Wayne posted here a few times that, when he interviews people for jobs at Pelican, he either sends someone out or he goes out to take a look at the applicant's car. Having a total mess in your car can be considered an indicator of your work habits and certainly your work station.

Keeping the above in mind, when I went to an interview last week (just got the offer an hour ago), I drove my Hyundai Santa Fe, but had the inside spotless before leaving the house.

I knew a girl who worked at Geico and got fired when a security camera spotted her driving into the office garage without her seatbelt on. True story. Don't know if she had been warned or if that was written policy.

my cars are kept absolutely immaculate, right down to the even wear on my tire treads. let the morons in HR check, it's not like they know what the hell they are looking at anyhow.

I can't remotely imagine how this is legal during an interview.

On another note, my buddy drove around a beat up 78 Malibu, kept complaining the cops pulling him over guns drawn cuz he looked like a Meth head driving around in it.

rjp

Anyone in HR- I invite you to sneak out and not only check my interior, but check my tire pressure. See if you can find a flaw, anywhere.

Hah.
When I worked for a shipping company, all the bodyshop cars had dents and the mechanic's cars were always breaking down.

This story brought some ancient memories flooding back. In the early/mid '70s, when I was a young teenager, I worked summers at a parking garage in DT Minneapolis hand-washing cars. It was a decent job when busy, I got paid by the car instead of the hour. I still remember that it was $1.30 per car, inside and out, vacuumed and chamoised(?) dry. There were some massive cars in those days, like Eldorados and Buick wagons. :)

I wasn't even old enough to drive in those days but I had long hair and an attitude. My boss was a straight-up redneck named Ernie Peacock Jr., (I kid you not), he had a buzz cut like a Marine, (unusual in the '70s), and he was a beer drinking 35 y.o. to my pot smoking 15 y.o. He used to call me "hippie freak" all day long but I knew that he really liked me but would not admit it. One day, I came in with a pretty good shiner from a fight over the weekend and he was in heaven giving me crap about it. :)

Your boss asking how much weed you sold for the Corvette really reminded me of Ernie. He was a funny guy. I wound up doing some yard work for him at his large suburban place one weekend and drank a 12-pack with him, he liked my work ethic even though he wouldn't admit it and he bossed me around like a drill Sargent but with always some humor involved. I miss that guy and hope he's had a good life since. :cool:

PS i know the VP of HR for Chase- had nachos with her in PHX a few weeks ago- cute girl BUT...

YOU SHOULD SEE HER CAR. IT'S A DISASTER, Not only is it a mess, it's probably been crashed 1,000 times. I would NEVER, EVER, GIVE HER THE KEYS TO MY CAR, EVER- even if I lay dying and i had to go to the hospital I would hesitate giving her the wheel.

rjp

My HR friend explained the basis of this: If one knows having tinted windows is illegal(at least in CA for driver and front passenger windows), and your car has those windows tinted, then the mindset is your above the law, that the law doesn't apply to you.

So from the company perspective, what else are you capable of from an ethical standpoint knowing what is wrong, but then doing something that might compromise the very company you work for.

Just as many don't like "personality tests", but they usually can find deception in answers just by moving a few words around, asking that same question 2 pages later, and then they look for an inconsistency. For instance, anyone that answers "have you ever lied?" and says NO is absolutely full of shyte.

Life isn't fair, but a private company is pretty much free to hire and fire on their terms.

The problem is assuming such a trivial thing as indicative of a "mindset." I have purchased several used cars where the PO had tinted the front windows, never to the extreme of too dark to see the passengers, but tinted nevertheless. Does the fact that I don't think it's worth the time and money to disassemble the door window to remove a tint that is legal in 49 other states yet is illegal here simply because it's after market, make me think I'm above the law? Most of the time, I didn't even know the tint was applied.

My point is this, maybe your HR friend needs to ask a few questions. Maybe the car is borrowed. Maybe they don't know it's illegal because they know of no one who's been stopped. Maybe they're from another state where it's legal. Maybe your HRfriend does ask questions. Jumping to a conclusion that one feels above the law based solely on his window tint is ridiculous--especially when you extrapolate that they may be unethical from that single fact.

A job interview goes both ways. As a potential employee, I am looking for a company culture that I am compatible with. If window tinting or some other new age thing about me puts off the HR person, then perhaps I wouldn't fit into that company's culture.

As a long time employer and the one who did the hiring let me tell you that "attitude" is more important than certifications and qualifications. Your car can emit something about your attitude. I see this as a valid element of the evaluation.

Complete load of crap, jumping to all kinds of potentially wrong conclusions. As ossiblue mentions, there can be lots of extenuating or legitimizing circumstances. I know in my state one can apply for and obtain a waiver from tinting restrictions due to a sensitivity to light (I looked into it a while ago but then determined it really wasn't necessary to get an inspection sticker even with my tinted windows). If a company didn't hire someone on this basis, they'd be setting themselves up for a lawsuit bigtime ("so you didn't hire my client because of his medical condition? Tell me more...") Of course as with most things, good luck ever getting them to admit it - most companies will never state a reason that a particular candidate was hired and another one was not. They'll just give a safe, evasive, corporate non-answer like "we found the other candidate to be more qualified for the position" so in practice they can do pretty much whatever they want without repercussions.

Also, as has been stated, why would you work for a company that has a policy like this? I've turned down job offers before and I very likely wouldn't consider working for a company like this one if I found out their policy ahead of time doing my homework. The only reason companies get away with stupidity like this is because good, qualified people let them, roll over and compromise their principles just to collect a paycheck. Stop doing it and watch them change their tune. When all the best candidates start going to the competition and they start getting their butts kicked as a result, perhaps they'll reconsider - if they're able to figure out why it's happening before they go under.

I have tinted windows on my Mercedes which are / were legal in CA and MA but not in NH where I'm currently domiciled. Then again I spend 80% of my time down in MA and live very close to the border so I don't see the need to remove the tinting (that I paid good money for and which protects my interior and looks good) just to comply with a dumb NH law. I've even discussed it with a cop and he agreed with me that the tint law has nothing whatsoever to do with officer safety - it's just an excuse to pull over cars that exhibit a characteristic that a lot of low-lifes happen to incorporate into their rides. I said if pulled over I roll down the windows anyway and put my hands in plain view, so what's the issue. He said "absolutely none - you'll definitely get treated better and with less suspicion than someone who leaves the window up and / or has their hands out of sight, whether the windows are tinted or not. If we're really concerned we'll order the driver to lower the window over the loudspeaker before we even approach the car".

Also keep in mind that it is the duty of the citizenry to challenge and even disobey stupid or unjust laws. It's not a "mindset" it's a responsibility. If our forefathers had followed all the laws we'd still be singing "God save the Queen" and paying tribute to London (although our taxes might actually be less than the tribute we pay to Washington, but that's another discussion! ;)

If my "mindset" about mindless conformity is a problem then fine - don't hire me. I don't want to work for you anyway. I'm sure your corporate leaders follow all the rules now, don't they? Your loss, not mine.

Amen brother! Be true to thy self. If you have to be someone that you're not to get a job, it very likely will not be a good fit. Be yourself, be honest, look for a culture where the real you fits.

As someone who has done hiring, I find it to be totally irrelevant. I've known incredible engineers that drive beater cars and keep a messy desk. If they are technical superstars willing to go above and beyond, I could give a rat's ass.

Of course, I also find most of the standard HR interview questions to be a joke that anyone halfway prepared can BS their way through. HR tries to standardize the interview process so they keep the power, because at the core they rarely even understand the job that they are hiring for. To me a conversation about past experiences, pros/cons of past jobs, desires for the next job, and general chit-chat can be much more revealing.

Profiles...all about the stats. Can't fight the averages unfortunately but when exceptions exist they rock conventional thought.