Endless questions from HR - how to handle?

I'm actually with the poster. For so long, Singaporeans do not understand the concept of personal data and their rights to it. In Europe or USA such personal questions would amount to discrimination. Some companies in the UK even went to the extent to require agreement from the candidates to video the entire interview in order to protect themselves.

The logic is simple: which schools your kids attend or what medical coverage your spouse has has absolutely no relation to the job. The advertised job is not dependent on these factors to select the most suitable candidate based on what has been advertised. Put it this way: Would the HR list these factors in the job ad? If they did anyone can sue them under unfair hiring practises.

I once had an interview with a HR of stat board. She went so far as to probe how did I get the money to fund my studies if I wasn't on a scholarship? I objected by asking her how is this related to the job? She was visibly offended and did not probe further. But excuse me? That was a rude and completely unprofessional question. And she had probably probed similar rude and unprofessional questiins to hundreds other candidates.

Needeless to say, although the job was attractive i had an extremely poor opinion of the company values.

I hope HR professionals read my post above and stop the nonsense if they are guilty. However most HR are very professional. The black sheep are a minority.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I'm actually with the poster. For so long, Singaporeans do not understand the concept of personal data and their rights to it. In Europe or USA such personal questions would amount to discrimination. Some companies in the UK even went to the extent to require agreement from the candidates to video the entire interview in order to protect themselves.

The logic is simple: which schools your kids attend or what medical coverage your spouse has has absolutely no relation to the job. The advertised job is not dependent on these factors to select the most suitable candidate based on what has been advertised. Put it this way: Would the HR list these factors in the job ad? If they did anyone can sue them under unfair hiring practises.

I once had an interview with a HR of stat board. She went so far as to probe how did I get the money to fund my studies if I wasn't on a scholarship? I objected by asking her how is this related to the job? She was visibly offended and did not probe further. But excuse me? That was a rude and completely unprofessional question. And she had probably probed similar rude and unprofessional questiins to hundreds other candidates.

Needeless to say, although the job was attractive i had an extremely poor opinion of the company values.

candidates can don't choose to answer personal questions, but that will jeopardise the chances of getting hired.

so did u get offer from the stat board? which stat board was that?

Originally Posted by Unregistered

I'm actually with the poster. For so long, Singaporeans do not understand the concept of personal data and their rights to it. In Europe or USA such personal questions would amount to discrimination. Some companies in the UK even went to the extent to require agreement from the candidates to video the entire interview in order to protect themselves.

The logic is simple: which schools your kids attend or what medical coverage your spouse has has absolutely no relation to the job. The advertised job is not dependent on these factors to select the most suitable candidate based on what has been advertised. Put it this way: Would the HR list these factors in the job ad? If they did anyone can sue them under unfair hiring practises.

I once had an interview with a HR of stat board. She went so far as to probe how did I get the money to fund my studies if I wasn't on a scholarship? I objected by asking her how is this related to the job? She was visibly offended and did not probe further. But excuse me? That was a rude and completely unprofessional question. And she had probably probed similar rude and unprofessional questiins to hundreds other candidates.

Needeless to say, although the job was attractive i had an extremely poor opinion of the company values.

when in rome, do as the romans do. seriously it's no big deal, just choose not to answer and lower your own chance of getting hired if the HR manager is offended.

this is called getting to know the candidate better. sometimes i get asked whether am i married. or have a girlfriend. i can choose to be an ess, or it is time to become friendly and play along.

if you're working in finance like a bank, their AML policies includes knowing all sources of income. it's okay if you don't want to provide this information, they will somehow get an idea through background checks, cpf contributions, etc.

so did you get an offer? isnt that the most impt question. Anyway you will only need to see HR another time to sign contract right.

And you wonder why people like Mobile Air Jover got away. It is because consumers do not understand their rights and therefore do not even know what they need to insist. It is the same with job seekers.

Striking up a casual conversation with HR (or anyone from the company for that matter) is perfectly fine, but personal questions should not be construed in the context where it can make or break the chances of getting the job. Focus should always be on relevant skills and experience and capacity in performing the job. More importantly, HR should readily accept candidates preference not to disclose personal information, especially if it has no relations to the advertised job and even more so as the Candidate is not even an employee to begin with.

Besides, HR should really be "pricing" a job based on the job responsibilities and scope as well as what the market rate is for similar capacity jobs. In other words - what the role should be paid in dollar sense. The candidates' last drawn pay has absolutely nothing to do with how much he should be paid for the role. If the role is priced at $X +/- 5% then the successful candidate should be offered $X regardless of how much lesser or more he earned in his current role. With greater transparency in remuneration guidelines, companies score with higher retention because even there is no monetary incentive for the Candidate to quit for another similar job as the pay would be the same.

Food for thought to HR? If anyone if from HR it will be interesting to hear from HR perspective.

Originally Posted by Unregistered

candidates can don't choose to answer personal questions, but that will jeopardise the chances of getting hired.

so did u get offer from the stat board? which stat board was that?

Absolutely. If you are desperate for the job and need money to put food on the table, it is understandable. But if you know you have options or are confident of having options, just be firm and politely decline to answer.

It was a research stat board. The dept hiring manager was not a local, never held a rifle in his life, had also asked in an accusing tone why I had gaps between my A levels and University studies. lol *roll eyes*

And when HR came on next, i badly wanted the interview to end. I was fresh out of Uni and i was confident of my options. So....

Originally Posted by Unregistered

It was a research stat board. The dept hiring manager was not a local, never held a rifle in his life, had also asked in an accusing tone why I had gaps between my A levels and University studies. lol *roll eyes*

And when HR came on next, i badly wanted the interview to end. I was fresh out of Uni and i was confident of my options. So....

Noob sia. He just started work in HR issit?