I was interviewed by three panelist that consisted of the various IT Leads. It started with a virtual interview, where they had basic questions and moved on to face to face interviews. Both interviews were rushed and they seemed less interested in responding to my questions about the job. I was able to ask two questions. This was most likely due to small interview windows and running out of time. I ultimately decided to pull my application from consideration, not due to the rush, but due to red flags with one of the panelists. Panelist 1: Was polite and kept a good spin on the interview. They responded to my questions and seemed excited. They were on a schedule so each interview was rushed and they politely directed me to close the interview after my two questions. Panelist 2: This one asked the technical questions. They were direct and clear in their questions. I actually enjoyed this panelist for their questions. However, they did not say much after the questions, probably because I was not interviewing for their location and felt indifferent to my hiring. Not a bad thing, just an observation. Panelist 3: This was the reason I asked to pull my application. They asked unclear limited questions, that would require understanding how they administer IT. Then it felt like they asked loaded questions in an attempt to play “gotcha” games. After that didn’t work, they went in to remarks about my application, that I would of happy corrected and appreciated the feedback. But what fallows is my reason for not continuing with my application. First: Commenting on my lack of a LinkedIn profile. I understand this form of social media is great for networking, however I view it as a security risk since anyone can view your information and use it for social engineering. The tone was a bit dismissive about it, but they fallowed with “its fine” once I confirmed I do not have one. You have my resume and we’re interviewing me, not my LinkedIn profile (or lack of one in this case). Second: After giving feedback on my application, I explained my logic. Much of the application is weighted towards teachers, I was not applying for a teaching position. I skimmed over a few parts of the application, figuring its better to ask for forgiveness and if they wanted to hiring me I’d correct anything they needed. This was mainly in regards to my work history and references. My work history is in my resume and my references are limited, so I provided 2/3 references. I did go back and correct this, but not before the panelist made a scoffing remark, saying asking for references is not outside the norm. Not sure how EFSC weights their applications, and I appreciate the feedback to address it, but the remark showed me who I’d be working for at this point and was a major red flag. Lastly, the biggest red flag was asking me about a medical issue that was already cleared by my Dr. They even commented they shouldn’t be asking this question, but went for it anyways. I told them it’s not an issue and I’ve been cleared by my Dr. They continued with the comments, really highlighting my medical condition as a concern. (It wasn’t Covid related if you’re wondering). In the end, it felt like the last panelist had someone else in mind for the job and was looking to find issues. The other panelist seemed to try and smooth the waters and keep things professional, but this last one kept getting little remarks in. Felt like I was playing “good cop back cop” kind of interview. I’ve had enough experience to trust my gut and this was the reason for pulling my application. I don’t need snide remarks, getting the last word in and leadership who skirts fair employment practices. To me, introductions are important and it seemed to foreshadow what is to come if I was offered the job.