Title:
"Beware Toxic Hiring Culture – Arbitrary Rejection and Biased Interviews"
Rating: ★☆☆☆☆ (1/5)
Pros:
✅ The HR team took my complaint seriously about the first interview and scheduled a second interview.
✅ On paper, the role looked interesting.
Cons:
❌ Unprofessional First Interview:
The first interviewer was dismissive, condescending, and patronising.
When I admitted I didn’t know a specific PostgreSQL term (gap lock), he sarcastically said, “Oh well, time for simpler questions then!”
From that point forward, he referred to me as "dear," which felt patronising and unprofessional.
I later found out that gap locks aren’t even relevant to PostgreSQL—they’re specific to MySQL’s InnoDB engine.
❌ Second Interview Was a Set-Up:
HR arranged a second interview after my complaint, but the interviewer seemed more focused on proving I was unqualified than assessing my actual DBA skills.
Instead of asking practical PostgreSQL DBA questions, I was quizzed on irrelevant topics:
- TCP vs UDP for relational databases (which makes no sense—RDBMS databases always use TCP).
- CAP theorem, which applies to NoSQL databases, not RDBMS database e.g. PostgreSQL.
- When I correctly explained backup strategies for RPO/RTO, the interviewer seemed annoyed and snapped at me when I asked if he understood my response.
❌ Rejection Reasons Were Arbitrary:
The rejection stated that I "lacked distributed database knowledge" and was "unsuitable for a principal-level role."
However:
- The role was NOT a principal-level position—the job posting required 2+ years of PostgreSQL DBA experience, and I have 4+ years PostgreSQL and 17 years Oracle DBA experience.
- PostgreSQL is NOT a distributed database—so why was I being assessed on something unrelated to the job?
- The second interview felt like a pre-planned justification to reject me rather than a fair reassessment.
❌ Likely Internal Bias & Favouritism:
After I reported the first interviewer’s rude and dismissive behaviour, the second interviewer seemed personally invested in disqualifying me.
Instead of conducting an objective assessment, he focused on niche, unrelated questions—almost as if he was defending his colleague rather than fairly evaluating me.
❌ Toxic Hiring Process:
The goalposts were moved. The job posting required 2+ years of PostgreSQL/MySQL experience, yet I was rejected based on "lacking distributed database knowledge" and being "unsuitable for a principal role"—neither of which were stated requirements.
This suggests the hiring process was inconsistent, biased, and unfair.
Advice to Management:
📌 Ensure technical interviews align with actual job requirements rather than niche or unrelated topics.
📌 Train interviewers on professionalism—condescending behaviour and biased treatment damage the company's reputation.
📌 If HR offers a second interview to correct a bad experience, make sure it is a fair reassessment, not a setup to justify the first rejection.
🚨 Would NOT recommend this company to experienced professionals looking for a fair hiring process.
