Strange interview request. Is this normal?

[SlipTheJab]

Huh? If people edit their posts does that show in your quoted snips?

.

No your original quote still stands which makes the sexism accusation quite bizarre.

[Hapax]

The OP has to decide to decide before signing the contract whether he can work with the client or not.

The issue is how and when he makes that decision. What evidence does he use? Does he decide before the interview, after the interview or during contract negotiations?

My suggestion involves using the only concrete evidence he has; that of the clients behaviour and making the decision as early as possible. Making the decision early in the process has the obvious risk of false negatives. However it has the benefit of minimizing his cost. In the OP's case this cost was real, a long drive and the associated potential loss of fee income. I put a high figure on my opportunity cost and I'm happy to live with false negatives. He may draw the line somewhere else.

[WTFH]

... the associated potential loss of fee income. I put a high figure on my opportunity cost and I'm happy to live with false negatives...

Have you ever thought about appearing on the Apprentice?


What is "loss of fee income"?
What is "opportunity cost"?
What is "false negative"?


These all sound like management consultant speak for "I want to sound important".

[Hapax]

Indication doesn't imply certainty, but i've worked at and interviewed on behalf of enough places to know that some places believe that a candidate should feel grateful to be considered .......

Absolutely true. It's precisely these potential clients that I want to identify as early as possible so that I can cross them off my list without wasting time on them.

[Cirrus]

What is "loss of fee income"?
What is "opportunity cost"?
What is "false negative"?

I agree using these terms makes it more difficult to understand the point being made. Possibly there is am element of cognitive dissonance here. Hapax describes a world where every minute could be being charged to a client and every interview slot could have been a slot for an interview with another prospect. I can't imagine most contractors are in that lucky position and therefore would not understand why Hapax would want to turn down possible roles on superficial evidence.

[SpontaneousOrder]

Absolutely true. It's precisely these potential clients that I want to identify as early as possible so that I can cross them off my list without wasting time on them.

Especially gaming companies. Well... especially a particular gaming company I'm thinking of They think people will happily suffer anything they throw at them because it's a games company!

And a financial services co I worked with. We were desperate to hire these 2 guys because they were good. But HR wanted them to travel to another interview elsewhere to be interviewed by HR, which they didn't want to. We were terrified of losing them (and we did lose 1) and HRs attitude was "We're xxxCo... they should be jumping through any hoops to get the job".

[SueEllen]

No your original quote still stands which makes the sexism accusation quite bizarre.

It's clear you like the Hapax doesn't understand I am a woman not a man.

You are both fixated on subtleties to avoid wasting time interviewing but you fail to understand those of language.

[pr1]

It's clear you like the Hapax doesn't understand I am a woman not a man.

You are both fixated on subtleties to avoid wasting time interviewing but you fail to understand those of language.

Are you calling sexism for the use of word "spokesman"?

[SlipTheJab]

It's clear you like the Hapax doesn't understand I am a woman not a man.

You are both fixated on subtleties to avoid wasting time interviewing but you fail to understand those of language.

What, with a tag of 'SueEllen' you do surprise me. And its clear you seem to be ignoring those questioning your assertion about Hapax being sexist when their is no such evidence of this, I fail to understand this yes but not your other arguments which you seem to think people have no right to dare question.

[WTFH]

OK, back to the original post...

My limited company have been contacted by an agent regarding a contract in public sector

Do you mean YOU have been contacted, or some company you work for, and they have decided to put you forward?

in five hours driving distance.

5 hours round trip, or 5 hours one way?

They want me to come at certain day and confirmed they will not pay travel expenses.

Fairly normal. They will want to interview you on a day that they are carrying out interviews.

is my company just being invited for statistics/regulations reasons?

Back to the "my company"

Would you travel there spending two days and couple of hundred quid in those conditions?

5 hours (or 10) is not two days travel, nor is it a couple of hundred quid, unless you drive a very uneconomical car badly.


So, a few questions...
Is the role through an agent you have used before?
When you have raised your concerns with the agent what have they said?
If you got offered the role, would you take it? (think about the travel)
What statistics/regulations are you thinking of?
Have you been contracting long?