Alright, let’s be real for a minute: job interviews are often a special kind of beast. We all know the drill, right? You polish your resume until it gleams, you practice your answers in front of the mirror (sometimes with varying degrees of success), and you psych yourself up to put your best, most professional foot forward. You anticipate the classic questions, maybe even a tricky behavioral one or two. But what happens when the interview goes from a professional vetting process to a full-blown circus of the absurd? What happens when you’re suddenly asked to sell a pen, recount your relationship history, or muse about what kind of tree you’d be?
Oh, buckle up, buttercups, because we’re about to take a deep, hilarious, and sometimes downright infuriating dive into the wildest, most unhinged interview stories you’ve ever heard. Thanks to a viral Reddit post sparked by career counselor Arpitaintech, a treasure trove of these bizarre encounters has emerged, proving that the job hunt can often be stranger than fiction. Arpitaintech, who frequently hears “crazy experience during the interview” tales from job seekers, decided to ask Reddit for their craziest stories, and oh boy, did they deliver. From bosses laughing jobseekers out of the room to psychological tests that felt more like therapy, these tales are a testament to the sheer unpredictability of modern recruitment. Let’s peel back the curtain and peek into the interview arenas where sanity sometimes takes a vacation.
First up, let’s talk about the interviewers who decided to take a detour into your personal life – and not in a cute, getting-to-know-you way. Imagine applying for a civil engineering position, only to be hit with a barrage of highly inappropriate questions. One Redditor recounted a truly wild experience where the interviewer asked, “are you in a serious relationship? do you want kids? are you religious? how do you lean politically?” As if that wasn’t enough, he then divulged his marital problems, attributing Jesus as their “saving grace,” and pushing the idea that the jobseeker would change her mind on kids once her “biological clock” kicked in. Oh, and the cherry on top? He “admitted he was reluctant to hire women because they usually put work second to their families,” but still wanted to hire a woman to “help keep the office neat and tidy.” To cap off this bewildering experience, he offered an “administrative assistant” role, completely disregarding the civil engineering position applied for. Talk about a red flag parade!
This wasn’t an isolated incident, either. Another applicant for an accounting job found their personal beliefs under scrutiny when their husband was asked “who he voted for and his personal feelings on his daughter’s ability to, one day (she was only like… 7 months old at the time), get birth control without his permission.” His calm reply that his personal opinions weren’t relevant to an accounting position was, unsurprisingly, met with no job offer. It’s a stark reminder that some interviewers confuse professional assessment with a personal inquisition, leading to highly uncomfortable and often discriminatory situations. Who knew your political leanings or views on reproductive health were key accounting skills?
Then there are the questions that make you wonder if you’ve accidentally stumbled into a surrealist play. One interviewer delved deep into a jobseeker’s family dynamics, asking, “Did you have a close relationship with your father?” for an engineering role – a question that left the woman engineer completely baffled. Another, in a surprisingly serious turn, asked about the jobseeker’s most annoying habits, threatening to call their wife or mother in the US at 2 AM to verify. It makes you wonder what kind of “team player” profile they were hoping to build from such bizarre inquiries. And let’s not forget the financial probing, like the 22-year-old fresh out of college, interviewing for a private bank, who was asked, “What is your opinion on wealthy people?” Imagine trying to formulate a politically correct, job-winning answer to that one on the fly!
Beyond the deeply personal, many interviewers have a penchant for the utterly nonsensical. The infamous “sell me this pen” test, often seen as a classic sales challenge, took a hilarious turn when an engineer finally had enough. Grilled on “completely unrelated stuff,” the engineer retorted, “I’m not a sales person I’m an engineer.” The interviewer “flipped out and said I’m unqualified and bad at dealing with stressful situations.” His calm response? “Well I’m dealing with you right now.” The co-interviewer struggled to suppress laughter, and frankly, we can all relate. It seems some interviewers forget the specific skills required for the role they’re trying to fill, opting for generic, often frustrating, challenges.
Similarly, a Blockbuster manager (yes, we’re talking way back when!) didn’t bother with experience but instead presented candy and snacks, demanding the teenager “sell this to me.” It seemed the company had a “massive overstock of candy and other movie snacks,” making that his sole concern. Then there’s the truly baffling, like being asked, “Why are manhole covers round?” during an IT Helpdesk interview at a bank. The ‘correct’ answer, according to the interviewer, was “I don’t know,” testing for honesty rather than actual knowledge. It’s a bizarre way to gauge problem-solving or integrity, making one wonder about the actual thought process behind such questions.
But wait, it gets even weirder. Picture this: you’re interviewing for an analyst position, and you’re asked, “If you were a tree, what kind of tree would you be?” Seriously? In a stroke of genius, the applicant went for a “decision tree” and, believe it or not, got the job! Then there’s the more philosophical, “If you were a brick in a wall which one would you be?” which prompted a jobseeker to quip, “I’m sorry, I didn’t know I was interviewing with Pink Floyd.” These questions, while sometimes leading to a chuckle, highlight a fundamental disconnect in what constitutes a valuable interview question.
Perhaps most egregiously, some interviewers treat the process with shocking unprofessionalism, disrespecting candidates’ time and even their basic dignity. Consider the job seeker who waited 45 minutes for an interviewer at Sears, only to see him “leave and come back with his food.” During the interview, this gem of a hiring manager “insulted me talking about my ‘poor employment history’ because I only worked over the summers during college and called me fat.” As if that wasn’t enough, he paused to “lick a spot of ketchup off his shirt.” It’s no wonder Sears went bankrupt, given the caliber of their hiring personnel!
Ghosting, a phenomenon usually reserved for dating apps, has unfortunately made its way into the professional world. One person recounting their Taco Bell interview saga reveals a particularly egregious example. After showing up at the scheduled time, they were told they were “too busy, come back tomorrow.” The next day, after being told to get a drink and wait, the manager vanished. The applicant sat in an “empty dining room” for two hours, got a refill, and left. A potential employer even scheduled an interview with a brother “without telling him,” and then got upset when he didn’t show up. They offered to reschedule “later that day,” not comprehending why he was “unwilling to immediately drop everything and get on a last-second flight across the country to attend.” These stories aren’t just frustrating; they’re a massive waste of time and an insult to anyone seriously looking for work.
And what about the sheer disrespect for a candidate’s time and effort? Multiple candidates reported being subjected to multiple rounds of interviews, including grueling “surprise online test[s]” that lasted 1.5 hours, only to be “low-balled” with offers or simply strung along. One applicant for a freelance opportunity was “stress-test[ed]” with a full office tour, then low-balled with an offer that included “unpaid probation – on a 6-day working week.” Another shared the experience of being made to “sit out for 90 minutes as a ‘stress test’,” leaving immediately after being told they’d ‘passed.’ This isn’t just inefficient; it’s a cynical exploitation of jobseekers.
Sometimes, the unprofessionalism borders on the truly alarming. Take the lawyer who, during an interview, casually admitted to “forged their clients signature to make sure the documents were filed on time.” Or another lawyer who confessed to paying a “bribe to get documents filed on time.” Who says that in an interview?! Even more disturbing, one jobseeker interviewed for a company that “was behind charging prisoners families the collect call money when the prisoner called them.” This “Christian company,” as they frequently mentioned, also had a CEO who micromanaged employees and made changes directly on a “live DB because the CEO was too cheap to have a testing environment.” The overall vibe? “Misery” from everyone except the “eric trump clone interviewing me.” The jobseeker later realized they “dodged a bullet,” despite desperately needing work.
Some interviewers seem to view the process as an opportunity for ego boosts or personal therapy sessions. One applicant for a corporate receptionist position was interviewed by a “loss prevention guy” who admitted they listed the role as ‘receptionist’ to avoid “the wrong types of people.” He then declared his “unique style,” asking only one question: “do you love to win or do you hate to lose?” Following this profound query, he spent the *entire rest of the hour* talking about himself, his job duties, and past experiences. When the jobseeker, prepared for a real interview, only had a few questions, he sat and waited for more, claiming that “if he was doing his job right that he wouldn’t need to ask a lot of questions.” Oh, and he was drinking soda the entire time. It felt like a “formality,” wasting the applicant’s time and energy.
Similarly, a CEO who claimed to be “not like other bosses” stated he didn’t ask questions during the interview; he expected the candidate to. While the jobseeker played along and impressed him, they knew they would “never work there.” The CEO “just wanted to feel special with someone letting him talk, which is the key to most hiring managers.” This approach, the jobseeker noted, is “ineffective af” for getting to know a candidate. It highlights a troubling trend where the interview becomes less about evaluation and more about the interviewer’s personal agenda or insecurities.
Then there’s the infamous “fake job posting” phenomenon, which Arpitaintech himself noted was a “peculiar theme found across several answers.” Many candidates had a gut feeling early on that they weren’t going to get the job, yet “interviewers kept the interview going for the sake of it, wasting both their and the interviewee’s time.” The situation gets even more bizarre, with Arpitaintech adding, “Also, there were many cases where a person was interviewed for 2-3 rounds, only to find out in the end that it was a fake job.” This isn’t just anecdotal; a 2024 survey of 1,641 hiring managers revealed some truly shocking statistics: 40% of companies posted a fake job listing this year, and 3 in 10 currently have active fake listings. The reasons? “Alleviating employee workload concerns and suggesting company growth.” Bizarrely, “7 in 10 hiring managers believe posting fake jobs is morally acceptable.” This means a significant portion of the interview experiences shared aren’t even for real opportunities, adding insult to injury.
Even when jobs are real, the interviewers can still be incredibly thoughtless. Take the jobseeker who was invited for an in-person interview for an IT Helpdesk job at a bank. After about 20 minutes, both the tech support manager and the VP abruptly left the conference room, saying they’d “be right back.” Ten, fifteen, twenty minutes went by, then more. After an hour and 45 minutes of being left alone, the jobseeker decided to leave. An hour later, the VP called, asking where they were and if they’d come back to finish the interview, claiming an “emergency client call.” Despite the obvious red flag, the jobseeker took the job, only to be laid off “xmas week because the guy who had quit wanted his old job back.” Talk about a rollercoaster of emotions and a complete lack of regard for employee stability.
Another unsettling trend involves invasive psychological screening. One marketing manager applicant, after two rounds of interviews for a local wine shop-bar, was told they’d receive a questionnaire about their personality. What arrived was a “300 questions clinical psychology test” with questions about their “relationship with my parents, my fears or trauma.” Understandably, they were “really weirded out and refused to proceed as I don’t want a potential employer to have a record of my psychological issues.” This kind of overreach transforms an interview from a professional assessment into an intensely personal and ethically questionable interrogation.
From ghosting to psychological profiling, from inappropriate personal questions to bizarre tests that reveal nothing about job aptitude, these anecdotes paint a vivid picture of the wild, wild west of modern hiring. They highlight not just individual bad experiences, but systemic issues that make the job search a truly bewildering journey. The next time you walk into an interview, just remember: you’re not alone in facing the unexpected, and sometimes, the most challenging part of the job hunt isn’t proving your skills, but navigating the sheer absurdity of the people on the other side of the desk.
The chaotic labyrinth of modern job interviews, as we’ve seen, is riddled with more twists, turns, and outright bizarre encounters than a funhouse mirror. But amidst the madness, some intrepid job seekers don’t just survive; they *thrive*. They parry absurd questions with wit, turn awkward silences into opportunities, and sometimes, even land the gig despite (or because of) the sheer strangeness of the situation. This section isn’t just about the wild moments; it’s about the ingenuity, resilience, and sometimes, the sheer luck that defines the job hunt in an age where professionalism often takes a backseat to peculiar whims.
Let’s kick things off with a round of applause for those who didn’t just answer the weird questions but *aced* them. Remember the eternal debate: Is *Die Hard* a Christmas movie? For one friend applying for a Christmas temp job, this wasn’t just pub banter; it was an interview question. Her genius reply? “No. It’s a Christmas classic.” Obvious job offer material right there. Sometimes, it’s not about the “correct” answer, but the clever one.
Another genius, faced with the philosophical query, “If you were a tree, what kind of tree would you be?” for an analyst position, didn’t miss a beat. They declared themselves a “decision tree” and, in a truly bizarre twist, *got the job*. Who knew botanical classifications held such sway in the world of data analytics? It seems a dash of lateral thinking can sometimes trump traditional qualifications.
Then there are the candidates who turn potential blunders into unexpected triumphs. Imagine sleeping through an entire interview, realizing your mistake later that evening, and sending a heartfelt apology email the next business day. Sounds like a surefire way to be instantly disqualified, right? Nope. This Redditor got the job. Talk about second chances!
Or consider the person who, applying for a job involving a lot of driving, half-jokingly listed ‘drivers license’ under work experience. The interviewer’s response? “valid drivers license, good. You’re already ahead of the other guy.” Sometimes, low expectations, combined with a touch of humor and genuine qualification, can be your secret weapon.
Beyond the witty comebacks, some job seekers face genuinely bizarre challenges with impressive composure. One individual, applying to a logistics company, endured *three* interviews, memorized all 50 states for a states test, took a math test, and aced a company knowledge test—all with scores above 90%. Yet, they were still rejected. While not a triumph in getting the job, their dedication and resilience in facing such a gauntlet of tests speaks volumes about the effort job seekers pour into the process, only to be met with inexplicable outcomes. It’s a stark reminder that sometimes, it’s not you, it’s them.
Sometimes, the “triumph” is simply walking away. After navigating an interview where a senior engineer mocked their LaTeX resume for a formatting error, even though LaTeX was listed as a skill, the job seeker could feel the frustration. This interaction, like many others, underscores the fine line between testing skills and outright condescension.
Similarly, one applicant for a Ruby/Rails programming job found themselves in a linguistic muddle with a lead developer who, despite a thick accent, kept asking “What do you know about gem?” When the applicant tried to clarify “which one?” (referring to specific Ruby gems, which are software libraries), the interviewer insisted on “Gem,” eventually explaining what gems were. The jobseeker, understandably frustrated, cut her off, saying, “I know what gems are, I’m asking what about gems do you want to know about?” While this led to not getting the job, the refusal to be condescended to, and the clarity in communication, represents a subtle triumph of self-respect in a confusing situation.
Many shared stories where dodging a bullet became the ultimate win. Take the jobseeker who, after bypassing a password-protected Linux proficiency test designed to make applicants look stupid, decided to ask about the work environment. They discovered a micromanaging CEO, direct changes on a live database, and general “misery” among employees, all from a self-proclaimed “Christian company” that profited from charging prisoners’ families. Despite desperately needing work, the rejection ultimately felt like “dodging a bullet.” This keen observation of red flags, even in desperation, is a valuable lesson.
Similarly, when a cell phone service provider asked if the applicant would follow a policy they found “morally wrong,” the “no” answer, followed by a dismissal, might have felt like a loss but was, in fact, a liberation from a potentially unethical workplace.
Not all “WTF moments” are about outright absurdity; sometimes, they’re about sheer, baffling incompetence or unexpected circumstances. Picture this: an interview for an analyst position at a cruise company. The candidate arrives, checks in, waits, and is then led to a meeting room. The interviewer, a “very gentle guy,” starts with pleasantries, asking about hobbies. Ten minutes in, he asks, “how would you describe your style?”
The jobseeker, thinking fashion or perhaps work style, replies, “My….style?” The interviewer clarifies, “Yes…your cooking style.” Turns out, he was expecting a sous-chef candidate who didn’t show up and confused the analyst with them! Meanwhile, the actual person the analyst was supposed to meet was wondering where *they* were. This wasn’t malice; it was a pure, hilarious mix-up that wasted everyone’s time but created an unforgettable story.
And speaking of unforgettable, one person recounted an interview at an archival library in London. Three interviewers, a tiny room, a bad headache, and a 5 AM train ride set a dreary stage. Then, the fire alarm blares, forcing an evacuation into a pouring London rain. The jobseeker, being the only one with an umbrella, ended up huddled with all three silent interviewers under it for a painfully awkward 15 minutes. Despite the obvious disruption and the clear lack of fit, the interviewers insisted on resuming for another 15 minutes once back inside. It was a miserable experience, yet the shared human moment under the umbrella, however awkward, stands out.
Sometimes, the bizarre takes a deeply personal, uncomfortable turn. One jobseeker shared an experience where one of their interviewers, discussing customer service, inexplicably brought up his ex and how “setting expectations and overperforming” didn’t save their relationship. The other two interviewers were “shocked,” and the jobseeker simply said, “that sucks.” Incredibly, they got the job, possibly because the other interviewers felt awful for them. This incident highlights how interviewers’ personal lives can unexpectedly derail professional interactions, creating truly cringeworthy moments for everyone involved.
Another jobseeker for an accounting role found their potential future workplace revolved around “treat days,” leading to the question: “Not me, but wife was asked if she knew how to bake… This was for an accounting job.” The office apparently wanted to know if she’d contribute baked goods. While seemingly innocuous, it’s a bizarre criterion for an accounting professional!
Similarly, a manager at a mechanic shop, during an interview, received a call from a technician with a computer problem. His response? “you’re a f*****g mechanic, you fix things, figure out how to fix it.” He then tried to laugh with the interviewee about the absurdity. This glimpse into the work culture, followed by the same manager later declaring he saw customers only as “dollar signs,” was enough for the jobseeker to leave after two years, illustrating how early red flags often prove true.
The collective experiences underscore that interviewers themselves are a mixed bag of personalities, often leading to wildly inconsistent and unprofessional practices. One panel interview stood out because each of the five interviewers had a “very different idea of what I was interviewing for.” They even asked the candidate if the position should be full-time or part-time, what the title should be, and what the pay should be. The jobseeker, rightly confused, tried to wrap it up quickly. This complete lack of internal alignment isn’t just a “WTF moment”; it’s a systemic failure that wastes everyone’s time.
And then there’s the truly direct, almost aggressive unprofessionalism. One person was asked, “You obviously have a great resume. Why haven’t you gotten another offer yet? Is something wrong with you?” This question, delivered with an accusatory tone, is designed to undermine confidence and put the candidate on the defensive—a highly unethical tactic. Another encountered an interviewer who, upon being greeted with “good morning,” retorted, “Why did you say good morning when you know perfectly well it’s afternoon.” These moments, while individually small, cumulatively paint a picture of an often hostile and disrespectful hiring landscape.
Sometimes, the ‘WTF’ is simply the feeling of being used. Many candidates found their intellectual labor exploited. As one Redditor shared from LA, they interviewed with a known gaming company, only to find the JavaScript they wrote as a test being used on their production website, without getting the job. A friend experienced the same with CSS for text boxes. “None of the agencies here in LA blacklisted them,” the Redditor noted, highlighting a widespread problem of companies getting “free work” under the guise of an interview. This blatant exploitation is a serious ethical breach, turning the interview process into an uncompensated labor trap.
These anecdotal snippets, while often hilarious, aren’t just isolated incidents of bad luck. They form a pattern, revealing crucial lessons for both job seekers and hiring managers. Arpitaintech, the career counselor who sparked the viral Reddit thread, believes that while “skills are the foundation of any interview and a must-have,” the real focus should be on “cultural fit.” As they put it, “A bad attitude is almost impossible to fix, and if someone ends up in a place where they don’t connect with the team or environment, it can cause long-term issues for everyone involved.” This insight is particularly poignant when we consider stories like the job seeker who, after a CEO claimed to be “not like other bosses” and expected the candidate to ask all the questions, realized they would “never work there” despite impressing him. The CEO “just wanted to feel special with someone letting him talk, which is the key to most hiring managers,” a tactic Arpitaintech confirmed is “ineffective af” for assessing a candidate.
The prevalence of “fake job postings,” as highlighted by Arpitaintech, is another sobering lesson. Many job seekers had “a gut feeling in the first few minutes of the interview that they weren’t going to get the job, yet interviewers kept the interview going for the sake of it, wasting both their and the interviewee’s time.” The shocking statistic that 40% of companies admit to posting fake job listings, with 7 in 10 hiring managers finding it “morally acceptable,” is a stark warning. Trusting your gut feeling about a potential red flag, even if it means walking away from an opportunity, can save immense time and emotional energy. This empowerment comes from recognizing that the interview process should be a two-way street, where mutual respect is non-negotiable.
First, cultivate a strong sense of self-awareness and self-worth. If an interview feels like an interrogation, a therapy session for the interviewer, or a blatant waste of your time, it’s a red flag. Second, embrace your wit and personality; a clever, honest, or humorous response can make you stand out. Third, always be prepared to walk away. Armed with these insights, you can navigate the job market’s wild ride with confidence, transforming bewildering moments into lessons learned and even triumphs.
