“They’re Not Volunteers”: CEO Blasts Applicant For Refusing Task, Gets Reality Check Instead
A recruiter ignited controversy after rejecting a candidate who refused to complete a 90-minute skill assessment test.
The employer, who goes by M. Stanfield on X (formerly known as Twitter), expressed his frustration when a Gen Z job seeker refused to complete a task for an investment analyst position.
The post read:
“Me: [I] really enjoyed the call. Please see attached financial modeling test.
- Recruiter faces backlash for rejecting Gen Z applicant who refused a 90-minute unpaid skill test.
- Online critics argue that a 90-min test is excessive without knowing where the applicant stands in the hiring process.
- Research shows a trend towards skills-based hiring over traditional resume evaluations.
“Gen Z applicant: this looks like a lot of work. Without knowing where I stand in the process, I’m not comfortable spending 90 minutes in Excel.
“Me:…well…I can tell you where you stand now.”
A job recruiter’s reason for rejecting a candidate was met with criticism online
Image credits: Pexels/Nicola Barts
In follow-up posts, M. Stanfield shared that the skill assessment test was “one of the first things discussed in the interview.”
He also wrote that “if an analyst can’t hammer that out in 90 minutes, they’re not the right person.”
Furthermore, the recruiter admitted that if the job applicant had asked to be compensated for the task, he would’ve “gladly paid and probably hired” the Gen Zer.
M. Stanfield’s posts were met with criticism on social media, with many users pointing out that an hour and a half is a lot of time to work for free.
“To be fair, a lot of places are just using applicants for free labor. The job doesn’t exist. The ‘test’ is the only work they need done,” someone suggested.
“Applicant is right. Unless you offered to compensate for that 90 minutes. He has no idea how many applicants remain in the process. He probably has interviews with other businesses. Effort vs. reward definitely not there for this. Good for him,” another person penned.
The recruiter complained about the job seeker refusing to complete a 90-minute skill assessment test to advance in the hiring process
Image credits: Pexels/Fauxels
Another X user chimed in, “Why would someone accept spending 90 mins of their time jumping through hoops when they might not even get the job?”
Then, a separate individual shared his experience devoting time to a skill assessment test, only to be ignored and not get any feedback from the company later. “I don’t mind doing work for free to show what I can do. But last time I did this, the company ghosted me after I spent a weekend on a take-home,” he wrote.
“Without knowing where I stand in the process, I’m not comfortable spending 90 minutes in Excel,” the applicant stated
Image credits: Unsplash/Campaign Creators
Another employer also weighed in on the situation, saying that skill assessment tests are a better indicator of whether an applicant is fit for a role compared to a résumé or a job interview.
“I’ve watched people that present themselves so well fall flat when asked to do real work. Also, I’ve seen people who were on the fence about just kill it. When you hire these people, you want to invest in them and have them there for years,” they wrote.
To which someone responded, “Totally makes sense but the caveat is I think you need to be a final stage candidate. Not as a first-round filter for 100 people.”
Generation Z, sometimes known as “Zoomers,” is a cohort that spans from 1997 to 2012. Unlike millennials, Gen Zers are referred to as the first fully “digitally native” generation, given that they grew up with social media.
According to a 2023 survey carried out by Indeed and The Center for Generational Kinetics, more than half of respondents aged 16-24 stated that they’ve been “ghosted” by hiring managers.
Me: really enjoyed the call. Please see attached financial modeling test
Gen Z applicant: this looks like a lot of work. Without knowing where I stand in the process, I’m not comfortable spending 90 minutes in Excel
Me:…well…I can tell you where you stand now
— m. stanfield (@mu2myoc) April 23, 2024
Additionally, 4 in 10 Gen Zers said the most frustrating aspect of looking for a job was not receiving feedback from employers when they don’t get hired.
When it comes to drawn-out hiring processes, the response was clear: half said they wouldn’t apply for a job that required three separate interviews.
Meanwhile, a 2022 survey from the Society for Human Resource Management found that 79% of HR professionals believe that scores on skills assessments are just as (or more important) than traditional criteria in hiring decisions.
New research indicates a growing inclination toward skills-based hiring, marking a departure from conventional résumés. Over 70% of survey respondents—employees and employers from different continents— stated that skills-based hiring is more effective than relying on résumés, according to a report published by Test Gorilla.
“I wouldn’t do a 90-minute task for free,” a social media user wrote
Poll Question
Thanks! Check out the results:
Subscribe to Access
Exclusive Polls
By entering your email and clicking Subscribe, you're agreeing to let us send you customized marketing messages about us and our advertising partners. You are also agreeing to our Privacy Policy.
Thank you! You've successfully subscribed to newsletters!
You May Also Like
Woman Refuses To Chip In For Babysitting Because She Doesn’t Even Have Kids, Asks If She’s A Jerk
Do you think childless individuals should be expected to chip in for group babysitting costs during friend gatherings?
“They Saw The Blood Leave My Body”: Woman Refuses To Tip 10% At Bridal Store
How do you feel about the practice of tipping at a bridal store?
17 Y.O. Is Done Sharing Her Birthday With Her Late Twin, Parents Are Not Having It
Do you think the girl should be allowed to celebrate her birthday without the remembrance of her deceased twin?
I've done technical skills tests that would be part of the job. However, everyone had the same test, it wasn't work that needed to be done, and the test was limited to 30 minutes at the most. The reason for the test is because some people lie about their skills or over-estimate their abilities. Example: someone said they knew Photoshop, but a test revealed that they only knew one tool.
test = free job. No thanks. If you exploit me in the application phase you will exploit me also later.
It's not exploitation, it's verifying skills. When employers have moved away from conventional resumes to instead hire based on skills, which means they're not necessarily looking at education or past employment, how are they supposed to know that you aren't full of $hit? You can spend the years and gain the immense amount of debt getting the paper work, or you can spend an hour or two proving yourself. The word of a stranger who has motivation to misrepresent themselves isn't worth much.
Load More Replies...
I've had to do mock assessments for jobs, but it takes no more than 15 minutes. It's not anything that the company could use for anything other than a skill assessment. I've worked in financial institutions and it's just more of a test of how to interact with people and not to give away account information if the person isn't on the account. But this particular instance sounds like they wanted free labor.
I've done presentations for jobs where I'm at 2nd/3rd interview stage (which is also a joke in my opinion). I have refused to do tasks like "come up with a product plan" for a first interview. I still think having to prove my capabilities is wrong expecially in an industry I've worked in for 20 years.
Very American. I've never been asked to do a 90 minute task to prove my worth. The resume and two interviews should be enough and if I don't perform when hired, you have a month to fire me without reason. These tasks during application are just free labour ruses, there's probably not even a job. Their own team has a sprint and outsources chunks of it to 100s of applicants, taking the best solutions for their end product.
even more if they want. In italy the trial time can be longer, but is a two cut blade... You can fire me when you want but I can leave you when I want...
Load More Replies...
The hiring process has become ridiculous. Interview after interview, homework, etc. Even two interviews would have been considered odd not that long ago. Now it's normal to have 3 - 5 separate interviews trying to get a single job and that's on top of having to provide both an application and a resume with the same daggum information. It's a waste of everybody's time and ridiculous. If you want to test potential employees, pay them for their time. If you want a seeming endless number of interviews for potential employees, pay them for their time. Why is it so hard for you to make a decision? Stop disrespecting people's time.
And don't forget the interview with the entire board of directors to fill a job on the loading dock!
Load More Replies...
Definitely okay to do an assessment as a part of the interview process. Not okay for that to be a 90-minute long endeavor. One thing that's really helpful if you use a site like Indeed is employers can require a skills assessment when you first apply, but then your results are saved. Indeed offers categories of these skills assessments, so if you're applying for similar jobs, you can use the same results repeatedly so you don't waste a ton of time filling them out each time. Works well for both employer and applicant.
Gee, I can hand out 100 "tests" and I won't have to do any work this quarter. It's not a "test", it's working for them doing one of their jobs.
Skills based hiring is far more equitable than resume based hiring. The corollary is you have to demonstrate your skills.
That's shouldn't take 90 minutes of unpaid time, particularly with companies that refuse to divulge their pay scales or provide information on where you are in the hiring process. You can hire on a provisional basis to observe skills and determine who remains or pay a nominal fee to those who make it to a skills round to take a brief skills exam.
Load More Replies... “ Gen Zers are referred to as the first fully “digitally native” generation, given that they grew up with social media.” Growing up with social networks does not make anyone a digital native. A digital native is a person in his 50s who grew up using personal computers at home and at school (and knows how they work), who has used all kinds of social networks that he has seen born and die, who has used all kinds of gadgets like palm pilots, smartwatches, smartphones, and has seen how they have evolved while he has used them.
Besides the issue here around work, it's a real problem. The hope was that ubiquitous computing would mean that kids would learn how computers work. Instead we ended up presenting them with devices that are mostly about passive consumption of media/games/social networks. They're much less creative in a lot of ways than an 1995 PC.
Load More Replies... At NZ minimum wage they want $46.30 of free work as a skills test, then let's say other interviews were another 2 hours in total; so almost $100 worth of work and time. And that doesn't cover travel, clothes etc. just time. Skills/aptitude tests should be short and to the point. 90 minutes of free labour is ridiculous!
In general, a skills assessment is more valuable than a second interview. It should be a standard task for the job and should be timed and monitored so the candidate takes no more than 90 minutes on the task. I don’t want the person who spends 2 days making it perfect, I want to know what they produce in a given amount of time with expectations adjusted accordingly. This is not unreasonable.
I worked in IT and we occasionally needed to hire someone for our team. We had a a set of 10 basic knowledge assessment questions that we delivered verbally in the 1st in-person interview. It was a reasonable set of questions that let us weed out the obvious resumé-inflators. Our candidates had already gone through an initial interview by HR, that I suppose weeded out the job hoppers and personality nightmares, so we usually had good success with new hires.
I just this week had a recruiter request that I complete a test. He told me in the email, “it only takes 10 minutes”. I clicked on the link for the test, on the first page after logging on, there was statement, “this is a 40 minute timed test.”. The test was ridiculous, complete waste of time. Like something a Ph.D cooked up in a lab, not something relevant to actual work.
"Prove you're a good DBA -- fix our online system." OK ! As a non-employee that will be 300 bucks per hour...
I spent an entire hour editing an article as part of a "job assessment" a few months ago. I never heard from the recruiter again. I'm pretty sure I just did some jerk's work for them for free. NEVER AGAIN.
Idk ive been asked to do full day working interviews with the clinic covering airfare/hotels several times,, I feel like it should be a final step before signing a contract for a top pick,, not to sort through applicants, helpful for both sides to see if a good fit, but its also super stressful and exhausting and you better be willing to give me a full 2 page breakdown on why I didn't get the job if I don't get hired after all that free work. Interviews go both ways
It's funny how so many people directly jump to the worst base scenario when seeing this! The boss is already the worst boss that exploit his employee. I think it says more about their relation to authority than work itself. I did a lot of benevolent work to gain experience in culture. Now just 90 minutes seems like exploitation... Also, the job is analyst... Not sure I'm gonna employ someone with so little motivation for a job like that.
I've done technical skills tests that would be part of the job. However, everyone had the same test, it wasn't work that needed to be done, and the test was limited to 30 minutes at the most. The reason for the test is because some people lie about their skills or over-estimate their abilities. Example: someone said they knew Photoshop, but a test revealed that they only knew one tool.
test = free job. No thanks. If you exploit me in the application phase you will exploit me also later.
It's not exploitation, it's verifying skills. When employers have moved away from conventional resumes to instead hire based on skills, which means they're not necessarily looking at education or past employment, how are they supposed to know that you aren't full of $hit? You can spend the years and gain the immense amount of debt getting the paper work, or you can spend an hour or two proving yourself. The word of a stranger who has motivation to misrepresent themselves isn't worth much.
Load More Replies... I've had to do mock assessments for jobs, but it takes no more than 15 minutes. It's not anything that the company could use for anything other than a skill assessment. I've worked in financial institutions and it's just more of a test of how to interact with people and not to give away account information if the person isn't on the account. But this particular instance sounds like they wanted free labor.
I've done presentations for jobs where I'm at 2nd/3rd interview stage (which is also a joke in my opinion). I have refused to do tasks like "come up with a product plan" for a first interview. I still think having to prove my capabilities is wrong expecially in an industry I've worked in for 20 years.
Very American. I've never been asked to do a 90 minute task to prove my worth. The resume and two interviews should be enough and if I don't perform when hired, you have a month to fire me without reason. These tasks during application are just free labour ruses, there's probably not even a job. Their own team has a sprint and outsources chunks of it to 100s of applicants, taking the best solutions for their end product.
even more if they want. In italy the trial time can be longer, but is a two cut blade... You can fire me when you want but I can leave you when I want...
Load More Replies... The hiring process has become ridiculous. Interview after interview, homework, etc. Even two interviews would have been considered odd not that long ago. Now it's normal to have 3 - 5 separate interviews trying to get a single job and that's on top of having to provide both an application and a resume with the same daggum information. It's a waste of everybody's time and ridiculous. If you want to test potential employees, pay them for their time. If you want a seeming endless number of interviews for potential employees, pay them for their time. Why is it so hard for you to make a decision? Stop disrespecting people's time.
And don't forget the interview with the entire board of directors to fill a job on the loading dock!
Load More Replies... Definitely okay to do an assessment as a part of the interview process. Not okay for that to be a 90-minute long endeavor. One thing that's really helpful if you use a site like Indeed is employers can require a skills assessment when you first apply, but then your results are saved. Indeed offers categories of these skills assessments, so if you're applying for similar jobs, you can use the same results repeatedly so you don't waste a ton of time filling them out each time. Works well for both employer and applicant.
Gee, I can hand out 100 "tests" and I won't have to do any work this quarter. It's not a "test", it's working for them doing one of their jobs.
Skills based hiring is far more equitable than resume based hiring. The corollary is you have to demonstrate your skills.
That's shouldn't take 90 minutes of unpaid time, particularly with companies that refuse to divulge their pay scales or provide information on where you are in the hiring process. You can hire on a provisional basis to observe skills and determine who remains or pay a nominal fee to those who make it to a skills round to take a brief skills exam.
Load More Replies... “ Gen Zers are referred to as the first fully “digitally native” generation, given that they grew up with social media.” Growing up with social networks does not make anyone a digital native. A digital native is a person in his 50s who grew up using personal computers at home and at school (and knows how they work), who has used all kinds of social networks that he has seen born and die, who has used all kinds of gadgets like palm pilots, smartwatches, smartphones, and has seen how they have evolved while he has used them.
Besides the issue here around work, it's a real problem. The hope was that ubiquitous computing would mean that kids would learn how computers work. Instead we ended up presenting them with devices that are mostly about passive consumption of media/games/social networks. They're much less creative in a lot of ways than an 1995 PC.
Load More Replies... At NZ minimum wage they want $46.30 of free work as a skills test, then let's say other interviews were another 2 hours in total; so almost $100 worth of work and time. And that doesn't cover travel, clothes etc. just time. Skills/aptitude tests should be short and to the point. 90 minutes of free labour is ridiculous!
In general, a skills assessment is more valuable than a second interview. It should be a standard task for the job and should be timed and monitored so the candidate takes no more than 90 minutes on the task. I don’t want the person who spends 2 days making it perfect, I want to know what they produce in a given amount of time with expectations adjusted accordingly. This is not unreasonable.
I worked in IT and we occasionally needed to hire someone for our team. We had a a set of 10 basic knowledge assessment questions that we delivered verbally in the 1st in-person interview. It was a reasonable set of questions that let us weed out the obvious resumé-inflators. Our candidates had already gone through an initial interview by HR, that I suppose weeded out the job hoppers and personality nightmares, so we usually had good success with new hires.
I just this week had a recruiter request that I complete a test. He told me in the email, “it only takes 10 minutes”. I clicked on the link for the test, on the first page after logging on, there was statement, “this is a 40 minute timed test.”. The test was ridiculous, complete waste of time. Like something a Ph.D cooked up in a lab, not something relevant to actual work.
"Prove you're a good DBA -- fix our online system." OK ! As a non-employee that will be 300 bucks per hour...
I spent an entire hour editing an article as part of a "job assessment" a few months ago. I never heard from the recruiter again. I'm pretty sure I just did some jerk's work for them for free. NEVER AGAIN.
Idk ive been asked to do full day working interviews with the clinic covering airfare/hotels several times,, I feel like it should be a final step before signing a contract for a top pick,, not to sort through applicants, helpful for both sides to see if a good fit, but its also super stressful and exhausting and you better be willing to give me a full 2 page breakdown on why I didn't get the job if I don't get hired after all that free work. Interviews go both ways
It's funny how so many people directly jump to the worst base scenario when seeing this! The boss is already the worst boss that exploit his employee. I think it says more about their relation to authority than work itself. I did a lot of benevolent work to gain experience in culture. Now just 90 minutes seems like exploitation... Also, the job is analyst... Not sure I'm gonna employ someone with so little motivation for a job like that.
27
35