The boss was working. He has a day job. He crammed an interview into his schedule, then he caught up on work, and expected to cram in another interview at 3:45. He told the OP to arrive at 3:00, that way the OP would have plenty of time to fill out the paperwork and it would streamline the actual interview process.
The OP arrived early and rushed though the paperwork. Then he was asked by the receptionist to take a seat, and the boss would be with him as soon as he was free. That's entirely normal.
The boss wasn't ignoring the OP, he was working. According to the OP, he was making phone calls and meeting with employees. The OP simply believed that he was more important than whoever that was on the other end of the phone. He believed that by showing up early and finishing his paperwork quickly, he had priority over the boss' other appointments.
Yes, it would have been nice if the boss came over, shook his hand, and said "I'll be with you in a couple of minutes", but he might have preferred to focus on getting his own work done before coming over and saying "Phew, got that stuff all out of the way. My name's X, nice to meet you." And it's not the boss' job to wait on people who are waiting in the lobby, that's the receptionist's job.
In the OP's nuke-letter, he implied that the boss was free at 3:05, as soon as the previous candidate walked out of the office, even though he told us he could hear the boss working, right up until he rage-quit the interview. Why are employment applications a valid job for the boss, while phone calls and employee meetings aren't? It's because the OP saw the boss as nothing more than an object that hands out jobs. (And note, the OP spent a half hour on the phone with the boss a day earlier.)
He saw that the receptionist was busy, so he stopped pestering her, and went as far as to not ask her any questions when he began to feel uncomfortable. But "with all due respect" that boss is terrible for making the OP wait for his scheduled appointment. Total double standard.
Also, the OP said that he was broken at 30 minutes. He showed up early, rushed his paperwork, and then couldn't wait 30 minutes before he felt he was so agitated that he would have been unable to pass the interview. It took him another 15 minutes to reach the state where he torpedoed everything. He needs some sort of help.
Edit: Just to reiterate: He arrived 15 minutes early. Waiting for 30 minutes broke him.
Too add, had he waited 2 more minutes, he would have had a job.
For those of you just joining us...
![]()
Goodnight.
I kind of admire the OP for doing that. It certainly wasn't smart, but I'd like to live in his world.
After skimming a good portion of this thread,
1.) Thacker messed up. Interviewer did as well to a lesser degree.
2.) Thacker messed up even harder posting it here. Elaborate troll attempt/ persecution complex/ or whatever on his part, it's weird to see how riled up GAF gets at this shit. I know the dude seemed pretty hard-headed that he was mostly in the right but damn, be thankful that y'all have the self-awareness to not make threads detailing a dumb mistake you made lest you risk eliciting the wrath of GAFs goof-beatdown squad...
This entire thread is one of the greatest reads ever. I couldn't make this up even if I tried. Oh, Thacker
I would gave waited an entire day for the interview had I been in your shoes
For those of you just joining us...
![]()
Goodnight.
... But I'm not even American - or In America!way to let the man walk all over you have some pride
youre why america is in the shape it is
way to let the man walk all over you have some pride
youre why america is in the shape it is
That's kind of what he did, though, because all he had to do was wave or say "Hi, I'll be with you shortly" and it would have been fine. Hell, they were within earshot of each other. Instead he pointedly ignored Thacker since he expected him to take longer.
Thacker still could have handled it a lot better but it's very grating seeing people say that behavior like the owner's is expected because it's absolutely not--it's grossly disrespectful and unprofessional.
Thacker also over-reacted in the thread but he was 100% correct in saying there's a pervasive attitude of "anything for the boss as long as I have a job" in America, which hurts everyone. Just that there's a better way to say it than " 'Merica!"
Sometimes I wish I was unemployed. Not very often. I have a very comfortable job. But sometimes.The wonderful world of unemployment.
Why, there was even a brief moment where people began to suspect that I might even be involved with Thacker's story. Hah. As if there was some sort of conspiracy involving old Lionel Mandrake and milk. Preposterous.
Oh, and to Thacker... If you're reading this. We're always open to new employees if you'd like to try for another interview. I'm afraid the old position's been filled, but the Mandrake Air experimental division can always use more testers.
![]()
Goodnight.
For those of you just joining us...
![]()
I don't think people would have come down as hard on him if he hadn't A) decided to frame it as "fighting the man" and "standing up for himself" once everyone (IMO, rightfully) started calling him immature and/or an idiot for what he did, and B) had a history of making threads detailing the woes of feeling underpayed and being unemployed.
This was my big thing too.
I mean, I know a couple people got on me about mentioning his thread history, but it was very relevant to this thread.
In every one of his OT threads, he framed himself as the victim, correct?
Interesting thread but I just kind of feel bad. He reminds me very much of people I used to know. I just hope it really happened because it feels like the kind of story I've heard with people trying to make themselves feel better about 'being screwed over' when it didn't happen.
You understand that a job is a privilege, not something that you are just entitled to?
Last great thread before OT is shutdown for E3.
I just wanna throw in regarding this notion that a job is a "privilege." I think that's an extremely caustic attitude, one that paints employees as subservient and not deserving of respect. As much as any employee needs a job, a company needs an employee. It is a symbiotic relationship, and anyone who thinks "oh god please bless upon me a position" is just perpetuating a terrible mindset where workers are just meat waiting to be processed. The more interviewees act like this, the more companies will think it's okay to treat them that way.
Obviously I am not arguing in favor of a job being something a person is "entitled to," but rather that I think it should be an even exchange, not one of those two extremes.
I just wanna throw in regarding this notion that a job is a "privilege." I think that's an extremely caustic attitude, one that paints employees as subservient and not deserving of respect. As much as any employee needs a job, a company needs an employee. It is a symbiotic relationship, and anyone who thinks "oh god please bless upon me a position" is just perpetuating a terrible mindset where workers are just meat waiting to be processed. The more interviewees act like this, the more companies will think it's okay to treat them that way.
Obviously I am not arguing in favor of a job being something a person is "entitled to," but rather that I think it should be an even exchange, not one of those two extremes.
my favorite part was when he accused the interviewer of making a "power play" over email by asking for references.
Dude, this is not an episode of Suits, no one is laying traps for you.
Employers need employees. They don't need you. That's where you get into trouble.
An office job making above the median salary with OT and benefits in a comfortable American city isn't some Upton Sinclair-esque dystopia. The OP's job at Walmart is much closer to what you describe, and he somehow doesn't seem to have a problem working for minimum wage at the Manniest of all "The Man" companies. He'll never even know if the boss was a nice guy or an asshole, because their entire interaction was based on inference and speculation. He assumed their initial phone call and his waiting room experience was some assertion of dominance power play in which the evil manager was attempting to bend him to his whim. When it turns out he was just completing his due diligence on the OP's paperwork and doing, you know, his job.
The reality of the current job market is that there are more seekers than there are jobs available. It has thrown off the traditional balance of power (which, lets face it, only really existed for the last 30 years or so). If you walk in to an interview with no referral expecting a latte and a back rub, instead of having to fight tooth and nail for a position that 100 other people just as qualified as you are also applying for, you're not going to find much success.
It's actually a pretty common interview tactic...making the interviewee wait. It's not exactly kind, but it does give a bit of insight on the person's patience, and how determined they are to get the job.
It might have behooved OP to ask questions of the person he was speaking with a little more directly, or just ask where the restroom was to go and collect himself a bit. If you're desperate for a job, sometimes you have to prove that you're capable of it. If that means doing a song and dance, then so be it. Pity he missed out, but hopefully it's a lesson learned.