u/Top-Cap824

I wanted to share an interview experience that left a bad taste in my mouth and see if others have gone through something similar.

I interviewed for a Data Engineer role requiring 3+ years of experience in a niche technology at a very large Glass Manufacturing MNC in Mumbai. The compensation was north of 20 LPA, so I was genuinely excited.

The story started when I reached out directly to a recruiter and shared my resume. A few days passed with no response, so I followed up. The recruiter told me that my profile didn't match the job requirements.

Honestly, I was shocked. Anyone with experience in this domain could tell from my resume that I had worked extensively on the required technology.

I decided to send a much more detailed version of my resume, practically explaining every responsibility in simple terms. This time, I got an interview call.

Round 1: Technical
The interviewer skipped the usual "tell me about yourself" questions and jumped straight into scenario-based problems and designing data pipelines. It was challenging, but I handled it well and received positive feedback.

A few days later, the recruiter informed me that I'd cleared the round and needed to travel to Mumbai for the hiring manager interview.

I booked my own flight from Delhi to Mumbai.

Round 2: Hiring Manager (Onsite)
Another solid discussion. More practical scenarios, project work, and architecture conversations. Again, I felt it went well.

Then came the HR round. We discussed my previous experience, notice period, compensation, and other formalities. I was told there would be one final technical discussion with the onsite team from Paris.

I returned home and attended the final technical round online.

Round 3: Final Technical
Two interviewers joined. They asked mostly basic and intermediate questions. I answered in detail and explained my real production experience.

What surprised me was that it felt like they had prepared a list of questions rather than having hands-on experience with the technology themselves. I also conduct interviews for this skill set, and my approach is usually to start with fundamentals before moving to difficult scenarios. This didn't feel like that.

The discussion was positive. They seemed happy with my answers, my work experience, and my approach to solving problems.

Then came the twist.

A few days later, I followed up with the recruiter and was told that the feedback was that my "complex architecture knowledge wasn't good enough."

The strange part?

There were barely any deep architecture questions in the entire process. I wasn't challenged on complex designs or advanced architectural decisions to the extent that such feedback would make sense.

I don't know if I was simply not the preferred candidate or if the process was never serious to begin with. Rejection is part of the game, and I'm completely fine with that.

What bothers me is:

• Four rounds of interviews.
• Being asked to travel for an onsite interview.
• Spending around ₹20,000 out of my own pocket.
• Getting vague feedback that didn't match the actual discussions.

The biggest lesson I took away from this is:

I'm done paying for onsite interviews.

If a company wants you to travel, ask upfront whether flights, hotel, and local expenses will be reimbursed. If they aren't willing to invest in their hiring process, think carefully before investing your own money.

Companies often say they're looking for talent, but sometimes it feels like candidates are expected to bear all the risk while the company loses nothing.

I also have one question for the community:

Has anyone else spent significant money for an onsite interview only to receive generic or questionable feedback afterward?

I'd love to hear your experiences. Maybe this is more common than I think.

#DataEngineer #TechJobs #Hiring #JobSearch #InterviewExperience #CareerAdvice #SoftwareEngineering #IndianTech #TechCareers #Recruitment #JobHunt #WorkCulture

I recently received a LinkedIn message from a recruiter saying they were looking for a Senior Fivetran Data Engineer. I agreed to interview, and honestly, the experience was quite unexpected.

The interview was rescheduled six times within five days. Each time, there was a different reason — sometimes the panel had a production issue, sometimes the interviewer was sick, and sometimes there was a family emergency.

Finally, the interview was scheduled for the evening of 15 August, and the interviewer joined.

With 3+ years of experience working for a PBC client, I was expecting some meaningful, role-specific questions around Fivetran, data engineering, pipelines, CDC, troubleshooting, or real-world scenarios.

Instead, the interviewer initially asked me which technologies I had experience with. I noticed she was clicking through something and seemed to be checking off different areas. She asked about API experience, data warehousing, and a couple of other technologies.

Then she went offline for a while.

When she came back, the questions suddenly became extremely difficult — almost architect-level system design questions on the topics she had just asked about. The transition was honestly quite surprising.

Even the constant clicking, scrolling, and typing sounds were very noticeable, and it genuinely felt like the questions were being generated or assisted by AI during the interview.

At one point, I actually interrupted and asked, “Do you think this question is relevant to the role?” She fumbled a little and eventually changed the question. 😂

The whole experience was honestly more funny than frustrating at that point.

My question is: if a company isn't able to arrange a legitimate and prepared interviewer for a role, why waste the candidate's time?

Candidates also invest time, preparation, and energy into these interviews. Rescheduling an interview six times in five days and then conducting an interview that doesn't seem aligned with the role is not a great candidate experience.

Anyway, it was definitely one of the more unusual interview experiences I've had. 😂