A woman has opened up about the reason she got rejected from a job interview after asking the recruiter what the decision was based on.
Jobhunting can be a bit of a minefield, from finding the perfect opening to making sure you stand out among the often hundreds of other applicants.
So you'd hope by the time you got to interview, you'd have a pretty good shot of getting the job, right?
Well, one woman has revealed the reason she fell at the final hurdle after recent job interview.
Her experience, shared by workplace commentator Ben Askins on his TikTok account, has sparked a heated debate on the propriety of salary discussions during job interviews.
Katherine, after a seemingly successful interview, was shocked to learn she didn't get the job. According to the recruiter’s message, the reason was her "financially oriented" questions.
"Yeah, they said they absolutely loved meeting you, but your questions were too financially orientated," the recruiter explained, leaving Katherine bewildered and frustrated.
When she asked "what on earth" that was supposed to mean, the recruiter replied: "Apparently you asked about money a lot?"
She defended her inquiries, emphasizing they were minimal and mostly focused on the benefits package included with the position. However, the feedback was clear: the company felt she seemed more interested in the salary than the role itself.
Askins, known for his critical takes on toxic workplace cultures, lambasted the company's stance.
He argued that it's perfectly reasonable for candidates to inquire about compensation.
"It is a job interview, of course, people are going to be interested in the price and package that comes with it. That is the sole reason the person is in that room,” he stated emphatically.
Askins' sentiment resonated with many online, sparking a flurry of support for Katherine’s straightforward approach.
However, not everyone agrees that discussing finances during an interview is appropriate. Some argue that it’s better to focus on the job’s responsibilities and company culture, suggesting that bringing up compensation too early can be seen as tactless.
"I know this is an unpopular opinion but the interviewer was right – the financial questions shouldn’t be asked in the interview," one commenter noted, echoing a sentiment that has persisted in the job market for decades.
Workplace expert Roxanne Calder offered a middle ground, advising news.com.au that salary discussions are necessary but should be approached delicately.
"It is okay to talk about salary. We should, everyone needs to pay the bills," Calder said, recommending a strategic approach to the timing of such questions to avoid seeming overly money-focused.
She suggests a “sandwich” method: start with a question about the role, follow with a query about salary, and conclude with another role-related question.
Moreover, Calder emphasizes the importance of letting the company initiate the conversation about compensation, or at least waiting until the end of the interview to broach the topic gently.
This approach can help candidates navigate the tricky waters of salary discussions without coming off as greedy or disinterested in the job itself.
.jpg_wne4ke?tr=h-184)