Interview Dilemma: Should Family Background Be Discussed During Personal Interviews?

Is it important or relevant to ask for family details during a personal interview? In my opinion, how one's family background is relevant to a candidate's current education or profile. Please comment...

Dear Gunjan,

Company recruits humans, not machines. Family details help an interviewer to understand a candidate's background, upbringing, and social life, which are very important. For example, if a candidate's family members are all well-educated, the candidate is also perceived to have good educational values.

Additionally, such general questions help a candidate feel more at ease and can enhance the interview discussion. In my opinion, this question is both relevant and vital. An interviewer cannot solely focus on technical questions. How a candidate presents their family also reflects the pride they have for their family and their approach to life.

Please note that the above are my thoughts, and others may have differing opinions.

Regards,
Arti

Dear Gunjan,

Arti has written nicely. I too agree with her views. Firstly, candidates come to a comfortable zone by asking these questions. As an interviewer, we get a lot of information about the family background.

Dear, only 15% of knowledge contributes to someone's appointment; attitude contributes the most. Family background matters in attitude.

Regards,
J. S. Malik

Dear All,

This is for you. I hope that this will help you to know your value.

KNOW YOUR Value...!

A well-known speaker started off his seminar by holding up a Rupee 500 note. In the room of 200, he asked, "Who would like this Rupee 500 note?" Hands started going up. He said, "I am going to give this note to one of you, but first let me do this." He proceeded to crumple the note up. He then asked, "Who still wants it?" Still, the hands were up in the air.

"Well," he replied, "What if I do this?" And he dropped it on the ground and started to grind it into the floor with his shoe. He picked it up, now all crumpled and dirty. "Now who still wants it?" Still the hands went into the air.

"My friends, you have all learned a very valuable lesson. No matter what I did to the money, you still wanted it because it did not decrease in value. It was still worth Rupee 500/-. Many times in our lives, we are dropped, crumpled, and ground into the dirt by the decisions we make and the circumstances that come our way. We feel as though we are worthless. But no matter what has happened or what will happen, you will never lose your value. You are special. Don't ever forget it! Never let yesterday's disappointments overshadow tomorrow's dreams. "VALUE HAS A VALUE ONLY IF ITS VALUE IS VALUED.

Pain is inevitable. Suffering is optional.

All the best.

Regards,

Aseem Sheikh

Hi Gunjan,

Beginning an interview with things that are familiar to the person being interviewed lets him get relaxed. Unless the person has a troubled past, he will get comfortable and be confident while answering queries. The interviewer should be able to spot whether he is uncomfortable answering personal questions and should stop and ask other relevant questions.

For me, it is important to ask about the family background as it lets me judge why the person wants the job. It lets me gauge if he/she is responsible towards his/her family - this trait can well be used to the advantage of the company. Family background, members in the family, upbringing, schooling, etc., let you see the candidate from the organization's fitment perspective and can be very useful.

Regards,
Neeraj K. Singh

Dear Gunjan,

The company recruits humans. Knowledge comes first, followed by experience, and then family details. Social life is also very important. However, the company pays based on his/her ability, and other benefits are generated in a timely manner through experience.

Ashok Agnihotri

Asking personal questions about family is none of HR's business. It's better for HR professionals to refrain from asking personal questions to candidates.

Even if a person's parents are not educated, if they took pains to educate the child, you might realize that the lack of education in the family should not be a reason to deny the person a job opportunity.

We often read in newspapers about sons of laborers, workers, and cobblers excelling in exams, bringing pride to their parents. However, during interviews, when HR personnel ask about family details and a candidate mentions that their parents are uneducated and engaged in humble professions like laborer or rickshaw driver, some HR professionals tend to view this negatively and reject the candidates.

Individuals like you, despite receiving a good education, seem unfit for society when you base hiring decisions on irrelevant factors such as family background. It is disappointing that you, tasked with assessing a candidate's suitability for a company, choose to discriminate in this manner.

In the end, dear HR professionals, how does it benefit you to reject a candidate based on their family background? It is a shame that you engage in such practices, and you will eventually regret your wrongful actions.

The above post is specially for Arti to learn something about life and to understand the purpose of your life.

I don't know how you HR people assume that you are making a candidate comfortable by asking personal questions. This is ridiculous. Have you done any research on it? Are there any research people here who can state the facts that asking personal questions makes candidates comfortable? You are just like a herd of goats, following the leader.

Dear Gunjan,

Of course, this will lead to candidates' attitude contribution. When you ask about family, the candidates become friends. While talking, you can determine his/her communication skills and how he/she is explaining.

There are two benefits to discussing family:
1. The way of talking, explaining power, and communication skills can be easily determined.
2. Candidates feel comfortable talking about their family, and they have good awareness about their family. This allows you to judge the skills of employees.

We used to capture video recordings of all candidates, and one of our experts observes the behavior of the candidate and gives a 20% rating based on this.

Best Regards,
Sajid Ansari

There is no harm in asking. It is a relevant question.

Ravi, no one said (even Arti) that parents' education matters in selection!

Why do you hyper-imagine others' views?

This question helps one understand the learning path, how the person excelled in his field, family support he has, etc. For example, in my first company (an ITES company), they always asked this question to see what kind of family support we will have so that the night shifts will not become a problem for them. They usually advise/give information about all the problems that a married person will face and orient him well about things.

For bachelors/spinsters, father and mother are sometimes oriented in the life we go through in a night shift career because our continuity with them matters!

Please note - this question is not for deciding on the hiring part (Ravi, this goes to you because I don't want you to come back and say, "How can you select/reject a person based on family background" - no one is doing this here).

Remember - interviews also help employers understand the employees' background, needs, family pressure, monetary pressure - and also behave in a manner so that we can make sure, from our side, we can do everything to make things better in our employees' life!

Hi Gunjan,

I agree with Ravi; personal details are absolutely irrelevant to the candidate's performance on the job. What about a person who has taken the pain to get higher education, and just because of the limited education of his family, YOU REJECT HIM OR HER. It is really unfair.

The interviewer should ask only technical questions, and finding out the details of the background is important, but it should definitely be a PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND rather than PERSONAL. After all, you are interested in his professional life, not in personal.

Even abroad, asking a personal question to the interviewee is prohibited.

Dear Gunjan,

I think it's important up to some extent, as it affects the stability of a person or the purpose for which he joins the company.

Regards,
Darshak Mehta

Dear Gunjan, Company recruits humans, not machines. Family details help an interviewer to understand a candidate's background, upbringing, and social life, which are very important. For example, if a candidate's family members are well-educated, the candidate is perceived to have good educational values. These general questions help a candidate feel comfortable and enhance the interview discussion. In my view, this question is both relevant and important. An interviewer cannot simply ask technical questions. A candidate's way of representing their family also reflects the pride they have for their family and their expression towards life. Please note, the above are my thoughts; others may have a different opinion. Regards, Arti

Dear Asha, Don't think I am just blabbering; whenever I write, I think a hundred times before writing, and an intelligent person will immediately understand the meaning of the words written by Arti and others. Just go through the bold words of Arti and help me understand their meaning. Also, not all people are proud of their families, as mentioned by Arti. For example, if a mother does not provide food to her son and he has been eating out for the past 15 days without her care, in an interview when asked about his family, he may not be proud of his mother. Does that mean the boy in question is useless and unfit?

There is no harm in asking. It is a relevant question. Ravi, no one (even Arti) said that parents' education matters in the selection process! Why do you hyper-imagine others' views? This question helps one understand the learning path, how the person excelled in their field, the family support they have, etc. For example, in my first company (an ITES company), they always asked this question to assess the kind of family support we would have so that night shifts would not be problematic. They usually advise/give information about all the challenges a married person may face and orient them well. For bachelors/spinsters, sometimes fathers and mothers are oriented in the life we go through in a night shift career because our continuity with them matters. Please note - this question is not for deciding on the hiring part (Ravi, this is directed at you, as I don't want you to come back and say, "How can you select/reject a person based on family background?" - no one is doing this here). Remember - interviews also help employers understand employees' backgrounds, needs, family pressures, monetary pressures, and behave in a manner that can make sure, from our side, we can do everything to improve our employees' lives!

That is why I said - "Read before you comment."

I have clearly mentioned that this question will not lead to the decision-making part.

And revealing this info is not what the interviewer expects.

Why should we not ask about the family background in such situations?

Girl (age 23) hired for a supervisor role (in quality). We made the mistake of not asking about her family background (I mean we did not probe more). She said she was married (we did not ask about her husband). After five days, we received a complaint from her father who stated that we have forced one girl to work with us and never let her come home. It was the same girl - when we inquired, she burst out crying that her father is a drunkard and she has no choice but to stay away from him. She was worried if we would not hire her because of this.

Now we make sure that in no way she is disturbed by her dad. More probing helped us understand that her mother was being tortured by him and also beaten up. We finally decided to also accommodate her mother along with her. We made extra provisions for her and also assigned her a job within the unit itself, so that she can earn a decent salary - and also stay away from those bad thoughts. They are both happy, and now busy with "actually finding a guy" for her.

I am not saying that she should have revealed all this during the interview or that based on this we would have decided whether we should hire her. This only helps in the long run.

And we have a ritual - where every member's family people are asked to meet us - like a get-together. We make sure even by accident we don't ask her about her father - because we know that she would not like to hear about that.

So - asking such questions is to know what kind of life one is facing - only because we as employers should not make life miserable for such people.

Dear Asha,

Don't think I am just blabbering something; whenever I write, I think 100 times before writing, and an intelligent person will immediately understand the meaning of words written by Arti and others. Just go through the bold words of Arti and make me understand its meaning... and then maybe you will realize why I have posted like this.

Also, one point which many people face, not necessarily all people are proud of their families (refer to Arti's point), a purely personal scenario, but that does not mean that the person is a useless worker. For example, if a mother does not at all give food to her son, and her son is eating out for the past 15 days, his mom does not care for him, then in an interview when asked about his family, he will not be proud of his mother. So, does that mean that the boy in question is useless and unfit?

Dear Mr. Ravi,

Sorry, I may be wrong in your perception, but one thing I want to tell you is that we are discussing one process which we all are practicing day in and day out. We, in general (if you are not a very, very special person), are all learners till our death, and it may not be sufficient in one lifetime to become masters in all aspects. I am unable to understand why you are so emotional and very harsh in your approach. Without having a personal interaction with you, in one instance, I have made up my mind that you are a bit emotional. Talking with a candidate for 15 minutes one-on-one or in a group may help us understand his basic behavior. If he is not comfortable disclosing his real background, and once we conduct the background check, we will come to know if he is withholding facts, and then we can make a decision.

One point to consider is that when you are talking to a person based on known data, you can understand their body language. You cannot immediately bombard the candidate with technical questions as soon as they enter the interview chamber. Very few people are comfortable in front of a team, especially with unknown individuals; hence, some general points are needed to initiate the discussion.

Thanks and regards - Kameswarao

Dear Mr. Ravi,

Sorry, I may be wrong in your perception, but one thing I want to tell you is we are discussing one process that we all practice day in and day out. We (in general, if you are not a very special person) are all learners until our death, and it may not be sufficient in one lifetime to become masters in all aspects.

Unable to understand why you are so emotional and very harsh in your approach without having a personal interaction with you. In one instance, I made up my mind that you are a bit emotional and talking with a candidate for 15 minutes one-on-one or within the group may help us understand his basic behavior. If he is not comfortable disclosing his real background, and once we do the background check, we will come to know if he is not disclosing the facts, and then we can take a call.

One point to consider is that when you are talking to a person based on known data, you can understand his body language. You cannot immediately bombard the candidate with technical questions as soon as he enters the interview chamber. Very few are comfortable in front of a team, especially unknown people, so some general points are needed to initiate the discussion.

Thanks and regards,
Kameswarao

Queries:
1. Psychology, eh?
2. Can you explain the meaning of "take a call" and other things?
3. Who asked you to bounce? Can't you ask technical questions slowly? Dear, what do you think the candidate is there in your room for? Obviously, to get the job, so he must be prepared for technical questions, right? Isn't it all common sense? 😉

Good answer by Arti. I always expect the same thing which Aarti has told. Personal details are absolutely irrelevant to the candidate's performance on the job! How can an irrelevant attitude also matter while giving an interview?

Regards,
Srinivas Nednurkar

Interesting discussion...

I'm not an HR professional, but speaking from a candidate's perspective, I think it is fine if such questions are asked for the sake of comfort. However, there must be no conclusions drawn from it.

Let me narrate an experience... I was married only for a month and was looking for a job. In a big MNC, during my 3rd round of interview, the interviewer asked me, "Tell me about your parents"... and I told him. Then he asked me, "Which parents are you talking about?" I was confused! Then he told me that since I am married, I must talk about my in-laws first and only then my own parents!

I apologized and explained that I am so recently married that out of habit, I spoke about my own parents. Anyway, I realized at that instance that the guy is a chauvinist. I was informed that I wasn't fitting their criteria!

Hi all,

This seems to be a really nice discussion, and thanks to Ravi for his confrontational discussion which has made the thread meaningful. Unfortunately, my views are against Ravi. I am a bit sure that questions on family background play a role in the personal interview. Of course, the technical aspects and GD would have screened the candidate's communication and technical skills. A personal interview is needed to understand the candidate and their behavior. Behavior solely reflects from a candidate's background (family, friends, relatives, neighbors, etc.).

We can have many examples of this in psychological and medical contexts. However, that might take us out of the context, and additionally, I am not a professional in this field to quote exactly. Overall, it is appropriate to ask about the family in a personal interview, but that must not have any negative impact as our previous friend's experience in the interview.

Regards,
Samrat

Hi,

In addition, I would like to make a note on Shika Singh's experience. There are some HR interviewers who speak unnecessarily about caste, religions, etc., noting these as personal backgrounds. They must be corrected and should try to avoid such activities. Otherwise, I am sure the family backgrounds will reflect a candidate's behavior and attitude. It is the HR's duty to analyze whether a candidate can cope with the rules and environment of the organization. For this, they can ask these questions but not for educational perspectives.

Regards, Samrat

Hi,

First of all I do not agree with the views of Mr. Ravi and way he is type casting entire HR Community based on few lines/comments posted on this thread. Some of the views posted by HR Community Members over here are not properly articulated hence may give very different impression about selection process. Mr. Ravi is carrying impression that, candidates are selected or rejected by HR alone and that too only on the basis of their family background, which is not at all true.

Let me please elaborate my views based on my experiences.

1. Selection or rejection is not a decision of a single HR person. It is decided by a group of people drawn from different relevant functions. In most cases HR representative on panel is also generally senior, experienced, matured and seasoned professional who applies his professional knowledge and experience while taking decision and also moderates views of others.

2. Based on one of the comments Mr. Ravi has concluded that HR selects only candidates having well educated parents and rejects academically bright candidates if their parents are not educated. In fact chances of second type of candidates getting selected are far more. Reasons being: candidate has been successful against many odds and in a environment not conducive for education. Such candidates are perceived to be focused on job, dedicated, hardworking and having ability to perform against all odds. This candidate is less likely to hop the job for flimsy reasons and for few Rs. more. On the contrary first candidate is likely to have many distractions pulling him away from the job. But to know the odds faced by the candidates in his life, it is imperative to know about his family background and how would one know about it unless asked in interview.

3. In most cases selection is a process of elimination. One or two candidates are finally selected out of 10 candidates interviewed. Eight candidates are bound to be rejected. It does not necessarily mean that all of them are useless but organizations current need is only two hence they get eliminated, may be with a very narrow margin. Job of the selection panel is to choose two candidates best suited for the job. Accordingly they decide selection criteria considering needs of the job. For example for counselors' job good oral communication and command over language is of prime importance whereas for a clerical job it is of less importance.

4. While selecting candidates different criterion is decided and each criterion will have different weightage. Academics, experience, communication, skills, abilities, growth prospects, salary expectations and family background are some of the possible criterion. Point is, selection or rejection is not based on any single criterion but based on combination of many criterion having different weightage.

5. To conclude I would like to state that family background will be a criterion for selection but it will be a secondary criterion with less importance and weightage which may also vary for position to position and situation to situation.

6. I would also like to request Mr. Ravi to respect others even in case you do not respect their views and opinions. I would also like to request him to not to generalize based on few lines written thru a post. Please express your views in a more polite way. By offending and demeaning others you are not making any point.

Thanks & Regards

Dear Ravi,

This citehr forum is for all HR members, as you write you read 100 times before writing anything, probable you should start thinking 1000000 times before targeting someone like this.

You have no authority to teach someone purpose of life and understanding about it.

We are not aliens, but humans as I mentioned earlier and please mention me name of any good company where HR persons don't deal with Human problems of employee. Do HR have job to only deal with Technical aspects? If you call us as stupid, then what would you call those who spend their years in developing and studying attitude, behaviors, Psychometric testing (gain insight into a person's personality and psychological thinking).

To all others, please use this cite to help, advice each other rather any kind of personal abuse. If you don't like someone's opinion, put yours but this is not a generic way.

Mr. Ravi first valuable lesson of life is Respect yourself and respect others.

And if you feel to increase your Blogs no from 2383 with such rebuking thoughts, please go ahead.

I am not such time-waster that will continuously reply to your thoughts. Gunjan posted the question and I am sure she must have got valuable intake what she wants as per her perception.

Thanks Ash for your good thoughts, you are very crystal clear at your thoughts.

Hello,

In one of my interviews, an interviewer was asking more questions related to my personal aspect than professional. She was not much interested in my knowledge and skills about the job profile.

"When are you planning to get married? Will you get married in Mumbai (the opening was in Mumbai) or somewhere else? Will you continue your job after getting married?" Such pathetic questions really made me uncomfortable. I was not selected, and I don't know what the exact reason was.

I am only opposing the statement that family background is an important criterion for judging a candidate's selection. I think Mr. Ravi is also opposing that personal background should not be the only criterion for hiring or rejecting a candidate.

So please citeHRian, do not take it personally. :)

Thanks

Dear Shabz,

I will definitely ask those questions to an unmarried lady. Reason: Continuity for a longer time. In my case, when I was interviewed, I was asked the same question. You never know if after marriage whether you will be in a position to continue in the same location/company... or work at all. Yours must have been a role that will require you to work for a longer period, rather than breaking in between and letting someone else take over that job. Hope you got my point.

To me, that question is really important. As a recruiter, I would not want to recruit a girl who has plans of getting married in two to three months, and move out of the city - that is a huge cost under recruitment. I will have to find another person, set the same salary standards, give the same training, and wait for months for results. It may be a hard question for candidates - but an important one for a recruiter/employer.

In all honesty, I am taken aback by some of the responses that justify asking personal questions. Asking personal questions, be it marital status, children, husband's occupation, or family background, is highly discriminatory, to say the least.

I have worked in HR in a few countries, and it is considered discriminatory to ask such questions in the interview. To the effect that a candidate can instigate legal action. A candidate should be selected on the basis of his/her capabilities, not the background they come from. In order for recruiters to gain an in-depth understanding of a candidate's attitude, aptitude, communication skills, and other important criteria, there are ways to get around it. You can use:

a) Competency-based questions

b) Psychometric profiling

c) Role Playing

and many other such methods that will reflect the candidate's real talent, capability, or skill.

Dear Gunjan,

Company recruits human not machines. Family details help an interviewer to know about a candidate's background, upbringing, and his social life, which is very important. For example, if a candidate's all family members are well-educated, the candidate is also perceived to be of good educational values. Also, these general questions help a candidate to come in a comfortable zone and also enhance the interview discussion.

As per my view, this question is both relevant and important. An interviewer can't simply ask technical questions. A candidate's way of representing his family also depicts the pride he has for his family and his way of expression towards his life.

Please note, the above are my thoughts. Others may have a different opinion.

Regards,

Arti

Arti, there are many other questions that can help put the candidate at ease :). You may start by explaining what the interview would entail and ask the candidate not to feel nervous. (Howsoever obvious, this certainly helps). (I have seen a lot of recruiters jump straight to questions, without a smile on their faces.)

What if the candidate does not feel comfortable talking about his family background, your purpose of putting him at ease is defeated. Also, are you saying that candidates with a privileged or unprivileged background may prejudice our decision, solely because of their family background or circumstances.

Always remember, as recruiters, we meet candidates from all walks of life, and it is very important that we are able to draw a line between what we judge about a candidate and what we feel about a candidate.

A good recruiter should be able to make a good decision based on sound criteria. In my humble opinion, family background does not form a part of sound criteria.

Cheers

Even I hope that, like in other countries, here in India, a law should be made so that we can file a case against the HR person asking such questions. I would love to see most of the HR professionals in citehr in jail, rotating the grindstone (chakki peesing in jail) ;-) ;-) ;-) ;-)

But Ash, she hardly asked any questions related to my knowledge. It did not happen to me alone. It was a campus recruitment, and my friends were also asked questions related to personal life like hobbies and interests, etc. As mentioned by vkokamath, there should be a proper balance given to all factors like academics, experience, communication, skills, abilities, growth prospects, salary expectations, and family background too. She was emphasizing more on our personal life than on our knowledge and skills. I do not know whether it is right or wrong to ask such questions in an interview, but a career is always a priority and an important factor in anyone's life, and no one would allow his or her personal life to affect his or her career.

Thanks

Hi Ash,

I am sorry to say, but I find your response highly sexist and prejudiced. (no offense!)

I understand your point about recruitment budgets and ensuring you have the right candidate on board, but I fail to understand your questions around marriage.

I'd question a candidate's commitment, aspirations, reasons for change to understand their situation.

Would you ask the same question to an unmarried guy - his level of commitment may change post marriage.

Or if this was a married lady (you would hire her without a second thought) while she may be heading for a divorce in the background.

Or a guy with a stable background who may be checking out another offer only to ditch yours in a few days.

All in all, my point is eventualities are possible in every situation.

While your intentions are very noble and rightly steered in the business direction, your approach may be biased.

I ask you, had you not got the job because of questions that hold no relevance to the job, would you have called it fair?

Dear Shabz,

Please remember, this might have been one of your first few experiences in interviews. However, for the recruiter, it is a reaction to what must have happened in the past. They are careful to hire people, especially in campus recruitments, assuming you were a fresher at that point. Your skills required for that job should be trainable.

As far as freshers are concerned, I believe attitude and continuity will be gauged, apart from checking the basic knowledge on the subject being interviewed for. However, what do you think: should the candidate be interviewed further, knowing that the chances of her staying for a longer time are very minimal?

Hey buddy, I really appreciate your thoughts.

Pls see the answers below: (Sequenced in the way to respond to your queries that I have boldened)

a) I do ask the questions around marriage because: I need to know if the person has plans of continuing in the job for a longer time, or if the decision is purely based on circumstances.

- It might happen that I may not get the exact answers - but should I ignore asking this question just because 50% of the time people hide the facts that they are planning to move on?

b) Oh yes - we do ask an unmarried guy - not about marriage. But about his idea in moving to a metro city (I am from Coimbatore).

80% of the time we have had answers from bachelors saying that they want to move out to a metro city.

Depending upon the need - and the position, we sometimes even offer the position at a metro city (Bangalore / Chennai) if we have an opportunity there.

It's more of a need - and skills match.

c) I don't assume out of 10 people all 10 would be divorced.

Anyways - talking about facts - yes, if she is divorced, after joining us - we will still continue treating her the same way she is. If she plans to move - we have no option but let her do what she wants.

But honey - let's not deviate - we were talking about hiring success. The chances of a hire continuing for a longer time. If there are visible points that chances are less - then we have to choose "not to hire."

d) Yes - I never deny this.

e) Nope - I am talking about facts. I never mentioned that this is the ultimate question that I would ask to decide whether I should recommend for hire or not. I interview, I put these facts across: Attitude, skills, continuity possibility and everything to the Hiring Manager - depends on how soon they need the person, and how much they are willing to sacrifice - if it's not a successful hire.

f) Nope - I would never call it "not fair."

My current position (with this employer) when asked about the marriage part - I have clearly mentioned my chances of leaving the organization in the next 18 months. I have also told them not to expect me to stay beyond a "specific" period.

They agreed. Because - they needed this position filled immediately, and they were happy with the skills I gained from my previous career (that was what they are looking at - setting systems). Had I been a fresher, I doubt whether I would have had this offer in hand. So - I don't disapprove the questions put across to Shabz - being a fresher!

Now - how much this would relate to my job is the question. Isn't one's continuity related to the job? It is.

And again - coming back to your opinion on family background: Please note that this will not serve as a decision whether to hire or not. I hope no one else gets more emotional over this.

rp07: I really did not take any offense from your post. :-) But the term Sexist made me think if I have to do something about communicating the message with a self-help dictionary to understand what I have meant or "stating - read once again before you get emotional!

Babe - a sexist is one who considers a gender inferior to other. I don't do that - it's a matter of the right person on the job - for a "longer tenure."

We have also had instances of a Guy who told us he can stay with us only for 6 months, as he is planning to get married and move to the US. We analyzed the situation - gave him a contract for 6 months, and put a fresher under him to be trained - he agreed to this. (He was having a strong skill that could be passed on to others through training.)

Case 2: We had an accountant who told us he can stay only for a year - as he will have to go on a long travel after that and will be back only after 6 months. We had to ignore his application - because, we can't keep frequently changing accountants nor let a junior person take over after being trained (the situation we were facing did not let us think of any other option.)

So it all depends upon the need of the hour.

Hi Gunjan,

I feel the reason behind asking for family background details in the interview is to understand/judge the following:

Whenever the HR is selecting a candidate, they consider 2 major things. One is technical & communication skills, and the other is stability (long-term association with the company).

By asking technical questions, we can judge his technical knowledge. But to assess stability, we have to inquire about his family background. This question can be asked in the first session or the last session of the interview, depending on the position level.

When hiring fresher or junior-level employees, family background can also affect their long-term association with the company. For example, as someone mentioned about a shift-based scenario, we need to determine if the candidate is genuinely interested in night shifts or if their family background supports them for the night shift. Economic commitments also play a role.

Another aspect is when hiring mid/top-level management, family background and commitment details will impact their long-term association with the company. For instance, economic commitments and location commitments are crucial factors.

Thank you.

Ravi..

I agree with you that it is a great reply by rp07... But it was such a great reply, why couldn't you post something which is as concise as what he said and not offend somebody by your posts... I believe this is a platform for all of us to discuss issues related to HR and not offend anyone...Also I don't think you are actually in HR, because of which you don't understand the reasons we need to ask these questions…

Be it arti or asha or any other member who has supported this question, nobody is actually saying that we would reject a candidate on the basis on his/her family background. It just gives us an idea about the upbringing of a candidate.

I myself in my previous organizations have recruited fresher's who have come from not so privileged families, like father working as auto driver/best driver/tailor/ mom's a housewife, and maybe this influenced me to recruit them. As I was told by one of my bosses “Always recruit someone who needs a job”….it's difficult to go by this funda as well, as not everyone who needs a job will be the best candidate for the job. ..

And please also tell me which country has a law to file case against HR… I would never apply there :-D

Few Practical Occasions:

1. There is one company that does not hire (in the middle or junior level) individuals who are the sole breadwinners of their families. The reason for this policy is that sometimes payments can get delayed, leading to the possibility of the individual leaving the company or causing disruption if their salary is not disbursed on time.

2. In my previous company, I never hired a female candidate who had been married within the last 1 or 2 years. The rationale behind this decision was that such candidates were likely to approach maternity leave soon, necessitating the arrangement of a replacement.

3. I also avoided hiring females who had young children or lived with traditional-minded in-laws. The concern here was that occasional late sittings at work could pose challenges for these individuals in managing their responsibilities at home.

Please let me know if you need further assistance or have any questions.

Agreed with RSK... Females who have recently gotten married or have small kids do not mean they are not responsible or don't have the right to get a chance to grow professionally. I, myself, have a son who is 11 months old. I took maternity leave and joined back the office within 4 months. However, that does not mean I don't have the right to get a promotion or that I don't deserve a good position if I look for a change.

Regards,
Gunjan

Dear Gunjan,

The family background reflects the behavior of the person even though he is well-educated. A person from a very low background, like an auto driver's son or a servant's daughter, may not know how to behave with others. They might be well-educated, but behavior and character are nowhere taught in any books.

Regards,
Shantha

I completely disagree with your practice in respect of female employees. It's very unfair.