It kind of sucks when you find out that the world doesn't work as you've been taught it should. Today at work, we interviewed some potential new hires. There was one woman who was by far and away the best candidate. She had the paper qualifications, the brains, the confidence, and the enthusiasm.

My boss decided to use her enthusiasm against her. Since she really really wants this job, we can pay her less! We’ll offer her the rock bottom starting salary on our scale, below what she would normally command with her experience, because she’s so darned eager. What a bargain! Luckily, my supervisor talked her out of it.

1. Wow.
2. Forehead-to-palm-to-keyboard-to-monitor.
3. People like this exist, and they’re in charge of things.

Well, so much for meritocracy. Is there anything else that's sucky about adulthood that I should know about?

The world isn't fair, good things only happen to bad people, all pleasures in life will be small, and the only reward for niceness is more people taking advantage of you.

I think that probably sums up all the hopeful ways we try to teach our kids the world should but doesn't work.

Kea, you're a little older than me, but when you post I feel we're learning similar lessons at the same pace.

Lesson: always wear a suit to a job interview, because people are terribly shallow

How I learned:
I was pulled as an advisor for the final interviews for a new Marketing writer, because I'm the tech writer and I'm one of the view people here with a strictly writing background. The graphic designer was also pulled, since the writer would be working with her a LOT. Two candidates were left, and everyone was stumped; couldn't choose between Bob and Mary but leaning towards Bob.

So, in two consecutive days I interview both Bob and Mary.

Bob is cocky at first -- he's well spoken, confident, besuited. And he thinks nothing of me (I think because I look a bit younger than I am IRL, or at least did at the time of his interview *cough*). Then I start asking questions and he starts getting nervous. He keeps giving me non answers when I ask about styles he's familiar with, whether he's worked in groups before, how often he's been given tight deadlines. And I glance through his portfolio -- all VERY bland, if serviceable, samples. His PR pieces in particular were very cut and dry. I'm a tech writer, I'm all about cut and dry, but not when we're trying to sell our product. I'm not impressed.

Then I interview Mary. Mary is well spoken, confident -- and no suit. Khakis and a polo shirt, hair rumpled, brown boots. She's pleasant to talk to, has an easy personality. Answers all of my questions with ease. And her portfolio was outstanding, along with her style, which she obviously knew how to mold to fit her audiences. I was HIGHLY impressed, and frankly I knew I could learn from her (seeing as I'd only been working for reals about 2 years at that point.)

I gave my advice (and graphic designer was with me on the advice), completely flummoxed as to why Bob was in any way still in the running. Mary was hired, and she's been pretty much awesome and inventive at her job. A godsend, I believe she's been called. Not to mention a pleasure to work with.

Months and months later, I was speaking to my supervisor, and the interview came up. It was, without any doubt, the suit that kept Bob in the running. Mary's lack of slick interview clothes, despite her obvious superiority and her excellent references, lowered the confidence of the other interviewers that she was professional enough for the job. AND if not for graphic designer's and my input, THE SUIT WOULD HAVE BEEN HIRED. The VP was the only holdout, and he was waffling, so asked for more opinions! They would have shot themselves in the foot, not to mention dragged down the whole department (Mary's post is pretty much load bearing), for a friggin' suit.

Wow.

I think this explains why the suit was almost hired, Weatherwax. It's actually surprisingly easy to sound like you know what you're talking about with bland non-answers when the other person does not know what they're talking about. If the other interviewers do not have a writing background (or know enough about technical writing), they wouldn't have been able to get beyond his "well spoken, confident, suited" territory in order to force him into "nervousness, bland non-answers".

As I see it, the moral of the story is: Always include at least one person who knows the technical aspects of the job being interviewed for in the interview process.

CCC, good moral.

I suppose I've also learned that with a good VP and good management, you get a good work environment and efficient workers.

My fear, and other life lesson, is knowing that my workplace (and my department within my workplace) is not how things always are. I imagine that when it's time for me to move on, I'll be SUPREMELY lucky to find another place where the VP has the sense to ask for a second opinion during interviews (and so showing he has the sense to run the department well).

Weatherwax, something similar nearly happened here, too. We've actually been trying to hire someone for a while. It's hard to find someone with all the skills we need, and who is willing to work for not all that much money. (Which is why it was especially appalling that the boss wanted to stiff the girl out of a decent salary - it's not like good candidates are a dime a dozen).

I learned that suits really do make a good impression, but they won't save you if you're hopeless. However, they will keep you in the running if you are mediocre. The woman we are hiring is a total tomboy; she showed up in cargo pants and a plaid shirt. I wasn't at the interview myself, but my coworkers who were said that she was clearly really smart, so I'm glad her appearance didn't turn out to be too much of a disadvantage. However, her closest competitor was a girl who dressed up in a skirt and heels and suit jacket, but was an airhead. A pleasant smile, a sweet demeanor and a perfect American accent kept her going through the first round, but the second interview revealed her lack of substance.

I also learned that you ain't gonna get hired in this job if you have a thick Cantonese accent/dialect, no matter how smart you are. If you don't sound the part, you ain't getting hired. Which means that all I really had to do to get myself hired was to speak in coherent semi-intelligent sentences.

Never EVER try to exceed expectations. Odds are you won't get any special notice, just higher expectations from then on.

Woosh. That accent thing is a toughy. Ridcully's been pulled in for interviews where the people become immediately cooler towards him once he opens his mouth to speak. (Note: he's perfectly intelligible, has perfect grammar and a very high vocabulary. But his accent is strong enough to be noticeably Russian.)

I have to admit, though, I'm scratching my head at how employers in a Chinese city would knock off interview points because the interviewee speaks accented English (??). Is this a Hong-Kong-was-a-British-colony thing?

EDIT to add: I hope miss cargo gets hired. Maybe you'll have a non-tool co-worker finally.

So f-ing true.

It's a classist thing. There's the well-educated semi-British Hong Kong accent, and then there's taxi-driver English.


One of my coworkers is all right, though she's a bit on the neurotic side. Mr. Picky Staples Poncy Git isn't so bad anymore, I think he just had to get used to me. We get along fairly well now. It's just the boss who's the pain in the arse.

Tsh. Life Lesson: Everyone everywhere on Earth has an accent they consider "low class." Have that accent? good luck finding a white-collar job.

EDIT:



Glad for the update! I'm pleased the whole office isn't against you anymore, because seriously, they sounded pretty douchy. Douchesque.

Poor supervisors are easier to handle with comrades at arms.

I have to admit, I'm surprised that anyone would turn up to a job interview not wearing a suit. I guess for something very blue-collar, business-casual might be acceptable, but in general interview clothes = smartest thing you own short of actual formalwear*. I have a couple of suits but even of those I would only wear the wool one for an interview; the linen one, while awesome, is too casual for an interview.

*I suspect if I wore my tailcoat to an interview they'd think I was taking the piss.

Well, in Mary's defense she claims she didn't have the cash for nicer clothes until she got this job. A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT conversation brought this up! Someone complimented her new wardrobe, and she replied with details about her condition before her employment here.

I don't even own a suit (well, I do, but it's 15 years old and I doubt it still fits). OTOH, most lawyers in New Mexico don't wear suits either, so I'm not sure why I should be expected to wear one to an interview.

When I was younger I used to be highly upset about what I considered all the hoop-jumping in life. But as I get older, I've come to see that style can be indicative of substance --or at least suggestive of it. If someone wears a suit to a job it may not mean hesh is a good candidate, but it does mean hesh takes the interview seriously, has interviewed for jobs before, and wants to make a good impression.

In my current job I work with a lot of different clients. Some places I go, I dress up in a full suit and tie because it matches the local corporate culture. Other work environments, a suit and tie would stick out, and not in a good way.

In my other job, with my church, I was actually asked to dress less formally. I grew up in a church where everyone wore suits every Sunday. But in my new church, a lot of people would find it intimidating and unwelcoming if the staff dressed up all the time.



They don't have thrift stores where you live? Especially for someone in Marketing, whose job is to meet the expectations of the client, you would think she'd have a good handle on the need to look the part --in that sense, the employer is the first client.

I've been thinking about this in relationship to myself recently. I'm a terrible salesman. But my role in my job is as a web designer. And why do people want websites? Usually it's so they can sell themselves to the client. I've realized I need to make sure my project proposals are themselves more polished and professional.

Like Mary, rumpled competence is kind of my brand --which fortunately works great at my workplace. But to be honest, there's a bit of arrogance behind that. It means that you think you're so superior that it's the other person's job to figure out how superior you are.