Worst one I got recently was "What is your perfect number of working hours per week?" I said 40 and the interview process was ended early after the CEO said "oh we put in 50 per week because we know it takes extra effort for a startup". I expanded on how 40 is what works for me, interview got very cold after that. I felt pretty incredulous after that. Especially when the recruiter asked if 40 was a hard requirement. I thought those types of startup cultures were long gone by now but I guess not!
Sounds like it was actually a perfect question. It made it crystal clear that you and the company didn't see eye to eye on work conditions, and that neither of you would be happy working together.
Personally, if the expectation is to work 50 hours a week, then the question to ask them is "OK, do you pay 25% more than the average salary for this position?"
Of course, the only reason you'd ask such a question in the interview is that you have already decided you don't want the job. But the response can still be illuminating/entertaining. :)
Can't speak for most firms, but I interned at Jane Street and this definitely wasn't the case: almost everyone there worked 45 hours/week with a consistent schedule (market hours + a small buffer).
It makes sense: they value people doing high-quality work and avoiding mistakes. Everybody there was also clearly very productive—it was one of my first experiences that convinced me that long hours are actively counterproductive.
I understand other firms in the space (like Citadel) have pretty different cultures, so it's not going to be true for the entire field.
These were startups who were not making up for the long hours with financial compensation. They just felt that they were entitled to cheap labor that doesn't value their time.
Attention any quant firms-- I'll do it for 250k, 80 hours a week, 24/7 on call, fire me if I don't deliver satisfactory results.
10 years of experience in Cpp, Java, Javascript, Python, SQL, the last 5 of which as a lead (aka designing the data model and optimizing slow parts of the code base through better ds and algo implementations).
Only catch is I won't show up physically in NY or Philly or Chicago, etc.
Response to the 50: "Sounds like you need to work _smarter_, not longer and harder like my--" and then walk out but walk with a gait gorilla walk due to the weight.
Can't speak for the company and their intention - but here's how I'd answer that question, authentically to me:
"Work is variable. If we are on a super tight deadline with real implications, then people should put in extra hours if they can. Like, if we need to deliver for a major client, let's just do that.
And then other times, you can back off and work at a sustainable pace. It really depends on what makes sense in the situation"
This answer may not please everyone but I think it would resonate with reasonable people. It's worked well for me.
Interviews are a two way street. They crashed and burned on your interview. Unless they can explain that they are paying 25% more to compensate for 25% more time, why would you work for them?
I had a similar situation interviewing with one of Musk’s companies a while back. Who would want to work 80 hour weeks to make a 40 hour a week salary? The answer should be no one. You did great.
That was actually a great question for both parties!
They were filtering out people who were not willing to work 50 hours a week
You were filtering out companies who expected over 40 hours of work a week.
The only complaint I have is they should have put hour requirements it in the job posting so you both filtered each other out before it got to the interview stage.
I'm 43 years old, been programming all of my life, and have a Master degree. I've never seen a person do concentrated work or study for more than 6 hours a day. I've met plenty of people who claimed to do double. But they were either lying to me or to themselves.
If you think people can do 50 hours per week of highly concentrated work, you still have a lot to learn. Once you understand developers have around 0 to 6 hours of productive work in a day, you can start to optimize it.
Sounds like you dodged a bullet there! If the question is specifically about work for someone else, that they decide you do, I'd be suspicious of anyone answering anything other than "zero".
Why doesn’t anyone ever ask why people are expected to work an extra 10 hours for free? This assumes that 40hrs/wk is standard, but that doesn’t seem unreasonable.
You never put a ceiling: otherwise it makes them believe you work the hours, not the job (I mean, if you care to "win" the job offer).
A good response is "there s no hour limit: as long as there s work and the client isnt satisfied, we work. I think it's important to sleep a bit between work day sto stay coherent, otherwise as long as I can".
There is always someone who will make their lack of forethought into your problem. As long as they can override pushback with a little bit of social engineering they will never learn.
