In CA you need that class in order to get a Guard card. Yes, they certainly can pay you during it, or Goodwill offers it for free.
For half a day?
Hell, I have had to go thru 4 interviews, and other hoops, that what with travel time, ate more than 40 hours in order to get a job.
My wife sometimes gets editing samples as part of a screening process - but my impression is that all potential freelancers get the same sample, so it is not production work done for free. That may not be possible in horticulture (be still, Dorothy Parker!).
How about, after the first one, she agrees to do it with the proviso that if she is not hired she gets compensated for the work at a reasonable hourly rate. If the prospective employer seriously objects to this deal, it sounds like a ripoff.
It’s not about the time spent. Everybody knows that there’s opportunity costs to going to a job interview. It’s about what it potentially says about the employer. As you said, it could mean nothing special, and it’s just how they screen people (though 7 hours of “homework” is still asking a lot, at least in my opinion).
On the other hand, it could mean that the company tends to work its people especially hard and tries to avoid compensating them for it. Or that they’re stingy with resources and try to get free work out of applicants in lieu of hiring someone for it. Either way, the wife considers it unusual enough to think on.
It could also mean that they’re really discriminating about who they hire, which could be a good thing.
Is there something about this line of work that would have the owner/manager wanting to give her a few tests before deciding whether to interview her again because (s)he’s been snowed/disappointed before? Or is it the type of stuff that anyone with some knowledge could do and there’s reason to think he’s having her work on a paying project? Those are the types of questions I’d want answered before I got nasty, if the time is no real skin off her nose and she enjoys it.
I was asked to do that twice. Once I did agree (I was desperate for a job) and after getting the job, it ended up being utterly wretched. The reasoning for the work given was, “We have a lot of candidates claim they know this program and can work in our style, but we would like proof. Please provide a file.” I only did it after making them sign a contract stating that my work was wholly mine and only in the event of hiring would I release it for their use. They seemed a bit pissed about that but they followed through. I didn’t have trouble on that front, the boss just ended up being a micromanager that was very difficult to work with. They also demanded overtime every day regardless of the actual workload.
When that came up again in another interview, I was asked to start training myself at home before a job was even officially offered to me. The boss micromanaged his other employees during the interview, talked a lot about overtime, and about how proud he was to think of the idea of a night crew so he could have his shop working 24 hours a day - after he hired the people, of course (when the type of work he was in certainly didn’t need 24-hour production). I was in a position where I could say no, and did so. Once again, a bit upset.
Both small companies.
Basically, for artistic sort of jobs (design, cake baking, flower arranging, landscaping, architecture, advertising, film, whatever), this is what a damn portfolio is for. If you can’t judge my ability by that and an interview (with possibly a small hands-on test during the interview), you’re either insulting me or trying to take advantage of me.
About two decades ago I was applying to a few different nonprofits. Two of them were straight-up interviews. The third one did an interview, and then asked me to write a press release. After they got they press release, they continued stringing me along, and then they called me back asking me to do yet another task. It was pretty satisfying to say, “I would, but I just accepted a different job, see ya!”
Sadly, the other job I accepted had a psycho for a boss and I left after eight months, but at least I got that bit of satisfaction out of it.
The homework was to write up a “growing plan” for two types of plants, to be ready by a certain date. As someone not in that field, I can tell you I had no idea what that means, but it was old hat to her. It just involved a lot of time-consuming research and boiling down a lot of technical-plant-knowledgey-stuff into a timeline and overview of the process.
Now this could have been a generic test, or it could be free, real work; only he really knows, I guess.
My impression is that this is the sort of operation where the Organizational Chart involves virtually no middle-management; 99% of the employees are low-level “soldiers,” the President is at the very top, and there are a very small number of “expert” positions somewhere between the two, and that’s the job she’s interviewing for.
And that is why I’m advising her to just “do it” as DrDeth has said, and nevermind her annoyance with it. If it continues without a firm offer or at least a solid indication that it’s the final hurdle, I’ll advise her to stop doing it.
If it is not illegal it should be.
Why don’t you call the appropriate government oversight department and find out? The SOB is probably liable for a big fat fine, and if not he is unworthy of your wife’s services, anyway
I’ve been asked to take writing tests as part of the interview process, but the tests have always been structured so that nothing commercial could come from them – write a news release about a fictitious product, write a narrative about an event that never happened, etc.
But those tests never took more than an hour or two at most. Something requiring 6-7 hours seems excessive to me.
I was researching a company I was thinking of applying to, when I found a story someone posted of their interview there. They were given homework questions about the technology being developed by the company and told to show up prepared to discuss the answers. He said he spent about 7 hours preparing those answers.
Then when he got there, the first question was “Do you want to work 55 hours a week?” He answered that he could do so if required, perhaps, and was cut off with, “No! Do you WANT TO WORK 55 HOURS A WEEK?!” He said that not really so much, no, and was shown the door.
I decided not to apply there.
I don’t think there’s anything wrong with a prospective employee being asked to demonstrate their abilities by doing some amount of test work. Even a full day’s worth doesn’t seem unreasonable.
I agree, though, that whatever test work they’re being asked to do should either
(a) be paid.
or
(b) not be actual work for the company that they can use. It should be re-solving a problem they’ve already solved, or working on a fictional project that’s going to be evaluated and discarded.
If they’re requesting actual work without paying for it, that’s unethical for sure, and might be illegal.
Yeah… I tend to agree. It’s easy to get self-righteous and indignant, but job hunting for another 100 hours or so over the next few months of your life is a lot worse. If there’s no other red flags or bad vibes about the job or manager I’d just do it. Or you can roll the dice and professionally say your prior work product, resume, and recommendations should be sufficient, as long as you’re ok with potentially being shown the door.
Either way being overly emotional about it is the wrong way to go.
It’s not at all uncommon for tech interviews to require some kind of coding exercise; we do at my current job. But it’s absolutely not real work. It does, however, take a minimum of 4-6 hours to do. We have people put WAY more time than that into it, and, though it’s not required to do that to get the job, the people who put in some real effort definitely are looked upon favorably. It’s not so much that they spent <x> amount of time on it; it’s more that a very complete project gives us a much better idea of their skills.
That said, the exercise is not required. It’s one of a few options we give them at interview time, and if they don’t do it we have other ways of conducting the interview.
I think she should hold out for something better. Of course, the only thing I can go on is a gut reaction. My gut is telling me this employer is testing not just for proficiency in a job candidate, but also how compliant they will be to going outside the general norms of work boundaries. This usually has bad implications.
About 20 years ago, my daughter applied for a job with a small publisher. The owner narrowed it down to three applicants and gave them each the same page to edit. She paid each of the three $50 and chose one (my daughter’s) and actually used it. My daughter was impressed by how professionally it was all done and enjoyed working there (until it was sold to a large publisher). The owner was a really impressive woman and they are still friends.
Frankly, the experience the OP relates would have really put me off.
If I was an employer and the job required hands on skills I would absolutely ask someone for a real world work sample before hiring. People can put anything they want on resumes (and they do) a hands on demonstration is the best way to verify skills.
Beyond this if I am hiring for a narrow skillset in a field where there are lots more applicants than job slots (and the job in the OPs description strikes me as one of those scenarios) if people don’t want to go the extra mile move on. You’re the one who got the horticulture degree instead of an accounting or a business degree. I’m not dancing to your tune, you’re dancing to mine.
Samples are different from actual work product. As a project manager / management consultant I’ve had to provide samples of my “work” as part of the interview process. This “work” typically consists of doing a business case or mock presentation to a fictitious client.
Where it gets dodgy is in one instance where a firm was having me interview with their client as if I was already an engagement manager with their company. I ask the guy on the car ride home “so what happens if one of the other companies I’m interviewing with extends me an offer before you do?” He didn’t really have an answer.
At my employer we ask the candidate to do a small take home demo, then come in and explain their reasons for the design and how they would adapt if the requirements changed. We’ve discussed dropping it --some people say experienced people may find it insulting or they might think it’s free work (it’s nothing we would use; we already have a solution and the actual problem was more complex than the case we give them)–but I have seen too many candidates who talked well and had a good resume and portfolio but could not solve the demo problem worth beans, or explain their design coherently. My company is pretty reluctant to fire people so we want to make sure we hire the right people.
I would question whether it’s really free work or just a sample of work.
I do a test like this for bookkeepers - hand them a copy of some client information (with the names changed to protect the client identity). Otherwise, it’s real client information, but it’s from a month of bookkeeping we did for them about four years ago. I could see someone being confused about whether this was unpaid work or just a test.
By giving everyone the same task, we can measure how long it takes them, how well they do the work, and whether they follow instructions at all. While this task is designed to take about 45-60 minutes, I did have one person get to 4 hours before I suggested that they’d done enough to demonstrate their level of proficiency.