Direct and Personal Questions at an Interview

KalEl said:
Surely questions alone are not discriminatory? I would have thought a problem only arises if the decision on who to recruit is based on the information gleaned from those questions.
Click to expand...
There's no good reason to ask the questions at a job interview if they do not specifically relate to the recruitment decision. It is therefore best practice, including from a legal vulnerability perspective, to avoid asking personal questions unless they are directly relevant to the candidate's ability to do the job, or are follow-up questions in relation to something the candidate has raised (and even with the latter, you need to be careful).

I certainly wouldn't relish a defence against a case brought to the Equality authority "Why yes, Mr. Crowley, I did ask questions relating to the candidate's marital status and number of children and relate this specifically to their level of ambition; but I positively assert that this was irrelevant to my decision not to hire them."
"Well, Mr. Brontosaurus, why exactly did you ask the questions?"
"...ehm..."
"Is it possible you were trying to assess the candidate on matters not pertinent to her ability to do the job?"
"...ehm..."
"That'll be €20,000 damages to the candidate, please, and don't let me see you here again."
 
Dreamerb said:
Why yes, Mr. Crowley, I did ask questions relating to the candidate's marital status and number of children and relate this specifically to their level of ambition
Click to expand...

Is that not the problem...relating their marital status to their level of ambition. Discrimination is wrong but things are going to far when an interviewer cannot ask whether a candidate is married or not. It's a massive part of someone's life. Why do people put their interests on CV's and discuss them at interviews? Does this discriminate against people who have no interests or hobbies? Of course it does...yet people are ruled out of jobs every day on the basis of not having any intersts and thus being perceived as not being fully rounded individuals.
 
KalEl said:
Discrimination is wrong but things are going to far when an interviewer cannot ask whether a candidate is married or not.
Click to expand...

How so? I know of no reputable studies linking marital status with job performance.

Remember, discrimination is often based on strongly held yet irrational assumptions about certain personal characteristics and their (supposed) relationship to job performance. The fact that these assumptions are often unconscious is the most insidious thing about them.

If it's simply irrelevant, don't ask. If you think it's relevant but equality law says otherwise, err on the side of the law.
 
Fair enough...where does discrimination begin and end though?
I was hiring someone last year, narrowed it down to two equally competent candidates and made my decision solely on the basis that one lived much closer to the business. Was that discrimination or just sensible?
 
It's only discrimination if you thought the person you hired would be better because s/he came from a "better" neighbourhood. :)

Sensible? I suppose it depends on how the employee worked out.
 
extopia said:
It's only discrimination if you thought the person you hired would be better because s/he came from a "better" neighbourhood. :)
Click to expand...

Are you sure about that, extopia?

"The Employment Equality Act, 1998 and the Equal Status Act, 2000 as amended by the Equality Act 2004 (pdf) outlaw discrimination in employment, vocational training, advertising, collective agreements, the provision of goods and services and other opportunities to which the public generally have access. Specifically, service providers, agencies, and anyone providing opportunities to which the public have access, cannot discriminate against citizens on nine distinct grounds.

These grounds are:

gender
marital status
family status
sexual orientation
religion
age (does not apply to a person under 16)
disability
race
membership of the Traveller community."

Which of the 9 grounds applies?

On a general note, there has been too much discussion about discrimination in this thread IMHO. A question can be offensive, rude, even stupid but it is never discriminatory. For legal discrimination to apply an action must have been taken such as a job refusal, promotion refusal etc based on one or other of the above-mentioned grounds and must be agreed to be so by the Authority.

An employer is of course recommended to avoid asking questions of a nature which could in the event of a job being refused etc support the complainant's assertion that the act may have been discriminatory. It doesn't in itself mean that the claim will be upheld however.

Anyone with any real experience of interviewing prospective employees will know just how difficult the process is and appreciate that even the best of interviewers will occasionally get it wrong with possible dire consequences for both sides. Whereas it's easy to check claimed qualifications, it can be very difficult to determine just what type of person the candidate is. Dependent on the job it's often vital to determine how will he (meaning 'he' or 'she'!) fit in? Will he be a good person to work with and if relevant be good with clients or customers? Is he serious about the job and interested in making a career of it? Self-confident? Self-reliant? Promotion material? Likely to be able to manage staff? The list goes on.

There is no magic formula for determining such factors. References are often not worth the paper they are written on, leaving the interviewer little choice but to try to get the candidate to open up and talk about himself. Appearance, presentation, general lifestyle, interests, etc can all provide clues.

It's as much in the candidate's interest to know that he is the type of person they want so why be defensive about being asked whether he is married or not, or be uptight because an interviewer pays him a compliment? Ironically it's often possible to spot someone who is being defensive so I'd say go in with a positive attitude. What have you got to lose? If you are right for the job you won't be refused it. If you are not, so what? Worry about discrimination if and only if it ever arises. If you don't like the line of questioning then maybe you are learning something about the employer and that's something you take into consideration to help you decide if you want to work there anyway.
 
Last edited:
I would suggest that if someone is asked a question about marital status/ family status at a job interview, they could lie and if the employer finds out later it is a lie, they would have no comeback. That is, the original lie should not be sufficient grounds to be let go - even though it is a misrepresentation, it should have no relevance on the hiring decision.

Incidentally I was told over the phone a few years ago that a position I was interested in was for "girls only". I went to the EEA, or whatever they were called at the time and went to a hearing, represented myself and was awarded a thousand pounds. :)
(I also had documentary evidence, though.)

I think they most they can award is up to two years salary. I would suggest to the op to definitely make a complaint if he or she does not get the job.
 
Last edited:
I'm a great believer in applying common sense in these situations...there seem to be two options when asked if you're married at a job interview. Option 1 is get defensive, refuse to answer, say the question is inappropriate or complain to a relevant authority. Option 2 is to answer the question honestly. Assuming most people at an interview want the job choosing anything other than Option 2 in my opinion shows a lack of common sense and reflects badly on the candidate.
 
KalEl said:
I'm a great believer in applying common sense in these situations...there seem to be two options when asked if you're married at a job interview. Option 1 is get defensive, refuse to answer, say the question is inappropriate or complain to a relevant authority. Option 2 is to answer the question honestly.
Click to expand...
Another option might to politely turn it back on the interviewer and ask them why they consider the question relevant and appropriate.
Assuming most people at an interview want the job choosing anything other than Option 2 in my opinion shows a lack of common sense and reflects badly on the candidate.
Click to expand...
Hopefully others have a more open mind and might value the independence of mind that might be attributable to somebody not just slavishly answering any question in the interview just for the sake of it.
 
KalEl said:
Assuming most people at an interview want the job choosing anything other than Option 2 in my opinion shows a lack of common sense and reflects badly on the candidate.
Click to expand...
The point, though, is that it should not normally come up. Questions at a job interview (and I've done many, from either side of the table) should relate to the candidate's ability to do the job. Marital status is not relevant to that ability.

That said, if I found myself in the situation and depending on the exact context, I'd probably answer briefly and honestly although I wouldn't be particularly happy that the question was posed (why does a potential employer legitimately need to know?) - but the OP was faced with a series of personal questions which apparently related her marital status to her job commitment. It's not the idle chit-chat scene-setting where someone might casually ask "Are you married?". I wouldn't be unduly concerned with something like that although it really shouldn't be asked; in this case, however, it's the "Are you married?" with a follow-up of "Is that why you're motivated?" sort of situation which would worry me.
 
ClubMan said:
Hopefully others have a more open mind and might value the independence of mind that might be attributable to somebody not just slavishly answering any question in the interview just for the sake of it.
Click to expand...

See that's the point...common sense is called for. Assume the candidate wants the job. The general consensus is the questions are dodgy which would make you think the person asking them isn't the most clued in when it comes to employment law/sexual harrassment etc. So they probably wouldn't be the type to take kindly to being challenged over what they see as an inoccuous question. I'm not arguing the rights or wrongs of the question; I just think that in a job interview situation you have to have tunnel vision when it comes to getting what you want-the job.
 
Hi Kalel, I agree with you and I did answer the questions because I really want the job. I did want to ask the relevance but I didn't for fear of ruining my chances.
I answered briefly even though it felt awkward...Are you married? NO,
oh are you single then? eh yeh!!!
is that why you're "career driven"?

I mean please come on...ask me examples of how I dealt with work situations, give me an oppurtunity to tell you how I can do this job with 100% dedication, find out about my skills/attributes/ambitions/what I'm bringing to the organisation. These are the things that were relevant, not what my situation is outside of work.

there is a post below about why not ask about marital status, its a massive part of someones life...yeh, I totally agree... BUT its a massive part of someones PERSONAL life (not their work life)
relationships/marraiges/personal status is private and personal to each and everyone and no body should have to answer questions on it to a stranger at an interview.

I mean even to stop at the marraige question, when I answered no I was probed even further, then I felt it was assumed that I was focused on my career because I was single...oh are you sad and lonely being single at 31? Is that why you're climbing the ladder and doing well? Are you filling a void?

I genuinely think the guy was ignorant of the appropriate questions, or shold have worked a bit more on how to get the answers in a less direct way but everyone is different, and everyone could perceive the questions in a different way and take their different meanings out of them...the upshot of it all is none of it mattered to my application/CV/ability to do the job in hand...

am still waiting to hear back from them, hopefully will know either way today.
 
ci1 said:
Are you married? NO,
oh are you single then? eh yeh!!!
Click to expand...
The answer to the second question is not necessarily implied by the answer to the first. Single could mean not in any form of long term/live-in relationship. For example gay couples cannot marry (at the moment) but would probably would not count as single if in a committed long term live-in relationship.
there is a post below about why not ask about marital status, its a massive part of someones life...yeh, I totally agree... BUT its a massive part of someones PERSONAL life (not their work life)
relationships/marraiges/personal status is private and personal to each and everyone and no body should have to answer questions on it to a stranger at an interview.
Click to expand...
Well, let's hope this never happens here for example...! :eek:
 
Could always go for the shock tactic on that one, make them sorry they asked.

Well actually, I can't answer that because although I am a female now, I wasn't always a woman!
(I'm joking btw, and just for the record I am really a woman)

someone did say to me over the weekend that it would have been good to answer the questions and fire the same question back:

Are you married? No I'm not, are you?
so are you single? yes I am, are you?
Do you own your own home? No, not at the moment, how about you?
do you still live with your parents? yes I do, and yourself, are you still in the family home?
Are you career driven? yes I am, are you?
You don't look your age? My thank you, would you mind me asking how old you are so that I can determine if you look yours...

Brilliant...!
:D
 
What I meant was that a man turned woman still would not be able to answer the question they asked in India.
I think you unknowingly just started a new discussion.
:D
 
I've been asked about my marital status and if I had children at a number of interviews.

On one occassion the interviewer mentioned that he knew it was against the law to ask but went on to explain that the job entailed travel, often at short notice, and may possibly not suit someone with family commitements. I took no offense from this.

Since getting married I have been asked if I'm married a number of times....though I wear my wedding and engagement rings to interviews so anyone with a bit of cop on could glean the answer by looking at my left hand:rolleyes: . I keep telling my hubby that this diamond just isn't big enough:D

At one interview which took a quite informal approach , I was asked a number of personal questions, was I married, any kids, any plans to have kids in the near future, did I own or rent, how much I paid for my house, what it was worth now, was I using my husbands surname, was I a feminist because I hadn't changed it.....and all from a totally arrogant guy who abouth the same age as myself and imo should have known better. I had taken an instant dislike to him so was fairly vague and asked him the same questions back. He thought we got on like a house on fire and couldn't understand why I didn't want to come back for a second interview. The recruitement agent pointed out to him that his line of questioning was totally inappropriate but he disagreed with her...arrogant fool:mad:
 
Hi Elefantfresh,

still waiting to hear from them.

they said they'd let me know asap so hopefully will hear news today or this week sometime.
I'm cracking up waiting.
it has to be approved by the guy that asked the questions so have to wait and see

C.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top