Seems like they think conversations involve certain spells and invocations to force it to go the way they want. Like if you have a legal right, you must aggressively invoke it so your opponent realizes you’re a legal mastermind and hands you the job to avoid lawsuits.
Feels kinda like that advice for interacting with cops that sounded more like “how to be legally right while escalating interactions with the police”. Or the sovereign citizen version that drops the “legally right” part entirely.
It ignores the reality that anyone can judge you for any reason and that it’s practically impossible to prove or even know why they reject you after an interview, so it doesn’t even matter if they did it for an illegal reason as long as they didn’t outright tell you (or each other in writing if you do try to sue, which btw if you sue someone over how a job interview goes, few will want to even interview you if they know about it, even if you’re completely in the right).
Also displaying dominance when you don’t have it just shows that you won’t be a pleasant person to interact with regularly. And the people trying to argue this point with you are proving the point more than anything else by treating the pushback of “you don’t need to state that so defensively” as “forget your worker rights and boundaries, you’re going to be a slave!”
While workers rights can be a trump card, you don’t pull them out in an interview as most trump cards aren’t in play yet.
Seems like they think conversations involve certain spells and invocations to force it to go the way they want. Like if you have a legal right, you must aggressively invoke it so your opponent realizes you’re a legal mastermind and hands you the job to avoid lawsuits.
Feels kinda like that advice for interacting with cops that sounded more like “how to be legally right while escalating interactions with the police”. Or the sovereign citizen version that drops the “legally right” part entirely.
It ignores the reality that anyone can judge you for any reason and that it’s practically impossible to prove or even know why they reject you after an interview, so it doesn’t even matter if they did it for an illegal reason as long as they didn’t outright tell you (or each other in writing if you do try to sue, which btw if you sue someone over how a job interview goes, few will want to even interview you if they know about it, even if you’re completely in the right).
Those “know your rights” videos are exactly what came to mind. Not only is it unnecessarily combative, you’re showing your whole hand.
Knowing your rights is important. Telling someone you know your rights when they’re not pressing you to abandon them is something else.
Also displaying dominance when you don’t have it just shows that you won’t be a pleasant person to interact with regularly. And the people trying to argue this point with you are proving the point more than anything else by treating the pushback of “you don’t need to state that so defensively” as “forget your worker rights and boundaries, you’re going to be a slave!”
While workers rights can be a trump card, you don’t pull them out in an interview as most trump cards aren’t in play yet.