this post was submitted on 13 May 2025
958 points (99.4% liked)

Microblog Memes

7628 readers
1953 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

Rules:

  1. Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
  2. Be nice.
  3. No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
  4. Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Alph4d0g@discuss.tchncs.de 60 points 3 days ago (1 children)

If you're getting quizzed on subjective questions and ideology, it's time to back away.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, a questioaire like his is definitely a red flag

[–] ameancow@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Usually these employee screening systems are implemented by completely out-of-touch CEO's and upper management who want to seem like they're still taking "bold action" and such during their endless meetings.

I was supposed to use a really convoluted and stupid personality profile screening system to determine who would be best fits to hire for my team. I ignored it entirely, just had a lot of interviews and got to know the people. After making my decisions, I got called in for choosing candidates that "didn't fit the personality profile for the position" and I said I would take full responsibility if something went wrong.

The people I hired lasted there longer than me, a couple got promoted.

[–] ggppjj@lemmy.world 183 points 3 days ago (23 children)

I've heard these described as a "legally acceptable way of filtering out people with autism" and man I've not seen them the same way since.

[–] MoonlightFox@lemmy.world 71 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

I have had a theory that the personality tests are just to have an excuse to discriminate with plausible deniability.

[–] LoveSausage@discuss.tchncs.de 18 points 3 days ago

Yep quite a few years back I had two jobs lined up , already got the first but the second one wanted a second interview after I filled in a 50 page personality test. I felt the first offer would be interesting and better paid but wanted to see what they offered. So I said why not just be completely honest instead of faking it :) very interesting interview, I just told them that whoever sold them this idea was probably a very good salesman. The tool is just pointless. I got to much risk taking etc , yea I like skydiving.. I'm not skydiving at work. .. if you want people to bullshit you it's pretty good though haha

[–] bored_boar_onboard@lemmy.world 10 points 3 days ago (2 children)

This is absolutely the case. In the documentary “The Fog of War” (a great documentary IMO) Robert McNamara explains how he helped create a personality test to screen applicants for Ford (I think it was them).

One of the questions was “Would you rather be a coal miner or a florist?”. McNamara says his family had owned a florist but the answer they wanted coal miner. For “obvious reasons”.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net 3 points 2 days ago

"Yeah I want to be a coal miner. I want to fuck up my health, the health of the environment, the health of anyone nearby, all just to make somebody else a profit with a product that is more expensive than the clean alternatives"

[–] Dragonstaff@leminal.space 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I don't think the reason is obvious at all. Is it because coal mining is hard work?

[–] bored_boar_onboard@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think it was a clumsy attempt to filter out gay men.

[–] Dragonstaff@leminal.space 3 points 2 days ago

Lol. Homophobes are funny. Thanks for the explanation.

[–] Caesium@lemmy.world 42 points 3 days ago

yep when I applied to work at target a few years ago, there should have been absolutely no reason for them to not consider me but I took that thiny veiled screening test and wow I suddenly don't get a response.

fuck corpos man

[–] conditional_soup@lemm.ee 26 points 3 days ago

That explains a LOT.

[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Not really, in this case the more literally you read the question the better. It asks what responsibility you acquire when you have a job not why you got the job.

[–] JulieLemming@lemm.ee 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

It’s not about that. It’s because people with autism rarely have a first instinct to give fake answers custom made exactly for the person telling you to fill it out like nd ppl do

Ppl with autism have this honesty instinct and that is prone to be rather inconvenient in life. Some are very idealistic some are desperate to be accepted as nd and overdo the ‚lying selfish’ part and become big assholes

Obviously we all know we are here for ourselves but we have to create an illusion that we value our employer. People with autism are a bit worse at these games so it is best that they pair with adhd ppl and complement each other

I was an advisor of sorts for someone with autism for a really long time to the point I was sometimes writing text messages word by word for them because they couldn’t really ever make them sound natural. I had no idea about autism back then though. They are in finance now I think doing pretty ok but not typical for sure and they are a bit of example that there are autistic assholes out there

Seriously there is almost nothing worse than autistic person who falls into the incel Tate hole. Not only they are still awkward as hell but also now they are caricature of some kind of macho guy in a mix that is truly hard on anyone’s nerves. On the plus side they are rather confused than evil still because it’s just a trying to fit in mask after all

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] F_OFF_Reddit@lemmy.world 27 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I always respond and give the "right" answers because it's either an HR psychopath checking your answers to see if you're a dangerous unionist or now a damn AI.

So yes I'd like to kill myself for your company, then find something else and EAT SHIT

[–] Alteon@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

Yes Mr. Bossman, I would love to work at your company. I have aspired to be a since I was a small child. I would do anything to help out the company. My only desire is to help the business.

[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 51 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Acquired responsibility under a working contract ≠ Motivation for signing a working contract

[–] webghost0101@sopuli.xyz 19 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Sure but we are responsible for our own health and that of our family also, so the main objective for many is to obtain “stable employment” the more invisible, the better.

Work to live. Not live to work.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] callyral@pawb.social 13 points 2 days ago

you owe that question no honesty

[–] PunnyName@lemmy.world 95 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If I owned the means of production, then answer #1 would be okay.

[–] ThePantser@sh.itjust.works 66 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Or if they had profit sharing, that actually used to be a thing.

[–] neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works 28 points 3 days ago (2 children)

People all collectively forgot that that was the piece that made America great in the 50s.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] solsangraal@lemmy.zip 79 points 3 days ago (2 children)

i want all business owners to know: i, and millions like me, lie through my fucking teeth on these "surveys," telling you what we know you want to hear, while quiet quitting every minute of every day. because fuck you

[–] BarrelAgedBoredom@lemm.ee 17 points 3 days ago (1 children)

They know, they don't care. Read bullshit jobs

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

The question left out whether it meant responsibility to the employer or yourself, which is crucial information.

[–] ziggurat@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

If you can't pay your own bills, then you can't eat enough to be able to work. So no

[–] javasux@lemmy.world 35 points 3 days ago (2 children)

Responsibility and objective are two different things

[–] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 17 points 3 days ago

Well damn that's a good point. But what a weird ass question.

[–] Doctor_Satan@lemm.ee 10 points 3 days ago (1 children)

My primary responsibility is to take care of me and my family by earning enough money to pay my bills.

[–] lud@lemm.ee 1 points 2 days ago

Sure, but on a work questionnaire you obviously aren't supposed to list your private responsibilities and priorities.

Your private responsibilities and priorities are a whole different topic that's pretty much entirely unrelated except that work lies in there somewhere. They obviously aren't saying that work should be on top of your private responsibilities list.

It's really weird that that even included that as an option. Possibly done in bad faith but likely just incompetence.

[–] roude@lemmynsfw.com 54 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I would think that any business having this on an employment screener would be a huge red flag. But also, part of being a seasoned (read: weathered) corporate wage slave is answering nonsense like this with the corpo-appropriate response and NOT your actual thoughts.

[–] LouSlash@sh.itjust.works 17 points 3 days ago (4 children)

I once applied for a pretty "standard" job. In return, i was asked to complete a survey which was a requirement. This survey consisted of some questions about "what would you do in this scenario if you would work here" (some of them were video-based ones). Since i have quite enough experience working in retail - i answered those questions kinda realistically even tho i thought that in perfect world the actual answer should be different (so called by you @roude@lemmynsfw.com - "corpo-appropriate"). I finished the survey and i got a email with the results...

... it was something like "Not bad! There is a potential to improve" in a kinda mean way

[–] brygphilomena@lemmy.dbzer0.com 15 points 3 days ago

In half of them it's just "seek direction from my supervisor" or "follow company policy or procedure."

Basically it's never "think for yourself" for anything below manager.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Pacattack57@lemmy.world 37 points 3 days ago (1 children)

As soon as I read the responses I knew what this was. Guys you have no obligation to believe any of the training they give you. You know what the answers are supposed to be to be. Just tell them what they want to hear and keep going. They are still legally responsible for what happens on the job. This is just something they do to get rid of people or prevent people from getting hired.

load more comments (1 replies)

If it was a worker-owned co-op they'd be the same... but it never is.

[–] iAvicenna@lemmy.world 40 points 4 days ago

help your CEO get that hefty bonus

[–] andybytes@programming.dev 21 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Remember to tell them what they want to hear and they will do the same but we all know it is just a game.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›