Job interview, really shitty janitor position

Thanks OP, this gave me a good laugh, heres your (You)

Attached: 1544671390832.gif (640x272, 3.37M)

>They know you won't do a perfect job
By the question implies that that the alternative is mediocrity. Both somewhat extreme, but this is a hypothetical question anyways where you only have two choices. It's not like I would ever be late anyways, but in this hypothetical situation if I were the businessman I would want to save more money by having a perfect service in fewer paid hours.

Yet in real life they would obviously take a mildly tardy perfectionist than a punctual slacker

I don't really get it, but I guess that's why they're the business owners and I'm just the guy who can't even get a janitor job.

There is a bedroom at my office

Nope, have you ever had a job?

dude, they can pay anyone to do that job. all minimum wage jobs are just paying you to show up. this is obvious to everyone except the retards doing those jobs, as indicated by your retarded post

B. Boomers idolize time and titles. Each CONcept is as illusory, or transient, as feelings.
Why they have these dissonant habits of thought, in rebellion against The Lord God... Is symptomatic of their tacit exchange for their (satanic, vain, licentious freedom) privelages and benefits. Their religion is materialism of word-products, preference for the law of man. This is fatal adultery. Adultery also being the badge of pride for baby boomers. They are a wicked generation.

I have, but never a retarded question like this. Usually the questions go with, "can you do x, do you have experience with x, will you come to work on time for every scheduled shift?"
None of this retarded boomer head-game shit where you have to guess what the boomer values more.

This was somewhat deep and thought out. Thank you for your response.

Well if it's a big corporate chain. We have to handle all associates the same or HR is up our ass. We cant let the good trusted employees come and go as needed and still punish the slackers for showing up halfway through a shift and then hiding in a bathroom texting all day. So good employees are expected to follow arbitrary rules we use to trap the slackers HR wont let us fire for performance.

you could have just said "neither of those two would apply to me, i would show up on time and do a perfect job." accompanied by a laugh and a smile

Attached: 1539231263165.jpg (465x576, 54K)

Get rekt, zoomer. Welcome to a life of shitty interviews forever

picking the choices that were provided in the question. absolute NPC response. a real human would have said, neither - being on time and doing a perfect job is the only answer

and a firm handshake

checked and kekd. i like your style user

you're fucking stupid

I would have said something like.
>Well I think that doing the job well is the most important part, but part of that is being on time.
Boomers are stupid and love these hypotheticals and platitudes. Of course any sane person would prefer I be 10 minutes late everyday but every room is spotless instead of being on time everyday and the place is only sorta clean.

HR trolling

you failed the think outside the box test

>I value both perfection and punctuality, and with my skillset I would be able to achive both so I fail to see the merit of your question

Attached: 1543674367812.jpg (340x568, 51K)

>"I think it's important to be on time and work the best I can."

They are testing you for cluster-b tendencies. Note the word 'perfect'.
They are correct in doing so.

No, I tried to say that I would be on time and do a good job, but they said I had to pick one.

based and hired-pilled

nope. see

>but they said I had to pick one.
that was the test, brainlet. to see if you can think on your own or if you're going to need to keep checking with management before you do anything. literal NPC-tier thinking

Haha, no

>Haha, no
says the guy who wasn't hired because he didn't answer correctly. keep telling yourself it was their fault, brainlet

I can tell you think you're clever, but all you said is really just common sense, and is the first thing I tried. Lady wouldn't budge. It was a scripted interview with an obligatory binary question.

Why are you even trying to argue this when I already told you what the correct answer was? She said the first answer was the correct one.

I even tried to explain that I could do a good job and come to work on time, but she said punctuality was more important and that the first answer was the correct one.

i know i'm smart because i addressed this already and you conveniently overlooked it

You should have said:

>Important to be on time
>If I was late I'd be sure to do a perfect job

>Okay user, would you rather be on time and do a mediocre job, or be a few minutes late but do a perfect job?
>I would be on time and do a perfect job.
>No, you have to pick one.
>No I don't. You're an NPC. You can pay anyone to do this job.
Whatever your failures in life are I don't know, but you do, and this is the reason why. I doubt you have ever even been to an interview, because you think everything is like an anime or something where every question is some epic test

fucking lmao at you right now. i've been to plenty and i've also conducted plenty. you failed an interview to be a janitor, not the end of the world. you can find another one; but to not recognize this and call out others who are giving you good info is brainlet behavior. good luck user

>Please pick one of two answers.
>nooooo you're an NPC I have been to pleeenty of interviews and I conduct interviews too reeeeeeeeeeee
Okay, thanks for your input, user.

hahahahaha, being this assmad. brainlets gonna brainlet

I already told you what the answer she wanted was. It was not your answer. If it was your answer, she would have accepted it, because it was the first thing I said.

This is the only non autistic answer in this thread.
>"I appreciate the question but I couldn't honestly choose either option. Quality, honesty and punctuality are my 3 personal maxims"

>Yes that's great, but if you had to pick one? That's the topic of this question, which one would you pick?

kek this, it's so simple yet people are retarded, yfw business managers and executives havd the iq of roasties

Well coincidentally, they are no longer in business, as this was years ago. An user in another thread said he got a verbal warning on his record just because of some dumb HR rule about tardy points, which made me remember this, hence the thread.

lrn2dodgequetions

They don't want you to do a great job. They want you to obey. They want employees they can control.

When it’s a brainless job anyone can do, the only thing that can set you apart from other candidates is your commitment to being on time.

Also, your “you get to pay me less because I missed an hour” is not helping. They don’t want to pay you less for an incomplete shift, they want a janitor for the whole shift.

Checked. Good thing I didn't get that job. Three years later, they went out of business, and they had a bunch of shitty reviews from employees saying they didn't treat them right, and from clients saying their workers did a shit job at cleaning.

>*shits his pants and throws it at interviewer screaming*

user you need an College Degree Entry level skill of cleaning shitters with 30 years of work experience .

Attached: 980x.png (619x406, 235K)

HR here. When we ask questions like these, we’re looking for a specific trait, often because of problems we’ve had in the past with employees. So we want you to pick the right one because we want an employee that values x above all else, x being punctuality, or work ethic, or whatever the company values more.

All you guys trying to act smart and dodge the question would most likely get rejected.

That’s the crux of the issue though. Looking at it from a business standpoint, why would you ever prefer the option that costs more AND gives you less for your money? When something like that happens, there’s usually something broken somewhere down the chain of command. You would be surprised how many incompetent people are given leadership roles and go on to destroy companies from within.

The only situation I can think of where you should prefer the first one would be if you have janitors on call, waiting for someone to make a mess so they can clean it. But that’s not usually the case. What happens is that janitors have set shifts, usually after most people leave for the day. So what should be most important to you as a business owner is how well they clean the place. If they’re late, but still get it done well, all that means for you is that you paid less for a job well done.

Everyone is taking the question at face value
The question is:
>Do you want to do what you are supposed to do in a reliable manner
OR
>Do you want to be a special snowflake

It sounds fucking rude you underage faggot. Grow up

If they said that to me, I'd tell them that my net worth is larger than theirs and walk out the door as I call them a senile boomer

>huge faggot here
>we ask retarded questions because we're cucks outside of work

The correct answer was, 'I feel both punctuality and doing the job well are equally important.'

Businesses actually track if you're on time or not?

I was only employed at one place for a full time position (excluding an internship / summer jobs I had before) and as long as you didn't miss meeting or not do your work, they were ok with you coming late. Is a major corporation btw (20K+ employees)

Some do, some don't. Depends where you are and on company philosophy.

Unfortunately in the real world bullshit is what gets you places, its the things like meaningless but polite small talk and repeating those proven phrases at job interviews that advance your career

Kek

sir buy bsv and your wiping the poo street is never the needful again

Attached: the loos pajeet.png (960x639, 1.01M)

p. much what says

If you ask me, I'd much rather have an employee who gets shit done on time and does their job well, not some robot who comes at the office every day 9AM sharp and leaves 5PM sharp with every minute inbetween tracked and analysed.

It's a fucking janitor position you twat... What box would that be .. the toilet bowl?

>employee who gets shit done on time and does their job well
Doing a mediocre job implies all that. Not doing it implies poor performance.
Don't understand why anyone sees 'perfect' as a positive at all. It's a cluster-b honeypot word and implies unrealistic, never achievable and uncompromising standards.

>dance wagie, dance!
>play our guessing game, if you win, we might give you a job!

it's like those movies with the villain who makes the good guy play some ridiculous game to not kill him or a bus full of civilians. these managers are literally a psychotic narcissists.

I was let go from a six figure software development position a couple months ago because I was consistently late. I did a good job and the majority of my colleagues thought that my work was among the best in the company but my manager and his manager (a boomer) didn't really care and decided to let me go. Most of the people in the company were surprised and thought it was a BS reason, and I would be inclined to agree but a part of me is happy that I left a place that values what time you come in to the office more than the quality of the work that gets done. It makes zero business sense honestly, but I guess the user above is correct when he says that most businesses have absolute retards running middle-management.

I've done development before and my productive hours are about 9-2, maybe 9-3. Anything past that is just me warming the seat, I'm there merely for appearance's sake. It's retarded.

And then just walk away...

Can confirm. Run my own business, am a brainlet.

>good employees are expected to follow arbitrary rules we use to trap the slackers HR wont let us fire for performance.

This. It's also why competent White men have to put up with stupid rules and nanny laws , because we share our society with low IQ fucktards that can't behave.

the absolute state of wagecucks

Attached: 1539193829668.jpg (434x368, 57K)

im sure he is being interviewed by some house nigger "manager" and not the owner

didnt even know they'd do an interview for Jow Forums janny

Attached: 1522129536190.jpg (4151x4155, 402K)

>You need a better job, user.

All jobs aren't entry tier bottom rung jobs. You don't even need to speak English to be a janitor. Get some marketable skills. I know a lawyer that's a named partner at a midsize law firm that works at night and home schools his kids during the day. I get emails from him in the middle of the night. I have a friend that's VP of IT for a major bank. He works at home in flannel pants and a robe. Now that he's management, he mainly makes PowerPoint presentations and plays vidya while he's on group conference calls.

>Being on time is part of the job, so how can I do a perfect job when I'm not on time.

>>"Actually, we value punctuality."

"OK, I therefore accept your offer for a Punctual Yet Mediocre job".

You think it’s ok to be a late piece of shit? Grow up user, get your shit together

The question is meant to filter out people who get hung up on an unachievable perfection or use it as an excuse for not being reliable.

>I take a lot of pride in my work, but I think showing up on time is more important. At least if I'm on the job, I can figure out the situation and start completing tasks, even if I'm not at my very best.

This was all you had to say.

>Job interview, really shitty janitor position
>Frogs in tuxedos keep making offensive comments

Attached: 1537207053265.png (332x332, 148K)

That question is a morton's fork so they can use it as an excuse to not hire niggers and women.

>tfw I'm actually good at interviews because I can hold a conversation
I'm one of those lazy pricks that gets the job, OP

the problem here is that it is a shitty janitor job. with positions a bit more dignified you could just say something along the lines of
>"I am thriving in an agile set-up that allows me to focus on my deliverables".

No. You're caught in the trap. It's pilpul logic that can be jerked in either direction just as convincingly. There is no correct answer, by design. Logic is just a game to these people, you're not actually allowed to win. As soon as you play you've lost. The purpose of the question is so that they can cover their ass if they decide not to hire someone with a boutique gender or a degree in Womens' Studies.

And, in addition, by trying to game it you've shown you're not operating at their level. You've not only lost, but humiliated yourself. The correct response is closer to a wink and a joke, not shitting your pants trying to come up with some witty one-liner kissass answer.