Ist diese Frage Dumm?
Wenn man bei einem Vorstellungsgespräch fragt ob sie genügend Mitarbeiter haben wird man dann als Blöd wargenommen ? Ich war bei einem Vorstellungsgespräch und habe das Gefragt weil ich kein bock auf Stress durch Personalmangel habe und der Interviewer wurde ab da mega undfreundlich und verlor komplett sein lachen. Hat auch nur zurückgefragt was denn für mich genügend mitarbeiter seien worauf ich keine Antwort wusste. Später als ich dann nach dem Gehalt gefragt habe sagte er dass seine Mitarbeiter nicht nur wegen des Geldes arbeiten und dass sie ein Faires und Branchenübliches gehalt zahlen. Er hat auch da meine Frage nicht beantwortet. Generell fühlte ich mich mega kleingemacht bei dieser Firma.
Stehe ich jetzt dumm da warum darf ich das nicht Fragen ? Ivch verstehe es einfach nicht. Ich war pünktlich, freundlich, gut angezogen und trotzdem wurde ich dort wie ein Versager behandelt. Ich sollte das theoretisch sogar anzeigen oder wasmeint ihr dazu ?
(2 votes)
Loading...
Well, if they had enough staff, they wouldn’t hire new people. At the moment when you had the interview, your question was almost answered.
I understood the question differently now. I think that the questioner is more about whether many other points are still free.
Even then the question is not meaningful. There’s hardly any employer going to answer that they hire less and less people than they need. No one admits to operating his employees at the burn-out limit even if they do.
In principle, the question does not lead to anything like leaving it.
But yes, I understand the objection.
Absolutely okay. There is nothing wrong with discussions, you don’t always have to be the same opinion – even at the end -:)
Sure, absolutely right, you want to find the right workplace, with a good working environment and pay, and you have to find out a lot and ask questions. Some questions, however, give some of you yourself a price, things that put you in a worse negotiating position.
My tip: don’t ask the question in the interview, but, if you get the opportunity when you wait or the one or the other employee is on the way in the building, just imagine yourself curly and ask the questions. You’ll get far better answers without anyone going to twist you later. Nice to introduce and explain to him that you are currently engaged in a job and whether he is so happy with the employer and the job situation. If you like to come a bit too early, then this is an opportunity for an inconsistent talk.
Hey, sorry you had to discuss about me. I just wanted to know if they were looking for a lot of people like to do, for example, airlines or if I was just a substitute for someone who is pregnant/sick for example. It was my second real interview and I was extremely nervous. Also because of the salary I had the feeling that it was the right time to ask. Because hand to heart when I earn too little work can be so beautiful. Clearly, it is no longer so important at a certain level, but I am concerned about whether I can meet my basic needs, that is very important to me and I find it wrong when it is spoken at the end.
Right. Not smart. As an employer, I would think, “Look, he just wants to work if he doesn’t have to try.” This reduces the chances to be taken.
I would certainly not ask, justified or not the question of the OP. You’re more likely to shoot yourself.
To make it short: The question was stupid because the questioner has left a bad impression by not ending the whole thing.
The question and for itself would simply have been unnecessary to have an answer to the question of the staffer like the question is one of the most unfortunate circumstances that one can experience in the interview.
That’s right. But it was about whether it was justified and not whether it was a leader.
The questioner himself has defined the meaning.
I see that there is no meaningful answer. However, this is absolutely not justified, so the problem in the situation is rather the employer. The question, in my opinion, was not stupid, but unnecessary, which the questioner apparently did not know by lack of experience. I am disturbed by the expression “mum” in the answer.
Please don’t be angry – but have you ever tried your little gray cells and thought about why you had an interview in the company? But certainly not because they are sufficient or have “sufficient” personnel – right???
Of course, you shot yourself out of the game in the conversation – almost by a gate of your own.
I’m not surprised that the staffer became patty and pampty from there – although he actually had to be a professional enough to handle this SItuation properly.
I’m just wondering how someone I’m facing as a potential employer would ask if we had enough employees. I am almost convinced that I would have canceled this conversation at this point, saying: “No, we don’t have enough employees. But unfortunately, SIE will not be able to help change this condition. Thank you and goodbye.“
I wouldn’t ask the question.
Because on the one hand your motivation is to ask this question nothing that would emphasize you positively (‘stress’ will eventually give it IMMER, that is normal), on the other hand the question is totally unprecedented. Pleasant employees for WAS?
If they had so many employees that their capacities were exhausted to burst, you wouldn’t sit there, would you?
For its part, it is understandable not to ask such questions for you.
For him, the drops were probably already sucked. Your asked questions present you as ‘I want my rest’ and ‘I want money’…. you probably wanted to learn less about the company.
Let’s just say how it gets into the forest, it just sounds out…
You may ask, if necessary, that you do not leave a good impression on which the interview is to be made.
If you want to ask something in the direction of ‘how will work be divided and when, for example, I may have to jump in for a sick colleague’, ask for something like the team size or general structuring.
Are you working together in larger units of, for example, 8 people, where you can divide the work virtually ‘free’ and you just talk it off within the team?
Or are you working alone in his office, with colleagues on the outside, but in the end everyone gets his stack of work on the table and has to see how he gets clear with it?
Both have his advantages and his disadvantages to ask that shows more interest and you can also find out what is really important about the company, which can then go back to ‘fit together or, if necessary, not’… but above all, you can imagine how the work will be. And draw your own conclusions from this.
These are basic requirements… you don’t make the necessary maturity look over with your decision and the scope of your statements. You get that with time and life experience.
What are you doing? This is just another immature reaction, in my eyes. The man did nothing wrong except to gain a bad impression from you on the basis of your questions.
He’s been on a question and you’re being attacked because you couldn’t concretize. And forced to answer your questions, he’s not as little as you have to answer his questions… you take this from the conversation and that will affect your decision whether the company suits you or you fit the company.
And I dare to doubt that.
If you are not properly treated during an interview and you are not even answered by your legitimate questions, it is better that you were not accepted. The question was absolutely justified as I see. The question of whether or not there were enough employees is absolutely pointless, as he can best judge it. I assume that they currently have strong problems and he did not want to admit it, then he felt pushed into the corner and became unfriendly. Good luck with the next application!
The question ‘have you enough employees’ is completely pointless. It is even necessary to ask how the applicant thinks that.
It may be that I have enough employees in sales or in the logistics sector, but there is just a personal bottleneck in the IT sector. It may be that I currently have more than enough employees, but everyone must do their best if three new large orders come in tomorrow, which is not the standard.
It may be that I currently have a small bottleneck because many employees are in parental time, but they come back fresh and joyful in half a year and then relax the situation.
That’s why it’s important to find out what the applicant actually wants out.
If I find a bold interpretation… can of course vote, but only from what has been said can’t be pulled out so much that I would accept it.
As you did, it might have been bad. If they had enough staff, they wouldn’t be looking. The question might come over as if you were making fun of the company.
I would have explained this to the question, with “Naja enough staff to do the work done without there being backstrips or overtime.” You could have asked the question the same way, “How often does it happen that overtime or work is to be done that do not fall into your own work?”
You could have said, “Is the work done by industry, or would their employees claim that they are overproportionately required”? But then he would have been blown out of his face even more
Incidentally, if at all, you should always ask at the end of the conversation if you are asked if you have any questions. In general, however, one wants to be rather positive in an interview and something like that is always fatballs, though justified.
But don’t worry, you won’t have to sign a contract.
If you want to find out whether there is a lack of personnel in the company, you do not ask intelligent questions out of such a plump manner.