> You don't need to work at a job for 12 hours a day to wind up spending more time with your coworkers than with your partner though. I work 9-5, my partner works 10-6. I leave before she is awake and when I get home we have about 6 hours before we go to bed. So yeah, people willingly work at jobs like that because they are...normal jobs.
Buddy there are at least 32 free non-sleep hours on the weekend. I think the 9-5 schedule is a ridiculous social phenomenon as well, but if you're saying "I spend more time with my deskmates than my partner during the week", you're working more than a 9-5. If you're using "during the week" to mean on weekdays, this seems like a pretty arbitrary point to make. We live in a capitalist society, most of our social relationships are determined by economics, frankly I think it's fucked up to think you're entitled to be best friends with your coworkers. I'm unhappy that economic decisions beyond my control mediate my personal relationships, but that affects my politics not my decision-making around whether someone is entitled to earn a living alongside me.
> Makes sense to me. Anyone who gets up and walks out of an interview because they were asked what they liked to do for fun is probably not someone you want to waste your time with.
That's not why you ask these questions for one, because you're basically just describing me and mostly no one else. But ask yourself why its important to know what my hobbies are and why I might be reluctant to answer this kind of question when every single little petty bias you have might prevent me from getting a job. Consider the position of power you have in this scenario. This is not a hypothetical either. This will sound like humblebragging, but I had an interview with a digital healthcare company in the bay area once and was told I didn't get the job because I "seemed too interested in CS topics" or something to that effect. Effectively saying they didn't want somebody who was interested in more than hacking javascript (which I did a code interview in and did well I thought). I had an interview where an interviewer was able to learn my politics from a github org I was a member of and didn't get the job (no idea if that affected the decision or not, they wouldn't explain their rationale). This kind of thing is why I don't consider these questions innocuous.
> If you're using "during the week" to mean on weekdays, this seems like a pretty arbitrary point to make
This is pretty much the universal understanding of during the week. I don't think it's arbitrary at all. I spend 40 hours a week in my office, and I spend 62 (32 on weekends and 6 per evening on a weekday), so 40% of my waking time is going to be spent with this person.
> frankly I think it's fucked up to think you're entitled to be best friends with your coworkers.
You're the only person who is talking about being best friends with your coworkers. I'm talking about having a working relationship with people which means being able to communicate with people. There is lots of gray area between being best friends and wanting to keep work and personal life separate.
> But ask yourself why its important to know what my hobbies are
I literally don't care. All I care is that you can communicate in some way. Saying "sorry I'd rather not discuss that" is fine. Saying "Why do you want to know about my hobbies, you're just going to use what I tell you to confirm your biases and not hire me" is antagonistic and makes me wonder "how are they going to react when I sit beside them".
> You're the only person who is talking about being best friends with your coworkers. I'm talking about having a working relationship with people which means being able to communicate with people. There is lots of gray area between being best friends and wanting to keep work and personal life separate.
Christ, you literally compared it to your relationship with your partner, forgive me if I'm just following your argument.
> I literally don't care. All I care is that you can communicate in some way. Saying "sorry I'd rather not discuss that" is fine. Saying "Why do you want to know about my hobbies, you're just going to use what I tell you to confirm your biases and not hire me" is antagonistic and makes me wonder "how are they going to react when I sit beside them".
Being an interview candidate who is under the microscope and being a coworker are two completely different experiences, and my relationship to you as a candidate will be extremely different than as a coworker. The communication I'm provided as a candidate is usually not frank and honest. I often won't even get feedback because companies are afraid of being sued, so the process is often a total black box. If we're drawing the analogy between an actual working relationship and the experience of an interview, everything about the latter is artificial because I need to work to live and am generally willing to jump through whatever hoops you need me to. Meanwhile you are going to conceal your actual thoughts until you have to make a yes/no decision about if I'll have to worry about not getting a paycheck at the end of the month to pay rent.
This entire experience is a lie. I get that there are difficult, arrogant people out there, but stop prying into the lives of your candidates to try to suss those out and have a little empathy for people in this experience.
> that's awful, I'm sorry that happened to you.
Look in the scheme of things my grievances are minor, tech has a much larger problem w/ racism, misogyny, transphobia, etc. and those biases are much more prevalent in interviews. I want tech workers to have some recognition of their position within the structure of society as workers with relative privilege who could make their jobs easily accessible for anyone instead of nickel and diming candidates over bullshit. Start seeing yourself as an actual worker with compatible interests to other workers and not as a gatekeeper or emissary for your boss.
Testing me about the things I enjoy in my personal life that are unrelated to how I perform my job is a gross practice that shouldn't be tolerated. I have pretty regular hobbies, I like reading, movies, board games, I play drums, I like seeing bands, I participate in some activist groups. Why is this any business of a prospective employer? I was asked recently what my favorite genre of music is and when I said punk rock I was asked "why do you like punk rock?". Do you understand why I might find this to be weird and invasive and cause me to question what aspects of myself are really being interrogated in an interview like that?
Buddy there are at least 32 free non-sleep hours on the weekend. I think the 9-5 schedule is a ridiculous social phenomenon as well, but if you're saying "I spend more time with my deskmates than my partner during the week", you're working more than a 9-5. If you're using "during the week" to mean on weekdays, this seems like a pretty arbitrary point to make. We live in a capitalist society, most of our social relationships are determined by economics, frankly I think it's fucked up to think you're entitled to be best friends with your coworkers. I'm unhappy that economic decisions beyond my control mediate my personal relationships, but that affects my politics not my decision-making around whether someone is entitled to earn a living alongside me.
> Makes sense to me. Anyone who gets up and walks out of an interview because they were asked what they liked to do for fun is probably not someone you want to waste your time with.
That's not why you ask these questions for one, because you're basically just describing me and mostly no one else. But ask yourself why its important to know what my hobbies are and why I might be reluctant to answer this kind of question when every single little petty bias you have might prevent me from getting a job. Consider the position of power you have in this scenario. This is not a hypothetical either. This will sound like humblebragging, but I had an interview with a digital healthcare company in the bay area once and was told I didn't get the job because I "seemed too interested in CS topics" or something to that effect. Effectively saying they didn't want somebody who was interested in more than hacking javascript (which I did a code interview in and did well I thought). I had an interview where an interviewer was able to learn my politics from a github org I was a member of and didn't get the job (no idea if that affected the decision or not, they wouldn't explain their rationale). This kind of thing is why I don't consider these questions innocuous.