Recruiter divides the internet after slamming Gen Z candidate who flatly REFUSED to complete 90-minute task as part of interview process – sparking FURIOUS debate about ‘free work’
A recruiter sparked furious controversy after revealing he rejected a Gen Z applicant who refused to spend 90 minutes on an interview test because it ‘looked like a lot of work’.
The employer, who goes by @M.Stanfield on
In the tweet, he explained that he had emailed the unnamed Gen Z applicant and asked them to take a “financial modeling test,” which would take about an hour and a half.
But when the job seeker refused to complete the task, the recruiter was immediately shut down and took to the website to express his annoyance at the applicant’s attitude, sparking a furious debate among other users – some of whom insisted he should never have required a candidate to do any kind of ‘free work’.
A recruiter sparked controversy after revealing he rejected a Gen Z applicant because he refused to complete a 90-minute post-interview task
A Twitter user took to the social media platform to share his frustrations over a job candidate he interviewed for an investment analyst position and was no longer considering
The tweet read: “Me: Really enjoyed the call. See the attached financial modeling test.
“Gen Z applicant: This seems like a lot of work. Without knowing where I stand in the process, I don’t feel comfortable spending 90 minutes in Excel.
“Me:…well…I can tell you where you are now.”
The recruiter’s call sparked a fiery debate, with many people supporting the applicant.
One person said: ‘I stand in solidarity with the applicant.’
Someone else wrote: ‘Then pay them for the 90 minutes of their time.’
‘It’s even better to give them a real problem. And yes, pay them,” another user added.
One comment read: ‘See he had all the answers in the world but he can’t pay for 90 minutes of people’s time, hmm looks like the company is a red flag. Don’t appreciate their staff.’
The recruiter’s call sparked a fiery debate, with many people supporting the applicant
“If you want the worker’s labor, hire him first,” one user added.
Someone else wrote: ‘But you don’t care about paying people for their work, even if the work is a test, if it takes hours with no guarantee of a job, pay or the ability to even know the odds a smart investment of time and shows early on how little the company will value their time.”
Another user added: ‘Are you surprised that people don’t want to work for free without knowing if they’re going to get a job or not?’
“Boomer mentality: you are not the only employer and good candidates have options,” someone else added.
One user added: ‘Applicant is right. Unless you have offered to compensate for those 90 minutes. He has no idea how many candidates are still in the procedure. He probably has interviews with other companies. Effort versus reward certainly does not apply here. Good for him.’
Another social media user wrote: “He brings up a good point. You select for the most desperate applicants.’
“To be honest, a lot of places just use candidates for free labor. The job doesn’t exist. The ‘test’ is the only work they have to do,” another person added.
However, other people on the Internet agreed with the recruiter
However, other people on the Internet agreed with the recruiter.
One person said: ‘You don’t seem to understand that this person was just a job candidate. If you want the company’s rewards, go in first.”
Someone else wrote, “As I currently teach Gen Z, this unfortunately doesn’t surprise me.”
‘How can you prove that you can do the job well? It’s a chicken or the egg situation. And there is a saying: no pain, no gain. If you don’t want to do any work, don’t expect a return. Stay happy if you stay with your parents,” someone else added.
Another user added: ‘What free labor? Do you really think a TEST of your skills will be used in a deal? Do you think anyone would provide confidential information to a candidate to get a valuation that you would use in a deal?’