Dow is one of the most prospective job scammers, which use quite simple tricks to get as much as personal, sensitive and confidential information under either GDPR or contract clauses. First, either Dow or a third part agency contacts you by email with a questionnaire, mostly on your possibility to change location and salary expectations. The information provided to you in this communication almost fully agrees with the job opportunity posted by them, except for some details such like the working language or the market language. In the next communication, you book an online interview with the team leaders. The information still almost agrees with the posted job opportunity, up to the languages of the work. When you receive the interview invitation from the team leaders, the position name is already changed by at least one word (for example Customer Service Representative instead of Customer Service Specialist) and without defined languages of the work. During the interview the only one of the team leaders mentioned in the invitation is present, while the second declared team leader is replaced by person of unknown role and undeclared in the invitation. The interviewers present themselves to you, with a direct bias/prejudice put onto gender and sexual orientation, for example after they say you on their professional experience or position in the company they say you about their boyfriend/girlfriend. Just to make themselves more reliable to you, there is no a detectable bias put onto age, the interviewers come from two different age categories. The interviewers have the same nationality different than the nationality of a candidate, what is a direct bias/prejudice put onto the preferred nationality. When the interview questions go toward your professional experience, the interviewers want you to share with them sensitive and confidential information on your previous employment, which is directly under the standard contract clauses. When you reply them that you can provide reference letters and other employment documentation for background check instead of sharing the requested sensitive and confidential information, then they directly reject to accept this official way. Instead of this, the interview starts to go with their magic thinking on 'stability', which by their idea is just a marriage to the job, while the dynamic reality of the job market is not taken into account by the interview questions. These interview is directly gender/sexuality-oriented, because there are unambiguous suggestions to display your sensitive information. The business language used by the interviewers is far from neutrality, and shows they do not need your professional experience at all. During the interview there is no talk on the market language and the working language as well as on the company and the team. Instead of this quite important information, the interviewers try to oppose your professional experience in almost every available way, until you want to share with them the requested sensitive and confidential information. When you say them that you are uncomfortable with the interview, then the team leaders ask you directly to withdraw your job application. Also, on the other side, there is no any language assessment or skills assessment required before and in course of the interview. Around half-time of the talk, you get a clear and unambiguous impression that you are not welcome as a new team member, but you are just the source of money for the interviewers. Instead of showing you a good will to employ you as you are, they show you they want to eliminate you by the inborn and unchangeable traits of your personality, and just take money for this alleged 'recruiting'. It is a waste of your time and a waste of your energy to go with Dow interview. For experienced job seekers, the communication with Dow is just a trash item. For beginners, Dow interviews can directly demotivate to proceed with corporate jobs. However, by the attempt to play unfair and nontransparent, Dow tricks mostly itself instead to trick a candidate, because job market is sufficiently abundant in job opportunities with comparable employment conditions.
