awful interview, WIBU to have ended it early?

[cigarsmokingwoman]

I had an interview this week for a fixed‑term maternity cover role in a field I’ve worked in for years. On paper, it looked perfect — but it turned into a complete nightmare.
The current postholder is full‑time, but they want to replace her with someone part time, on a short contract, no team, and still covering the same massive list of responsibilities. Straight away, it felt like they were expecting one person to do the work of several. Its not a senior role, but sounded it as they kept refering to "supporting our staff of over 2000".
Beforehand, I’d asked for some reasonable adjustments, as I have several disabilities, which they agreed to — but when the interview started, they hadn’t done them. I had to ask twice, which was awkward and made me feel like I was being a nuisance. They did send the questions in advance, again as an adjustment, but then on the day they started asking completely different ones, putting me on the spot and making it much harder to answer properly.
One of the panel was so patronising. They asked me to explain really basic concepts that I’d expect anyone in the field to already know. When I started talking about some of my biggest achievements, they cut across me and actually said they didn’t want to hear about the awards I'd won! The question was literally about qualifications, experience and achievements related to the role.
The whole thing felt off. The tone was wrong, the expectations were ridiculous, and there was no sign of respect for my experience or the effort I’d put into preparing. Eventually, I just said I was ending the interview because it was a waste of both our time. I left the Teams call feeling small, upset, and wondering why I’d ever applied.
I’ve done and sat on many interview panels, but I’ve never had such a bad experience.I've never exited an interview before either and I'm still shaken by it. AIBU to think that whatever the role is, the least you should expect is a bit of professionalism and basic respect?

Used to hate when that happens, job description changes at interview.
Greatly increased expectations for salary and or hours.

@cigarsmokingwoman obviously it's upsetting to get pushback here when you're upset already about the interview.)(Btw pretty standard for MN.)Two issues for me - the first is that because the threshold for describing a need as a disability is low, it feels as though every other person has a disability or mental health problem. That can lead to compassion fatigue and resentment about expectations. So the second issue is that the request for adjustments involving you having questions in advance may have made the panel view that as an advantage for preparation and so give you a harder time. Not saying that's right or fair but a possibility. That said, sounds like you dodged a bullet - they seem to want the moon on a stick on the cheap. There is better for you out there.

Completely agree with and really shocked to read some of the answers you’ve had .

I interview people, it’s a huge part of my job. I also arrange interviews for others and this is just so off . They are clearly terrible interviewers - they should be embarrassed not you. Part of their role on a panel is to put you at ease in order the extract the right information from you.

It’s common to send questions in advance and if you’ve asked for reasonable adjustments and they’ve not been met there’s big problems with their practices.

Like others have said you’ve dodged a bullet . Don’t let one crap interview scenario from people are clearly underprepared affect your confidence .

Most likely autism or ADHD

Unfortunately some panel-type interviews can be terrible. It is not your fault at all and well done for calling it a day and keeping a shred of dignity. It would probably have been an awful work environment.

I was going to say to give feedback to their HR, but see that you did complain.
good luck going forward, hope you find a company worthy of your expertise

intowork.org.uk/reasonable-adjustments/

Good on you. It takes bravery to do that and I think you did yourself a favour by not wasting your time. If the interview was like that then imagine the actual job!

This interviews work both ways the candidate should be interviewing the company to see if they are a good fit for them. They clearly weren’t consider or lucky that they didn’t interview well as yiy might have accepted the job and it’s sounds a total nightmare

Thank you again everyone. I will continue to keep looking. I do have some money saved so I'm not desperate (yet) but the job market is a bit shit so hopefully something better will come up soon.

I misread the post , I thought the op was working with the company

It's blows my mind that you don't have set closing dates! That's absolute mental cruelty! So the people you interview in the first week etc, how many weeks do you leave them dangling?

Well played OP!

I really do feel for you I find interviews horrible but at the same time they do have a right to want to focus on more experience and knowledge you have about the job because they obviously need somebody to do the job short-term and straight away without needing too much training Since it’s a short-term maternity cover role, and this should have been obvious - it’s great towant to talk about your achievements- however they are not going to be interested too much about your life story because they just need someone to fill a position quickly and need to know that they can do it , you’re not going to be there on a permanent basis so they’re not too interested in your life story
regarding the disabilities questions they should have covered these better however some employers don’t want the hassle of dealing with having to provide adjustments when there are other candidates who don’t need them I should know I’ve been disabled for three years now with a spinal issue and I hate mentioning it during interviews( although I do) -usually I don’t want to because some employers can be biased about it and if you don’t mention it, they would have to provide reasonable adjustments by law anyway

What you’re suggesting here would be highly illegal, and if provable would land the employer in trouble for discrimination. The threshold for ‘describing a need as a disability’ isn’t low at all. There is a legal definition of disability set by the Equality Act 2010 - you are considered disabled if you have a physical or mental impairment that has a substantial and long-term negative effect on your ability to do normal daily activities. The condition must be likely to last at least 12 months.

If you satisfy these conditions you are considered disabled under the Act and have protected characteristics. An employer cannot simply say ‘oh another one claiming to be disabled, l’m so fed up with this’. Treating a disabled person differently from an able bodied candidate simply because they are disabled is illegal and if it can be proved, a job candidate or employee could potentially take action against them for discrimination.

Reasonable adjustment exists to level the playing field so that at interview, for example, a candidate is competing on the same level as able bodied applicants. So, by supplying interview questions in advance to an applicant who has information processing difficulties, which would put them at a disadvantage by having unknown questions fired at them during the interview, you aren’t giving them an advantage, you are mitigating the difficulty they already have and giving them the same chance as someone without that disability, who would cope with the questions unseen.

Being aware of an applicant’s disability in advance of the interview and agreeing to provide reasonable adjustment, and then knowingly behaving in a manner likely to put the person at a disadvantage because of their condition is direct discrimination and it’s illegal. And it’s reprehensible when coming from an employer who displays the Disability Confident accreditation - they should know what their responsibilities are.

Well done, OP, for knowing your rights and your worth. And for feeding back. That all takes courage.

Hold your head high and I hope you find something suitable soon!

But that’s not the point is it ? Reasonable adjustment exists to level the playing field so that at interview, for example, a candidate is competing on the same level as able bodied applicants. So, if an applicant has a disability which causes information processing difficulties which would disadvantage them if they were to have unknown questions fired at them during the interview, you aren’t giving them an advantage by supplying the questions in advance, you are mitigating the difficulty they already have and giving them the same chance as someone without that disability, who would cope with the questions unseen.

Good for you for standing up for yourself.

I've struggled through so many interviews with terrible interviewers who are just tying to catch you out.

sounds like they are trying to cheap out on hiring mat leave cover, and will fully expect 100% role done in part time hours.

But then what is the point of unseen questions at all? What purpose do they serve?

exactly this

Depends on what the employer is looking for l suppose. I would probably agree that it would be better for all candidates to have access so that they can give more considered n swears. My only point is that where questions are supplied as reasonable adjustment it is to mitigate the effects of disability, and in OP’s case they agreed to reasonable adjustment and didn’t stick to it. That would be considered discrimination because they are putting her at a disadvantage because of disability. And the employer in this case has the Disability Confident accreditation so the fact that they have written to OP claiming they are updating their practices is a bit of a joke.

Then you don’t understand reasonable adjustment. It’s not meant to put the disabled person at an advantage, it’s to allow them to compete on the same level as someone without the disability. So if someone has an information processing difficulty and firing unknown questions at them in an interview would cause them problems as a result of that difficulty, they are at a disadvantage. Prior knowledge of the questions mitigates that difficulty and allows them to compete on the same level as other candidates who have no problems answering the questions unseen.

Thank you for your essay, teaching me stuff I’m aware of. I am speaking as someone who also has particular needs but I tend not to declare them. Unfortunately there are not many employers who are knowledgeable and understanding. If everyone had the questions in advance and could prepare their answers, then the playing field would be level.

I used to be a councillor, and after seeing some MPs reading off prepared scripts I decided to use that when speaking in council as I would lose my train of thought and fumble my words, but that way I could concentrate on the delivery. If questions came up for me to reply to, I could note them as everyone was speaking and prepare what to say over the few minutes that people were speaking. But in job interviews I think I came across badly as I have a processing delay and would just have to stop and think, so as you said it's quite different in the interview and actual day-to-day work realms for me.

Generally speaking, the typical interview period is 2-3 weeks.

I let people know the timeframe that I anticipate during the interview so they have a rough timeline. “I have interviews scheduled this week and next…blah blah blah”.

If for some reason it takes longer than anticipated I’ll ask our internal recruiter to to contact any shortlisted candidates to ‘keep them warm’ and let them know that there have been some delays, find out if they are still interested, and give updated rough estimate for next step.

From first interview to offer is generally 3-4 weeks. It’s really not that bad.

Honestly, everyone should walk out of an interview and stop thinking about it. (I know easier said than done) Waiting by the phone is madness inducing and will do nothing productive for a candidate.