Strange Interview Behavior

[Resume Writer]

Hi Everyone,

Found this article and thought you might find it interesting what some people do on job interviews. It also has some common sense advice.

One area it talks about is people either not showing up for an interview or calling to reschedule. I see nothing wrong with calling to reschedule - as long as it is for a good reason.

One piece of advice I always give my clients is to bring a cell phone with them (leave it in the car though), with the name of the person interviewing you. If you get a flat tire or are in an accident on the way, always call the interviewer to let them know. Not calling is definitely the kiss of death.

Remember, the hiring manager community is as small as the aviation community. They talk and you do not want a bad reputation.

Kathy

Weirdest Interview Behavior


By Kate Lorenz, CareerBuilder.com Editor

"This guy walked into the interview wearing his swim trunks... "

Lest you think that's the opening line of a really bad joke, it's in fact one example of many given to CareerBuilder.com detailing job seekers' bizarre behavior, odd habits and complete lack of social graces.

The interview is the most critical point in the job search process. While you might look great on paper, the real test starts when you get in front a hiring manager. You've got the skills, now you need to prove that you'll be a good fit with your future co-workers and company. And it's oh-so-easy to sabotage that much-coveted and highly-valuable face time.

According to a recent CareerBuilder.com survey of 866 hiring managers, almost 70 percent recalled unusual conduct of job candidates. While the usual suspects did come up, some of their experiences were downright jaw-dropping. Here are some examples of how not to behave in an interview:

What Not to Wear
Clothes make the man (or woman) and what you wear has a direct impression on a hiring manager. Comfortable clothes will curb your nervousness, but that doesn't mean you should wear a housecoat and slippers like one job seeker did. The company dress policy may be casual, but save the Goth clothes and socks with slippers until you get the job. If you're hitting the beach after your interview, it doesn't give you license to wear your bathing suit and flip flops. And seriously guys, the flashy medallion on a bed of chest hair will not impress anyone.

Without a Trace
"Eighty percent of success is showing up," said filmmaker Woody Allen. So what happens when you don't even show up for your first step to success? Employers reported numerous interview absences -- candidates arrived late, asked to reschedule, didn't show up, left to feed a parking meter or simply just walked out and never came back. Needless to say, these job seekers did not receive a job offer.

I'm With the Band
Unless you're in need of a seeing eye dog, you shouldn't bring an animal or another person with you to an interview. It seems like common sense. Nevertheless, many a job seeker has brought a companion along on the interview including a child, spouse, friend, pet and even the entire family. An invitation to a job interview never includes a guest.

Have You Tried Hypnosis?
They might be normal to you, but to others, some personal habits are downright scary. Those things you do in the privacy of your own home are not meant to come out in front of someone you are trying to impress. During an interview candidates have chewed gum, lit cigarrettes, picked their nails, passed gas, burped, picked their noses, scratched various body parts, laughed erratically and even spit. Make sure to check this behavior at the door.

Time to Call Dr. Phil
One big interview no-no is talking negatively about your last job. Some job seekers seem to complain about their negative job experiences to anyone, including potential employers. Gripes included expressing hatred toward their last job, lamenting about personal problems that got the candidate fired from her previous job, complaining that his previous job was too demanding, admitting she was fired for not going to work, and divulging that a recommendation from the last boss was out of the question.

Intoxicating Behavior
Some things are strictly taboo at work, and you should behave in an interview like you would on the job. Alcohol impairs your judgment, as do drugs (not to mention they're against the law). They should be off limits -- but some job seekers don't think so. Job seekers openly admitted drug use and arrived at the interview high, intoxicated or hung over. One thirsty candidate requested whiskey, while another simply brought his own wine. Another asked if he would get the job even if he didn't pass drug test. And one candidate just left the interview after finding out about company drug testing.

Truth is Stranger Than Fiction
And then there are the incidents that are just plain bizarre, perhaps provoked by ambition, a desire to impress, or anxiety. One candidate constructed a shoebox diorama of himself on the job. Another did a Ben Stiller imitation. One job seeker offered a sexual favor to the interviewer. Still another knitted during the entire interview. And another barked at the hiring manager.

 

[Goose Egg]

...or simply just walked out and never came back. Needless to say, these job seekers did not receive a job offer.

I'm guessing that at this point, they probably didn't want a job offer.

And another barked at the hiring manager.

There's something that I wish I could do sometimes!

-Goose

 

[User546]

Kathy, I got a question for you after reading that. Of course we all know that talking negative about your previous boss or job is a big no-no, but what is the "right" way to address an overly bad job or company?

Case in point. Before I started flying, I worked for a company that (thru the process of my job) put me in a very uncomfortable position of doing very unethical practices. I went along with the job for a few months, then I finally got on the Head of HR's bad side for refusing to do something, and it all went downhill quick from there. Before it was over with, I was so miserable with my job, I ended up taking a few days off that I was told I couldn't by the HR lady. When I came back, much to my pleasure, I was fired on the spot. Which was fine, because I was starting full-time flight school in less then a month.

I also signed a piece of paper (totally stupid of me in hindsight - but I was so relieved just to finally get out of there, I didn't see any harm in it) that WAY over-exaggerated the reason for which I was fired. Reasons which might come back to haunt me later on. My question to this is, when a future aviation employer calls her, are they going to be able to have access to the reason I was fired in any detail, or is it just going to be the "we wouldn't / we would rehire him" routine.

This has been bothering me for some time, so if you could take the time, I'd really be glad to hear what you have to say. And how do you make that nightmare of a job sound "positive" especially the part about leaving to a future employer?

Thanks.

 

[HiFlyChick]

I'm guessing that at this point, they probably didn't want a job offer.

You'd think that, but I worked at a company one time that gave its potential programmers a (simple) programming test. After talking to the boss, the candidate was shown to a vacant office and given an hour to rough out two very simple (i.e. a few dozen line) programs. After about 10 min, the boss ran into the candidate waiting for the elevator. "Where are you going?" he said. The guy's response.. "I know how to program - I don't need to do any test..." Right. Sure.

 

[moxiepilot]

Of course we all know that talking negative about your previous boss or job is a big no-no, but what is the "right" way to address an overly bad job or company?

If you have to address it, stick to the facts and your reasons for doing what you did. Let the HR rep determine the ethicalness of the situation by stating this is what was requested of me and these were the reasons why I could not preform in that role...

I also signed a piece of paper (totally stupid of me in hindsight - but I was so relieved just to finally get out of there, I didn't see any harm in it) that WAY over-exaggerated the reason for which I was fired.

you can always ask if they may get intouch with your previous employer. If they respond yes then you can further expand and give them more of a heads up. But, it may raise a flag if you ask. Guess you gotta weigh the situation.

My question to this is, when a future aviation employer calls her, are they going to be able to have access to the reason I was fired in any detail, or is it just going to be the "we wouldn't / we would rehire him" routine.

Technically I think that is all they can ask - this is speculation though I don't know the law. Reality though is that a good impression can be given without stating the reason the former employee was fired.

And how do you make that nightmare of a job sound "positive" especially the part about leaving to a future employer?

Thanks.

point out your strengths , just like any other part of the interview. be ready for the "so what did you like about this last job the least" question so that you can prepare some tact.

 

[jetexas]

Years ago I heard about a guy at a UAL interview. He had a hand puppet and insisted that the interviewers direct their questions "at the puppet". I also heard he wasn't a very good ventriliquist.

A friend of mine interviewed at UAL some years back and said that one of the two interviewers put her head on the desk and went to sleep mid-interview. I think I would have gotten up and shook her awake.

 

[Resume Writer]

User997,


There are several issues here that need to be addressed. Since I do not know the whole story, it is hard for me to address it specifically.

Regarding the employer being able to trash you, most HR people will not do that. However, the law does not protect you if the employer has less than 50 people. If the former company does trash you, you might be able to sue for defamation and slander, if the allegations are untrue. Not sure who the burden of proof would be on, but I believe it is the employer since they slandered you. Be careful with lawuits though. If a future employer calls the former employer, and the former says that they cannot comment as they are in legal action with you, that will not look good!

Further, if you committed any "crimes" then they do have the right to disclose that. There is a legal precedent set for that.

There was a case where an employee was embezzling from a previous company. No charges were filed, but the guy was terminated. When the potential company (company B) called for a reference, the former employer (company A) did not disclose the offense. Company B hired the person and he embezzled from them. Company B found out that Company A knew, and they successfully sued Company A, since they should have disclosed that information.

If you want to know what your former company is saying about you, then hire a reference checking company. I work with one, and there is a link to their service on my website at www.awriteresume.com/pilot.htm Have them call the former employer and record the call. (legality of this depends on your state laws) If they cannot record the call for legal reasons, they can take good notes.

The other approach you can take is to put down a person that you worked with that was perhaps a direct supervisor - someone you got along with. Since your former employer is not an airline, you do not have to put down your "chief pilot" and this approach may work.


I worked with a person through interview coaching regarding his termination from an airline. It was pretty complicated, but we were able to craft an answer that had him taking responsibility without trashing the former employer. It worked and he got hired with another airline. Previous to coming to me, he had been trashing the former employer and never got calls back after interviews - just turndown letters.

It is tempting to trash a former employer. But put yourself on the other side of the table. The hiring people are going to wonder if you will trash them later.

Kathy

 

[Resume Writer]

A friend of mine interviewed at UAL some years back and said that one of the two interviewers put her head on the desk and went to sleep mid-interview. I think I would have gotten up and shook her awake.

Jetexas,

Curious - did your friend get hired? The reason I ask is I was wondering if she REALLY fell asleep or was it some kind of test to see if he would wake up a fellow pilot.

Kathy

 

[Ill Mitch]

Jetexas,

Curious - did your friend get hired? The reason I ask is I was wondering if she REALLY fell asleep or was it some kind of test to see if he would wake up a fellow pilot.

Kathy

Or just to see how the interviewee would react to an unusual situation. Not necessarily to see if they would wake someone up, just to see if they got nervous, lost their focus or a little flustered at the situation.
Personally, I would be amused...but wouldn't show it.

 

[User546]

Thank you very much for the advice Kathy!

 

[Resume Writer]

Or just to see how the interviewee would react to an unusual situation. Not necessarily to see if they would wake someone up, just to see if they got nervous, lost their focus or a little flustered at the situation.
Personally, I would be amused...but wouldn't show it.

The type of interview that fits most closely to this is called the confrontational interview or "good cop/bad cop." One person is really nice, the other is a jerk. The purpose of this type of interview is to see how you react to someone that is not "nice." There is validity to this type of interview, especially in customer service type jobs. Just be ready for one of these types of interviews, don't let your feathers get ruffled and keep your same nice demeanor - no matter what they throw at you.

Kathy

 

[Resume Writer]

Thank you very much for the advice Kathy!

Your welcome!

Kathy

 

[jetexas]

He didn't get hired. From what I was told, he just ignored the fact that she fell asleep and continued to talk to the other interviewer. She was acting totally disinterested and looked very tired anyway. I think they were giving him hell for being 6 hours off on his flight times as well (which is likely another 'test' they used at the time).

Personally, I would have been a bit angered that she was insulting my career efforts by being disrespectful. I might have gotten up and awakened her or said something to her,...or even dig around in my briefcase to see if there was a police whistle or duck call I could use. : )

 

[Resume Writer]

I would most likely have said something and they were probably waiting for him to say something. Since he did not, they probably questioned his judgment.


I would have perhaps made a comment such as, "Wow, all this hiring must really have you worn out. I can certainly understand, as sometimes we get too tired to perform our job, in which case we have the company find someone to replace us since safety is of the utmost importance. If you are too tired to continue, is there someone that can take your place?"

Might be kind of rude, but I would be very upset if someone fell asleep during my interview; especially after working so hard to get to that point in my career. Even if they were upset because he was 6 hours off on his times, that is completely unprofessional behavior on their part.

Kathy

 

[TIS]

If the former company does trash you, you might be able to sue for defamation and slander, if the allegations are untrue. Not sure who the burden of proof would be on, but I believe it is the employer since they slandered you.

The two things you might be able to run with are slander (when they say bad things about you), and libel (when they write bad hings about you). you migh be abel to get both.

The burden of proof is on YOU however, since what you must prove is that they KNOWINGLY gave out false information AND that it was injurious to you.

Be careful with lawuits though. If a future employer calls the former employer, and the former says that they cannot comment as they are in legal action with you, that will not look good!

Definitely TRUE! I would add that you need to be careful even involving an attorney. Once you do this the opposition cannot contact you directly at all - that's the law. You are represented and unless you dismiss that representative, they are the conduit through which ALL correspondence with you must pass. At $150 - $300/hour you can imagine that will get expensive.

If you want to know what your former company is saying about you, then hire a reference checking company.

Do this first. then decide about the legal steps you might take. I'd bet a letter from an attorney saying that they've been investigated and found to be in vilation of current slander/libel statutes would be sufficient if you uncover things that could be grounds for a suit.

TIS

 

[Bryan D]

The diorama in a shoebox sounds like a good idea. It would be even better if the characters are poseable though.

 

[Resume Writer]

TIS,


I am not sure if you are correct in your view of the person that has to prove slander/libel/defamation. It is hard to really understand how it works. There are two "burdens of proof;" one for the victim and one for the defendant. I found a website that states some interesting facts, although I think it states things from a journalistic standpoint.

In English and American law, and systems based on them, libel and slander are two forms of defamation (or defamation of character), which is the tort or delict of making a false statement of fact that injures someone's reputation. "Defamation" is however the generally-used term internationally, and is accordingly used in this article where it is not necessary to distinguish between "libel" and "slander".

In most legal systems the courts give the benefit of the doubt to the person who is being tried. Depending on the applicable burden of proof, he or she is presumed to be innocent until the prosecution can prove beyond a reasonable doubt, or to the balance of probabilities, that this is not the case.

Once the offended party meets the burden of proof that the publisher made a defamatory statement, the untruth of that statement is presumed, so that the burden of proving it was true and/or in the public interest falls onto the publisher of the statement.

This prevents the victim from being essentially "tried" in the media or anywhere else outside a legal system. The victim remains innocent and the burden of proof properly is shifted to the publisher of the statement (the accuser). Without this protection, the victim of a defamatory statement would have to prove his innocence in order to prevail. With this protection, the notion of "innocent until proven guilty" partially is extended to anyone accused outside the legal system.

Kathy

 

[Flechas]

Very interesting. When I interviwed with XJT, one of the candidates didn't have a blazer. When we were waiting he said "I didn't see anywhere that you had to wear a blazer" Duh....

 

[RampTower]

One recurring (no no) theme I hear at pilot interviews is your attitude. And more specifically, at airlines with turboprops and jets. Candidates come out to say they will not fly a turboprop if hired into it. Buh bye.. NEXT!

 

[TIS]

I stand (partially) corrected

TIS,


I am not sure if you are correct in your view of the person that has to prove slander/libel/defamation.

I'll cut you off there since after looking into it, I've found that you are correct and that there is indeed more to it than I originally suggested. But it only goes to a point. There's a reason you don't see bizillions of defamation suits out there. It's difficult to prove. But, in general it is an intersting portion of the law that employees should be very aware of.

Now, in aviation there's a thing called PRIA that grants qualified immunity to employers so that they may comment more freely on potentially defamatory issues. Incompetence, interestingly enough, is somthing that falls into this area if an employer makes or publishes statements regarding it. PRIA actually INVITES commentary on incompetence and makes it protected as long as it's true.

Anyway, the following is from a book called "Employee Survival Handbook" by David Hurd.

Probably the most important situation involving qualified privileges are those where your work is being evaluated in performance reviews or other evaluations of your conduct in the workplace.

Can your employer defame you in a performance review without being liable to you for defamation? Maybe. Maybe not. An employer loses his or her qualified privilege to make defamatory comments in critiquing you or your work when the defamatory statement is made,

1. Without a good faith belief in the truth of the statement; or
2. Without reasonable grounds for believing the truth of the statement; or
3. With a motive or willingness to vex, harass, annoy, or unjure you; or
4. Is exaggerated or not fully or fairly stated; or
5. The result of a reckless investigation; or
6. Motivated by hatred or ill will towards you.

Examples of statements that have been determined by the courts to be defamatory are those that involve; allegations of embezzlement, lying, irresponsibility, lack of integrity, dishonesty, laziness, incompetence, not being eligible for rehire, insubordination, being a traitor to the company, or having committed a criminal act.

As you can see, there are numerous situations where the employer risks losing his or her qualified privilege and if the privilege is lost, any publication of the false comment becomes defamatory and you will be entitled to damages for the injury to your reputation.

Other factors that may be considered in making a finding of defamation are whether the person making the statement knows or believes the statement to be true; whether the statement is the result of anger, jealousy, resentment, grudges, quarrels, ill-will or other conflict between you and the person making the statement.

In order to be defamatory the statement must be, of course, false. The employer has the burden of proving that the statement is not false In other words, the employer has to prove that the statement was true. The statement must also seem to state a fact, or that it is based on fact, rather than an opinion, or based only on opinion.

A statement made as a statement of opinion, rather than as an allegation of fact, is not defamatory.

Are statements made about you by a supervisor that are placed in your personnel file possibly libelous? If the statements are statements of opinion, rather than false statements of fact, they are not potentially libelous. The question to ask is, does the statement of opinion suggest that it is base on fact or is provable as a fact? Statements that may support a claim of libel are; false accusations of criminal conduct, lackof integrity, dishonesty, incompetence, or reprehensible personal moral behavior. For example, if you found in your personnel file, a false statement accusing you of suspected theft, such a statement would be libelous. Such a statement would imply to the average reader that it is confirmable as a fact, and is not just an unfounded personal opinion.

Be aware that a defamatory statement in your personnel file defames for as long as the statement exists in your file. What does this mean? This means that defamatory statements made 5, 10, or even 15 years ago, and placed in your personnel file may be subject to a lawsuit if they are still there in your file "attacking" your reputation or your good name up to the present time. The statute of limitations does not protect the employer on "old" statements that are still around to be seen or heard.

If you are an employee or supervisor-employee and you are accused of engaging in sexual harassment or some other offensive activity and the fact of the accusation is "published," your employer may be liable to you for defamation. If the employer notified other employees or other parties of the allegations against you , such conduct by the employer may be defamatory against you.

If you are defamed, the injury to your reputation affects a proprietary or "ownership" interest and is not a personal injury. This means that damages from defamation are not pre-empted by workers compensation. If the damages from defamation were thought to arise as a normal risk from the employment relationship and were regarded as a form of personal injury, rather than an injury to the "property" of your reputation, you would be forced to file a worker's compensation claim.You would not be able to sue in civil court.

You still have to prove that you were injured by things that were said that weren't true facts. That's the bottom line. It's not all that easy to do particularly in a business where the possible implications of injury to your reputation are so difficult to quantify.


TIS

 

[DC8 Flyer]

I would most likely have said something and they were probably waiting for him to say something. Since he did not, they probably questioned his judgment.


I would have perhaps made a comment such as, "Wow, all this hiring must really have you worn out. I can certainly understand, as sometimes we get too tired to perform our job, in which case we have the company find someone to replace us since safety is of the utmost importance. If you are too tired to continue, is there someone that can take your place?"

Might be kind of rude, but I would be very upset if someone fell asleep during my interview; especially after working so hard to get to that point in my career. Even if they were upset because he was 6 hours off on his times, that is completely unprofessional behavior on their part.

Kathy

Im sorry but crap like that at interviews is uncalled for and unprofessional. An interview is supposed to be a get to know you and make sure everything on paper matches the person, not some head game to see what you would do, its an unfair situation and unrealistic.

Not to sound high and mighty, by no means do I want to come across like that, but I have walked out of a few interviews after crap like that. I look at it as a two way street, they are interviewing me and I am interviewing them, if I don't like what I see I say thank you and excuse myself.

I've never understood this mentallity of being subserviant (sp?) to a job interview. All things being equal they need an employee as much as you need a job and if they dont want to treat you with respect then I dont want to work there. But thats just me.

 

[SWAnnabee]

Great post, DC8!

I recently left active duty as a Marine pilot and, like everyone else, was set on the airlines. I was aware of all the headgames and ridiculous HR questions but it didn't really sink in until my one and only interview. I left the interview with nagging feeling that I really didn't appreciate the process very much. I did not get the offer, although I was prepared and behaved professionally, followed all the interview advice, etc. Truth be told, I was not disappointed at not receiving the offer and didn't really want to endure anything similar. I kind of felt like I had sold myself out a bit with playing the game (reference the above post on subserviant interviewee).

I later interviewed with a major defense contractor and THIS was the interview that I always expected and felt was appropriate. No head games, no silly questions with canned kum-by-yah endings, just a review of my resume and past work experience, some time getting to know me, straight talk about the job and aviation and ending with friendly conversation. Got the job and very happy with the results.

I was describing the airline way of interviewing with my father, who is a surgeon, and a couple of his fellow doctors and we laughed at the idea of a surgeon interviewing for a job and being put through a simulated surgery to "test" his skills and TMAAT questions to determine your personality and decision making. The unanimous feeling was that if you have gotten this far in your career, tests like this are a professional insult.

In the end, my dislike for the interview process in the present airline industry, along with the general QOL, really turned me off. I hear stories of the days when an airline interview was similar to my defense contractor interview, maybe a couple of chief pilots asking some technical questions and exchanging flying stories, then a flight or brief sim with no tricks, just to see how you handle an aircraft. Just through this, you can still gather enough about a persons knowledge, judgement and suitability. I think the whole HR thing beginning about 20 or 30 years ago is a bit silly. Reminds me of a Jimmy Buffet song lyric, "Yes I am a pirate, 200 years too late."

 

[bafanguy]

Im sorry but crap like that at interviews is uncalled for and unprofessional. An interview is supposed to be a get to know you and make sure everything on paper matches the person, not some head game to see what you would do, its an unfair situation and unrealistic.

Not to sound high and mighty, by no means do I want to come across like that, but I have walked out of a few interviews after crap like that. I look at it as a two way street, they are interviewing me and I am interviewing them, if I don't like what I see I say thank you and excuse myself.

I've never understood this mentallity of being subserviant (sp?) to a job interview. All things being equal they need an employee as much as you need a job and if they dont want to treat you with respect then I dont want to work there. But thats just me.

DC8,

Dead on, Bro !! My only question is how have these HR folks convinced themselves that their methods produce a better product for the company ( isn't that the goal ? ). I'd like to see an independent study showing that games and confrontation are a better methodology than the process described by bozt45. The story about the UAL sleeping interviewer doesn't surprise me a bit. I've had many people tell stories about their UAL interview "adventure", and most were negative. I only know what I'm told by those who were there.

With the horrible state of the industry, companies are in the driver's seat and will just do what they want. It's their party so they get to say what party games will be played ( we ALL understand that reality ). Don't like it ?; then get out of the way cuz there's a line forming behind you full of people who WILL take what they're dishing out. They do it because they can.

I admit to being totally clueless; my last real interview was 1973. But, I have to wonder what long-term effect comes from a company full of employees whose first exposure to their employer was a negative experience.

 

[DC8 Flyer]

The aviation world is the only place I have really seen this kind of interview behavior though. Most of the time when I bring up this topic I usually get berated and told things like, be thankful you got an interview blah blah blah. I am always thankful for an interview but, just like the employeer, I have the ability to decide if I like it or not.

I took my first flying job with PDT and the interview was great, little 50 question test, 2 on 1 interview and some paperwork, felt relaxed and felt they where happy to have us there. When the time came to move on I sent my resume out all over and did some phone interviews, the one place I thought I would really want to go turned out to be a nightmare and I thus ended up interviewing with my current job and having an even better experience.

The sad thing is, most people think its ok to play those games, put people in lvl C or D full motion sims and expect ATP standards from them even though they have never flown the equipement, give them no win scenario questions that actually do have a right answer but its not what you would expect. The only way to make it stop is to get the word out about the dissatisfaction with the process and not interview at these places when they need workers. Of course Utopia is a city upstate New York, ie it will never happen. So we all need to do our part and when we get into those positions of hiring we need to make it known these practices are unprofessional and un-needed.

But what do I know, I'm just a dumb farmboy someone accidently let into the club.

 

[414Flyer]

I recently left active duty as a Marine pilot and, like everyone else, was set on the airlines. I was aware of all the headgames and ridiculous HR questions but it didn't really sink in until my one and only interview. I left the interview with nagging feeling that I really didn't appreciate the process very much. I did not get the offer, although I was prepared and behaved professionally, followed all the interview advice, etc. Truth be told, I was not disappointed at not receiving the offer and didn't really want to endure anything similar. I kind of felt like I had sold myself out a bit with playing the game (reference the above post on subserviant interviewee).

Thats one aspect that I would have a hard time with, is the selling your soul, both to the interviewer and to the airlines, where everyone wears the same clothes, with the dark suit, red tie and god forbid someones tie is not red, so that you can interview with the Borg of 121 and prove how you are not an individual

Some aspiring airline pilots live their life not for themselves, but to satisfy future airline interviewers. Seemingly everything they do is looked at in the context of what would an interviewer think. Some need to freaking live life for themselves for once, and quite worrying about what others think in regards to everything in life

I swear based on how some people seem to live that way, they probably have a flow and checklist system worked out for when taking a dump, so they can tell an interviewer how good they are with flows and checklists, and how they take a dump in safety conscious manner.