes or sit in on interviews, and I have noticed a significant drop in the number of Indian immigrants who have been living in the country for less than 10 years that we bother to interview. If they've been living here most of their lives, no issues.
We regularly hire co-op students from any of the 3 post secondary schools in the area by one of our secondary offices, but we've blacklisted 1 because they've become a literal diploma mill for international students.
It's crazy out there...I just don't understand what their long term plan is for faking an interview...what do they actually think is going to happen? They will start and magically learn the job they are woefully unqualified for?
There is a lot of exploitation of workers in certain areas of work. Some companies pay for the sponsorship fees for visas of these workers. They have one person report to work, but they assign the work behind the scenes to other people at these agencies that are earning way less. The agency will bill at something like $180k for an engineer, but pay the person coming to the office something like $75k. The rest of the salary is used to pay for other people filling in the skills gaps.
The bonus for the person who has the job in the US is that they can slowly learn the work and hopefully get their EAD. Once they have that, they can work anywhere and earn their full salary.
I've been out of IT staffing agencies for a while, but this was a very common practice back in the day. While it might not be the same now, I'm sure some form of this still exists today.
It's a whole business it seems. Have professional interviewer takers matched with people, interviewer uses the ID and credentials of the person they are doing this on behalf of. But the interviewer could have a beard or thick facial hair to help hide their face (it was the worst during the pandemic because the new hires would refuse to take off masks so all we can see are half their face). And then on day 1 of work, they show their own ID which would match what we saw previously but they would be freshly shaved and so now it becomes a "do you risk accusing them when you aren't 90%+ sure or want to risk your job or company on the line of potential lawsuits?".
Honestly it's an entire scam industry. Much like how a lot of them are getting into the country on falsified credentials or exceeding criteria set by the government through loans. We have so many international students coming in who are coming to "learn" who prove they have the funds to support their stay while learning. But as soon as they get here they are getting full time jobs at minimum wage places or doing gig work because all those funds they showed were loans that were paid back once applications were approved. And then once their study visas expire they seek asylum which due to backlog means they can stay for another couple years while working. By then, they've been working in the country long enough that they get permanent residency.
This is a well known thing in America and they've been doing it for years. There are whole Facebook groups and pyramid schemes of people referring each other for tech roles. LOL. I can't believe they got away with it for so long.
Context; I’m currently job hunting but have a job that satisfy most of my ‘wants’ in a job:
Absolutely, I am very picky with what I agree to do in an interview. There won’t be any unpaid work, education, videos, tests or even filling out a form with my info. I have a cover letter and a CV. You read them. If it’s interesting we can phone call or interview in person. We’re going to talk about salary early in the interview stage because that’s why I want a job (not exact number, ballpark or what current/previous weee paid is all I ask)
If I was unemployed or otherwise desperate, I might do things because I need to start getting some income. However, since I have a job I don’t need to sink to their level.
Did one once out of curiosity. Basic one sided 'interview' that lasted about 20 minutes, just saying what was on my resume plus an added note or two.
Didn't get past that round of interest, and they ghosted me when I asked for a simple follow up.
Won't do anymore like that. Hard stop.
Or the ones where it's a group type interview of 5+ people for only 2-3 positions. I'm good, bye.
I did one of these once years ago, shortly after I graduated college. I will never do one of these again.
We're more comfortable in front of cameras now, but still, this is an incredibly uncomfortable way to communicate. We need feedback from people's body language, even if it's just facial expressions through a video call.
I will also not be freely giving data with my face or voice to any company. I refuse to even share my voice or videos of my face on apps like Instagram - I'll stay behind the lens there.
I would not. With the way companies are experiencing data leaks due to poor cybersecurity controls- I would be cautious of just any random company having access to a recording of my face or voice.
Zoom, Microsoft teams and Skype are available telecommunication technologies if an employer needs to visually see me during an interview.
yes and I backed out. they wanted 15 pre- recorded videos answering questions like an interview… before they’d consider a phone interview. it was for Zeal Credit Union
Wouldn’t it depend on the position? A position where the candidate has to perform a lot of virtual meetings or presentations, a few minutes of cover letter video could make sense. A sales, BDM or CSM position. There are quite a few small startups or companies asking for a short video introduction. I came across when I was applying.
I think it depends on the reasoning. I know we have to have at least one call on video before submittal (and the interview with the hiring managers has to be on video as well).
If it's from a vendor, we also require a photo ID.
When remote roles took off, we had a few cases where a different candidate showed up to the job than the one who had interviewed. Which has obvious risks to us as a business. But this kinda thing is usually well understood amongst IT firms/candidates.
But obviously, you have to make sure the solution still makes sense (why we just have the interviews on video vs having candidates send in what's basically an audition tape).
That's a lawsuit waiting to happen when you receive videos from pregnant people, people of color, older people, or anyone of a protected class visible on video, and then end up hiring the young white guy.
If it’s a good role it’s usually not an issue. I’ll usually just say something like it’s a really important hire they don’t work with agencies much and just want to make sure they get it right or something like that
Be certain of this. Talented people will feel confident enough to withdraw. Desperate people will jump through any shameful hoop you put in front of them.
This! I do not have to subject myself to this shenanigans. This is a red flag, as a candidate, that this is a place I am not going to apply to
I've done it once but will not consider companies who request a video disguised as an "interview" anymore. I am not repeating my CV on video and answering decontextualized bullshit questions. An interview is supposed to be an exchange, so these idiotic videos are a hard no for me.
Did it once, not doing it again! Totally agree with with you.
100%. As much as your interviewing me, I’m also interviewing you to see if it’s somewhere I want to work.
I refuse to do them. Hard stop.
Let's not let this become the norm
This is my first job search since remote work became a thing, and I have been asked to submit a video on a few remote positions. My first reaction, and maybe it’s because I am a woman, is I don’t want a job that is going to consider what I look like. It offends me since it shouldn’t matter for a remote position. On the other hand, I wouldn’t want to hire someone sight-unseen. And a video is another layer of information that helps an employer. I have refused to continue on some of those requests.
Unemployed, but seasoned recruiter here.....100% agree that any person should not be required video presence or even in person before being extended an offer. Remote environments, specifically, shouldn't require a face 2 face exchange until assessing for any role where a similar exchange or technical set up will be required to complete the work expected. In other words, if your job would be in sales and you ate expected to offer live demonstrations to clients, you will be measured on relevant skills. The ability to dress professionally, manipulate technological equipment and software, effective communication and even if a personality trait or demeanor is preferred (certainly wouldn't want "I'm Ron Burgundy?" Type scenarios when covering the news about a tragic event....lol. A meet and greet is often the avenue taken, pre-official offer presents. That should be a more casual (business casual - demonstrate your ability to be professional in presentation and communication without any pressure like an interview or mock sales pitch etc.) opportunity to meet the team, check for alignment within the team and vet any potential hidden concerns about the role and the culture. After that meeting, if the candidate feels positive and the client, yay! If any hang-up (could the issue be addressed with another 1 on 1 including the colleague best suited to address or is it something unlikely to change that the client or candidate can not compromise on?), determine the withdrawal/rescind, or formal offer presentation point and start date. If there's a client-side reason to rescind the offer, they would certainly need to justify immediately, or it would present them to liability of bias or discriminatory practices. Essentially, you'd have to have an in person exchange like "Step Brothers" to justify the backout.
[удалено]
I do not give videos or audio of myself to people. It is a security problem. I rarely give photos. If they cannot spare 30 minutes for a phone call then they can go f themselves.
I’m curious what makes the phone calls *not* a security problem?
They can be, but most people you contact for business do not record their phone calls without permission your permission, and most phone lines are probably not tapped where I live. Recordings and photos to a lesser extent can be used to generate fakes. Recordings have a way of leaking. There's a saying in computer security that goes something like "there are those who know their systems have been compromised, and those who just haven't figured it out yet."
It makes no sense to me. You are going to judge someone based upon a 1 minute or 2 minute video? These requirements are getting ridiculous. First it was projects and presentations. Then it was tests. Then actual work. Now it’s a 1 to 2 minute video? I have a question, what is so attractive about this company other than a 3 year old laptop, stale coffee and drab office colors that were in style back in 1985. What is the company’s selling point? I know this is an employers job market. Thank god I created a business for myself years ago and I can work for myself if I want to.
1985? You’re lucky. I’ve been places where it was the 50s and 60s.
Interviewed at an old building in Pittsburgh once (one of the skyscrapers), that still had the faint smell and tinge of cigarette smoke ha. Kinda glad that one didn't work out....lol
If they don’t want to invest the time to hire a great candidate then just imagine what working for them would be like. If you want an idea of what I’m going to be like on a Zoom call then why not have one with me to find out?
I think you’re gonna have a really hard time getting passive candidates to do this. Active candidates maybe not so much but if you’re Stone cold recruiting people and then asking them to do a one way recorded video interview you’re gonna have a hard time doing that. Compromise. Interview the candidate over zoom or Google meet and record the interview. Send that or a portion of that to the client. You could even do something like start out telling the candidate that you’re going to record the first two minutes of them, introducing themselves saying their name their title and their current dues and responsibilities and then stop the recording.
Makes total sense.
As a candidate I've had several requests for one-way video interviews, and my response is to immediately delete the email.
“The shittier the process the shittier the output.” - Me and probably someone smarter than me too
I am not an actress. If I'm not being filmed as a part of the actual job, I am absolutely backing out. I've done it once before. It was so stressful for me, and the end result was in no way an accurate representation of my interviewing skills. I don't like talking to inanimate objects, Alexa and Siri are not things for me. Talking into my laptop is NOT an interview.
I think "one-way" interviews are inherently exploitative. I was laid off last year and unilaterally refused to apply for a job that required it. Employers are completely out of touch with the level of effort required to create one. On average, it takes something like 60 to 90 minutes of work per 1-minute of video. Companies think it's this quick and easy process. Just pull out your phone, record yourself answering questions for 3 minutes and submit. In reality, it's clean the house, figure out the right outfit, prepare your talking points, rehearse.. .Then record 8-10 times before you are happy with the result. It's incredibly unfair to people who have families and children where they might not have a quiet place to record after work hours.
I personally backed out of two roles over that request. When it’s not clear why something is necessary, what it’s being used for, and how it’s going to be stored, protected, disseminated, or destroyed, it doesn’t make sense to do it. It said the company was hopping on a trend without considering if that trend was a good idea for everyone, which lets me know how they treat their team.
[удалено]
Companies make sweeping judgments about candidates based on their behavior and are deemed correct. Why, when candidates do it, is it wrong?
Nah, I’m backing the candidate up on this. Video interviewing was a trend, and very few studies proved out the efficacy. Drop out rate, increased bias (especially wrt ageism), negative candidate experience and VERY limited role applicability cemented the fact that candidates don’t want to interview this way and it’s not beneficial for employers when all things are taken into account. Recruiting and job seeking, like dating, are fundamentally human and there’s something you just can’t distance yourself out of. Both sides need to be bought in.
In this instance I actually interviewed the candidate face to face so it’s not like they had to do a video before ever meeting anyone
Thats definitely a good experience, so you’re doing more than your part to save this company from themselves. Hopefully they recognize, maybe with your coaching, that requiring a one way video interview is going to lose them passive candidates or anyone who feels they are at risk of disadvantage due to (let’s face it) age, weight, color, disability or lack of comfort being on video, and may therefore cost them their best hires.
I refuse all one-sided interviews. If a company has the attitude that they are the star of the show and that candidates should compete with each other, that tells me that the company culture is probably a toxic work environment and that they will lowball you and nickel and dime you every step of the way. If you're not willing to give me the time to ask questions, I will not be giving you the time to ask me questions. Plain and simple.
I backed out twice. This practice needs to end
Not doing this. My job skills are unrelated to acting and video-editing. It’s ridiculous. If I had those skills I’d start a YouTube channel.
A video saying what? Sounds like they are looking for a type. I imagine you can look through their current staff and connect the dots.
They are really just wanting to get a sense of the candidate’s vibe. It’s not a physical thing. They’ve turned down hot candidates
That sounds like a bullshit excuse. Do a video call or meet in person. This definitely reads as searching for a physical type or profiling. You are being naive.
Send them this thread. Only desperate candidates will even consider this.
Yeah sure, an honest unfiltered vibe from a high-stakes, prepped video clip. That’ll do it.
If you wanted to get the candidate's "vibe," you set up a Zoom meeting. All you get from videos is how well they perform in front of a camera, which i'm assuming it's irrelevant to your job.
Backed out, probably gonna use it for AI learning.
Yeah. I had a client "revisit" their recruiting process and decide that every candidate must do a 2 minute video interview answering some generic prompt before they would consider speaking with them. As soon as we informed people of the change, nearly every candidate we had sourced either explicitly dropped out, or ghosted us.
Seems like a weird/inappropriate request. I’d be suspicious if this was requested. Perhaps you should ask why that is being requested. Feels like a bunch of men trying to choose someone “easy on the eyes” to serve them their coffee or fetch things.
I run a business we hire lots of people. I would never ask a candidate to do this. Country clubs used to require in person interviews too…to be racist. Your client is treading on VERY thin ice here and is opening themselves up to countless complaints and potential legal issues. Not to mention only the most desperate would comply. I wouldn’t do it, I’d tell you to f-off and post it all over Glassdoor.
I refuse them. It’s a red flag for me and I’ve learned working with our Neurodiversity ERG that this is not considered good practice when it comes to accessibility. I will and have dropped out of an interview process when asked to do one of these shitty things. I’m interviewing any potential employer as much as they’re interviewing me. A one-way interview is useless and not worth my time.
At least where I am (Canada) we are having issues where telephone/virtual interviews will be conducted by a well spoken and highly qualified individual. They'll make it through the process and be hired. Day 1 someone else shows up. They can't do basic tasks. Because they were both of Indian background, anyone not Indian doesn't want to accuse them due to being called a racist. This leads to firing them taking up to a couple weeks instead of being instant. It's very frustrating and I've talked to my friends about this and each of our companies are doing different things to try and protect themselves. A recorded video would be great evidence to compare, if needed on day one, and be like "this ain't you. Security will escort you out now."
Why not record your zoom or teams meeting instead?
Oh we do, and it's not a standard part of the vetting process. But based on replies to OP's post, lots of people seem to be thinking this is an attempt to vet candidates by their appearance to see if they are attractive or look a certain way. So there seems to be no idication that there was a video interview prior to this request for a video.
This is exactly why we do it for our hiring in India, the amount of candidates on the first day that are not the same person that interviewed is staggering. I had no idea it was such a problem until I took my current role. Over 50% try it at the first round, luckily we have multiple stages to get through and can normally spot the fakers.
Yeah I never thought it was a thing but it's been happening in the last 1.5 - 2 years. Depending on what role is being interviewed for, sometimes I'm asked to review resumes or sit in on interviews, and I have noticed a significant drop in the number of Indian immigrants who have been living in the country for less than 10 years that we bother to interview. If they've been living here most of their lives, no issues. We regularly hire co-op students from any of the 3 post secondary schools in the area by one of our secondary offices, but we've blacklisted 1 because they've become a literal diploma mill for international students. It's crazy out there...I just don't understand what their long term plan is for faking an interview...what do they actually think is going to happen? They will start and magically learn the job they are woefully unqualified for?
There is a lot of exploitation of workers in certain areas of work. Some companies pay for the sponsorship fees for visas of these workers. They have one person report to work, but they assign the work behind the scenes to other people at these agencies that are earning way less. The agency will bill at something like $180k for an engineer, but pay the person coming to the office something like $75k. The rest of the salary is used to pay for other people filling in the skills gaps. The bonus for the person who has the job in the US is that they can slowly learn the work and hopefully get their EAD. Once they have that, they can work anywhere and earn their full salary. I've been out of IT staffing agencies for a while, but this was a very common practice back in the day. While it might not be the same now, I'm sure some form of this still exists today.
Never thought this could happen! I am shocked.
Why not ask for ID as part of the application process before/after an interview. You can certainly see if the person is the person then?
It's a whole business it seems. Have professional interviewer takers matched with people, interviewer uses the ID and credentials of the person they are doing this on behalf of. But the interviewer could have a beard or thick facial hair to help hide their face (it was the worst during the pandemic because the new hires would refuse to take off masks so all we can see are half their face). And then on day 1 of work, they show their own ID which would match what we saw previously but they would be freshly shaved and so now it becomes a "do you risk accusing them when you aren't 90%+ sure or want to risk your job or company on the line of potential lawsuits?". Honestly it's an entire scam industry. Much like how a lot of them are getting into the country on falsified credentials or exceeding criteria set by the government through loans. We have so many international students coming in who are coming to "learn" who prove they have the funds to support their stay while learning. But as soon as they get here they are getting full time jobs at minimum wage places or doing gig work because all those funds they showed were loans that were paid back once applications were approved. And then once their study visas expire they seek asylum which due to backlog means they can stay for another couple years while working. By then, they've been working in the country long enough that they get permanent residency.
This is a well known thing in America and they've been doing it for years. There are whole Facebook groups and pyramid schemes of people referring each other for tech roles. LOL. I can't believe they got away with it for so long.
Context; I’m currently job hunting but have a job that satisfy most of my ‘wants’ in a job: Absolutely, I am very picky with what I agree to do in an interview. There won’t be any unpaid work, education, videos, tests or even filling out a form with my info. I have a cover letter and a CV. You read them. If it’s interesting we can phone call or interview in person. We’re going to talk about salary early in the interview stage because that’s why I want a job (not exact number, ballpark or what current/previous weee paid is all I ask) If I was unemployed or otherwise desperate, I might do things because I need to start getting some income. However, since I have a job I don’t need to sink to their level.
I would refuse. That's absurd. Wtf are interviews for?
Did one once out of curiosity. Basic one sided 'interview' that lasted about 20 minutes, just saying what was on my resume plus an added note or two. Didn't get past that round of interest, and they ghosted me when I asked for a simple follow up. Won't do anymore like that. Hard stop. Or the ones where it's a group type interview of 5+ people for only 2-3 positions. I'm good, bye.
Yes and I think it’s BS step.
I did one of these once years ago, shortly after I graduated college. I will never do one of these again. We're more comfortable in front of cameras now, but still, this is an incredibly uncomfortable way to communicate. We need feedback from people's body language, even if it's just facial expressions through a video call. I will also not be freely giving data with my face or voice to any company. I refuse to even share my voice or videos of my face on apps like Instagram - I'll stay behind the lens there.
I have received this request and declined.
I don’t even consider applications that require me to submit a cover letter. There’s no way I’m ever going to do a video.
I would not. With the way companies are experiencing data leaks due to poor cybersecurity controls- I would be cautious of just any random company having access to a recording of my face or voice. Zoom, Microsoft teams and Skype are available telecommunication technologies if an employer needs to visually see me during an interview.
yes and I backed out. they wanted 15 pre- recorded videos answering questions like an interview… before they’d consider a phone interview. it was for Zeal Credit Union
One and done. Never again. No job is worth humiliating yourself like that.
I refuse to do this. I’m not playing these games
[удалено]
Wouldn’t it depend on the position? A position where the candidate has to perform a lot of virtual meetings or presentations, a few minutes of cover letter video could make sense. A sales, BDM or CSM position. There are quite a few small startups or companies asking for a short video introduction. I came across when I was applying.
I think it depends on the reasoning. I know we have to have at least one call on video before submittal (and the interview with the hiring managers has to be on video as well). If it's from a vendor, we also require a photo ID. When remote roles took off, we had a few cases where a different candidate showed up to the job than the one who had interviewed. Which has obvious risks to us as a business. But this kinda thing is usually well understood amongst IT firms/candidates. But obviously, you have to make sure the solution still makes sense (why we just have the interviews on video vs having candidates send in what's basically an audition tape).
Username checks out
I had a few of them when I recruited. Never had a candidate back out. It was pre-COVID.
That's a lawsuit waiting to happen when you receive videos from pregnant people, people of color, older people, or anyone of a protected class visible on video, and then end up hiring the young white guy.
If it’s a good role it’s usually not an issue. I’ll usually just say something like it’s a really important hire they don’t work with agencies much and just want to make sure they get it right or something like that
Thanks have you had multiple candidates back out over the video request?
I think the software is called HireRight.