4 ms·

> In a December 2024 survey of 1,000 employers by Intelligent.com, 12.5% said a Gen Z candidate had brought Mom or Dad to a job interview. Many statements like

> In a December 2024 survey of 1,000 employers by Intelligent.com, 12.5% said a Gen Z candidate had brought Mom or Dad to a job interview. Many statements like this in the article make me think this is Reader's Digest level value I've interviewed for decades, including for interns and "first job" type positions. I've never had a possible hire bring a parent. 12.5% is one in ten dentists territory if even true, so what else is not true in this article?

b112 1y ago
This is an article about hiring new grads in 2024/5, and what's different/weird, eg parents at interviews. You've responded by saying you haven't seen that in the past. So what? The article mentions now, not the past. The article says "almost 1 out of 10" interviews. You say 12.5% is 1 in 10?!? 10% is one in ten, and almost is a less than property, so it's less than 10%. Did you get AI to summarize the article for you or something, then reply?
- leakycap 1y ago
  > You've responded by saying you haven't seen that in the past. So what? The article mentions now, not the past. LOL, well I certainly can't see it in the future and don't eat an apple from anyone who can say they can. And unless I was very rudely typing this reply during an interview, it isn't happening now. It sounds like you have never heard of the concept of '1 in 10 dentists' and are confusing the saying or concept with mathematical exactness. Not sure anyone on this site needs 10% vs 12.5% explained to them, it might help to remember where you are before you rudely respond.
  - b112 1y ago
    LOL, well I certainly can't see it in the future The future is not now, hence not entirely relevant, especially as there's a lot more future than the past. (hrm.. hopefully) unless I was very rudely typing this reply during an interview, it isn't happening now Yes, but "happening now" is an indicator of 1. How is that relevant for this aforementioned 12.5%? You'd need dozens of interviews to even begin to attain certainty. And bear in mind, this was referencing specifically gen z, which are all exceptionally young... just entering the workforce in fact. So unless all your dozens of sample cases are under 28, with most them being younger, it's apples to oranges. My point with all of this was, your initial post spoke of interviews of the past, which had no true bearing to "interviews now". After all, this very article says it's different than in the past! And to discredit the percentages discussed, you pointed at the whole 1 in 10 dentists thing, which has no relevance in discrediting this figure. It wasn't even 1 in 10, yes? More like 1 in 8, yes? And none of my response was rude. It was simply refuting what was data, which isn't really relevant here. I'd have even welcomed personal data, which said something akin to "I've interviewed 100 people under 28 in the last year, and none of this stuff is true!" But that's not what you've said. Instead, it seems you have a hunch. That's fair of course, but it was worded as a non-hunch.
- leakycap 1y ago
  I literally quoted the text I was referring to, which would be helpful to review before replying in future.

b112 1y ago

This is an article about hiring new grads in 2024/5, and what's different/weird, eg parents at interviews. You've responded by saying you haven't seen that in the past. So what? The article mentions now, not the past. The article says "almost 1 out of 10" interviews. You say 12.5% is 1 in 10?!? 10% is one in ten, and almost is a less than property, so it's less than 10%. Did you get AI to summarize the article for you or something, then reply?

leakycap 1y ago
> You've responded by saying you haven't seen that in the past. So what? The article mentions now, not the past. LOL, well I certainly can't see it in the future and don't eat an apple from anyone who can say they can. And unless I was very rudely typing this reply during an interview, it isn't happening now. It sounds like you have never heard of the concept of '1 in 10 dentists' and are confusing the saying or concept with mathematical exactness. Not sure anyone on this site needs 10% vs 12.5% explained to them, it might help to remember where you are before you rudely respond.
- b112 1y ago
  LOL, well I certainly can't see it in the future The future is not now, hence not entirely relevant, especially as there's a lot more future than the past. (hrm.. hopefully) unless I was very rudely typing this reply during an interview, it isn't happening now Yes, but "happening now" is an indicator of 1. How is that relevant for this aforementioned 12.5%? You'd need dozens of interviews to even begin to attain certainty. And bear in mind, this was referencing specifically gen z, which are all exceptionally young... just entering the workforce in fact. So unless all your dozens of sample cases are under 28, with most them being younger, it's apples to oranges. My point with all of this was, your initial post spoke of interviews of the past, which had no true bearing to "interviews now". After all, this very article says it's different than in the past! And to discredit the percentages discussed, you pointed at the whole 1 in 10 dentists thing, which has no relevance in discrediting this figure. It wasn't even 1 in 10, yes? More like 1 in 8, yes? And none of my response was rude. It was simply refuting what was data, which isn't really relevant here. I'd have even welcomed personal data, which said something akin to "I've interviewed 100 people under 28 in the last year, and none of this stuff is true!" But that's not what you've said. Instead, it seems you have a hunch. That's fair of course, but it was worded as a non-hunch.
leakycap 1y ago
I literally quoted the text I was referring to, which would be helpful to review before replying in future.