A recruiter just asked my husband if we are planning on kids. I am sitting here SEETHING (partly infertile). Why are they still getting away with asking questions like this!
In my country, Australia, you are not allowed to ask such questions. Yet they still do.
How do we navigate this? he just awkward laughed and said getting a bit old for that. we would love to have kids, when my body allows. i dont want him to take the job because im so angry about them asking which i know is extremely selfish of me and basing of emotion only but how are they getting away with this crap.
Jobadvisor
I am so sorry you both are dealing with this. Your "seething" isn't just an emotional reaction—it’s a completely valid response to a deep violation of privacy and, frankly, a breach of professional ethics.
When you are already navigating the heavy, silent weight of infertility, having a stranger poke at that wound for the sake of "corporate risk assessment" feels incredibly cruel. You aren’t being selfish; you’re reacting to a lack of basic human decency.
Why do they "get away" with it?
In Australia, the Fair Work Act and the Australian Human Rights Commission are very clear: discrimination based on pregnancy, potential pregnancy, or family responsibilities is illegal.
However, recruiters often use "conversational" traps. They frame it as a friendly chat to make the candidate feel like they’re being "difficult" if they don't answer. They get away with it because it is notoriously hard to prove that a rejection was based on that specific answer rather than "cultural fit."
How to Navigate This (The Strategy)
Since your husband already gave an answer, the "damage" in terms of the awkwardness is done, but for any future rounds or for anyone else in this position, here are three ways to handle it without losing the job offer:
The Pivot (Professional):
"I'm curious, does the role involve a lot of travel or specific hours that would make family commitments a concern? I’m very committed to the requirements of this position."
This shifts the focus back to the work.
The Gentle Boundary:
"I prefer to keep my private life separate from my professional world, but I can tell you I’m fully prepared to take on the responsibilities of this role."
The Humor Deflection (What he tried to do):
His answer was okay, but it often leaves the candidate feeling "icky" afterward because it feels like a betrayal of their real situation.
Should he take the job?
This is the hardest part. You aren't being "selfish" by wanting him to decline, but let’s look at it through two lenses:
The "Red Flag" Lens: If the recruiter is an external headhunter, they might just be a "cowboy" recruiter and not representative of the actual company culture. However, if this was an internal HR person, it suggests a company culture that doesn't value boundaries or legal compliance.
The "Practical" Lens: If the job is a massive step up, offers great pay, or (ironically) has excellent parental leave/flexibility policies, it might be worth taking the "win" for your family’s future stability, even if the recruiter is a dinosaur.
A Note for You
Please be kind to yourself. You are managing the grief of infertility while also trying to protect your husband. It is okay to be angry.
If he moves forward, he can keep his cards close to his chest. He doesn't owe them the truth about your journey, and he certainly doesn't owe them a "thank you" for their intrusive interest in your private life.
I blew it
I had the perfect position lined up. I had my current job, it’s a toxic work environment, I’m not excited for it in the morning, my last bosses got fired in a row, my title doesn’t fit my role. A recruiter reached out on this role that fit me better (in finance, not ideal but I’ll take it) where I’d be starting with a lot of young people (something my current job lacked) in person, really close to my apartment.
I got through 5 interviews, everyone likes me but they think I’d be a better fit for this other role which does match my resume better. I get to my 6th interview and it goes great, basically just describe the role, and then on my 7th I meet with this senior VP and the connection is spotty, I can barely hear him, he’s going in and out and was 10 min late and he’s asked me a basic question (“How do you manage version control?”) and I did not know how to answer which set the tone for the interview. I was confused by the question, I was prepping for specific questions about the job and my experience and I just went blank. It basically ended there.
HR almost immediately reached out saying they’d like to put me in a new lower level position and set me up with another interview a few days later but they canceled it the day before saying there freezing hiring for that position.(my guess is that the senior vp explicitly said no judging on the interview). The recruiter sounded confused but hopeful for me when I talked with her last but I think this was before she got the details of the 7th interview.
I’m spiraling now. I made one mistake that might have cost me my entire career and may not be recoverable. The amount of people I would have met and step up in career is heartbreaking and in this market in software, I feel like giving up on my career entirely. Please tell me someone can relate.
Jobadvisor
I hear the spiral, and I want to pull you out of it for a second because, while it feels like you just dropped the winning trophy at the finish line, the reality is much less "career-ending" than your brain is telling you right now.
First, let me tell you: every single person in tech has had a "Version Control" moment.
Whether it’s a spotty connection or a sudden brain-blank on a basic concept, "The Bad Interview" is a rite of passage. You didn't blow your career; you had a bad 30 minutes with a Senior VP who was already having a bad day (he was 10 minutes late and had a poor connection—that’s on him, not you).
1. The "Version Control" Trap
For future reference, "Version Control" is just tech-speak for Git (GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket). The question is basically asking: "How do you make sure you don't overwrite your coworkers' work and how do you track changes?"
The fact that you blanked on it doesn't mean you're incompetent; it means you were over-prepared for the complex stuff and got caught off guard by a foundational term. It’s like being a chef prepped for a soufflé and someone asks you how to boil an egg—sometimes the simplicity is what trips you up.
2. The "Hiring Freeze" Reality Check
I know it feels like the VP "blacklisted" you, but in the current software market, hiring freezes are rarely personal.
If they truly hated your performance, HR usually sends a standard "we've decided to move in a different direction" email.
The fact that they immediately tried to pivot you to a different role shows they still liked your "DNA" and your 5 previous successful interviews.
Tech companies right now are incredibly twitchy with budgets. A freeze often comes from the CFO’s office, not the VP you interviewed with.
3. Rebuilding Your Perspective
You mentioned feeling like your career is over. Let's look at the facts:
You passed 5 interviews. That is objective proof that you are talented, likable, and qualified. You aren't "bad at your job"; you are "bad at interviewing with spotty Wi-Fi."
The market is tough, but you are "active." A recruiter reached out to you. That means your profile is hitting the right notes.
You still have a job. Yes, it’s toxic. Yes, it sucks. But it is a "survival paycheck" that buys you time to find the right escape hatch, not just the first one.
4. How to Navigate the "Spiral"
Forgive the "Blank": You were stressed, the audio was cutting out, and you were 7 interviews deep. Of course you weren't at your best.
The Recruiter is your Ally: Reach out to that confused/hopeful recruiter. Say: "I really enjoyed the process, despite the technical issues during my chat with [VP]. I'm disappointed about the freeze, but please keep me at the top of your list when things thaw."
The "Software" Identity: Don't give up on the career. The industry is in a weird cycle right now, but your skills haven't vanished because of one awkward Zoom call.
You are grieving a "what if" life—the apartment-close job, the social circle, the fresh start. That grief is real. But please don't mistake a closed door for a dead end.
When you look back on this in two years from a job that actually respects your boundaries (and has stable management), this will be the "funny-miserable" story you tell over drinks.
Got the bait and switch
I applied to a job back in January that described the role as being salaried between 85-110K/year. Sounds great right? The posting also included a FULL description of benefits for full time employees and noted that it was a "fully remote team". Did a quick phone screening with two recruiters a few weeks back, they said it was a full time position but then also mentioned they were looking for someone to commute to the office in queens (im in central NJ). I told them i would not be able to commute to the office, that would be over a two hour drive, and taking a train->bus->uber into queens apparently is a 5 hour trip.
Now they are sending me follow up emails, i again stated i would not be able to commute to the office and mentioned that the posting said it was a remote position. The latest follow up email now states its not a salary position, but a 1099 position for 40-52 an hour and they also require you to "travel across NYC up to four times per month; occasional evenings or weekends as needed".
The original posting seems EXTREMELY misleading from what they are now saying the role is. It's taking everything in me to not rip into them for posting a totally misleading job post.
Jobadvisor
Oh, I can feel the steam coming off this message, and rightfully so. That isn't just a "misunderstanding"—that is a textbook Bait and Switch, and it’s incredibly disrespectful of your time.
To go from a salaried, 110k, fully remote role to a 1099 (contractor) gig that requires a soul-crushing commute into Queens is an absolute joke. In the US, being a 1099 contractor means you pay both sides of the payroll tax, you get zero benefits, and you have zero job security. That "40-52 an hour" is actually a massive pay cut once you factor in taxes, health insurance, and the cost of trekking into NYC.
Why you shouldn't "rip into them" (just yet)
I know the urge to scorched-earth their inbox is strong. But here is the professional reality: Recruiters like this thrive on chaos. If you blow up, you’re just "the angry candidate" in their notes. If you handle it with a cold, surgical precision, you maintain the high ground and might actually get them to flag the listing as incorrect.
How to handle the "The Pivot"
Since they’ve fundamentally changed the contract type (W2 to 1099) and the location, the "job" you applied for no longer exists. You are well within your rights to call out the discrepancy clearly and firmly.
You can send something like this:
"Thanks for the update. However, there seems to be a significant disconnect between the original job posting and the current offer. The listing I applied for was a salaried, fully remote W2 position.
A 1099 arrangement with a required NYC commute is a fundamentally different role that does not align with my requirements. Since the position has shifted from the original terms, I’ll be withdrawing my candidacy. I’d suggest updating the public posting to reflect these changes so other candidates aren't misled regarding the remote status or tax classification."
The "1099" Red Flag
Beyond the commute, the 1099 requirement is the biggest warning sign here. Often, companies try to misclassify employees as contractors to save money on benefits. If they are telling you when to work (evenings/weekends) and where to work (NYC offices), they are likely violating IRS classification rules anyway. You’ve dodged a massive, disorganized bullet.
A Perspective Shift
I know you're still reeling from the "software career" interview earlier, but look at this for what it is: This company is a mess.
January: They posted a "dream" version of a job they couldn't actually afford or support.
Now: They are trying to find someone desperate enough to accept a low-security, high-hassle contract.
You are frustrated because you want a win, but taking this job would have made your life a living hell within three weeks. That commute from Central NJ to Queens alone is enough to break the strongest spirit.
Can HR modify my original review?
Not for me, but for the sake of readability I will use personal pronouns.
At my company, we get a yearly review and are assigned a score based on performance. The score we get dictates how much of a raise we get.
For purposes of making the information not too identifiable, let’s assume we are working on a 5-point scale and anything over a 4 warrants a 6% raise but anything below a 4 only gets a 5% raise.
In my history of working at the company, I have always gotten a score over 4, but this year I was given a score below a 4 despite performing at the same level. I signed my review acknowledging the score I was given.
I was upset and spoke to my direct manager, Eden, to figure out why my score was so low and in discussing, I discover that the performance review Eden prepared and signed had a score higher than 4. The final version I was presented with has the signatures of all upper management including my direct supervisor, but she claims that she did not sign that version.
In speaking to other coworkers it seems that HR has, in the past, tampered with scores so that people do not qualify for the 6% raise.
In reviewing my old raises I also noticed that despite previously getting scores that would warrant a 6% raise, I was only given a 5% raise.
Is this most recent change within the discretion of upper management and HR? Are the apparent past changes/alterations also within their discretion despite my performance? Is it legal?
Jobadvisor
This is a frustrating situation, especially when you’ve put in the work and have a manager who seemingly has your back. Seeing a signature on a document your manager claims they didn't sign moves this out of the realm of "annoying corporate policy" and into "potential legal and ethical red flags."
To answer your questions, we have to look at the difference between company policy and legal boundaries.
1. Is it within their discretion to change the score?
Generally, yes.
In most corporate structures, HR and upper management perform what is called "calibration." This is a process where they look at scores across the company to ensure one manager isn’t being "too nice" while another is "too mean." They have the authority to adjust scores to fit a budget or a bell curve.
The Catch: While they can change the score, they usually shouldn't be forging a manager’s signature to do it. Standard practice is for the manager to be told to "revise" the review to meet the new score, or for the skip-level manager to sign off on the change.
2. Is it legal?
This is where it gets murky.
At-Will Employment: In the U.S. (and many other regions), unless you have a union contract or a specific written employment agreement that guarantees a certain raise for a certain score, raises are considered discretionary. A company can technically decide not to give anyone a 6% raise, even if they hit the metrics.
The Signature Issue: If HR or upper management electronically or physically attached Eden’s signature to a document she did not approve, that is fraudulent behavior. While it might not be a "crime" in the way bank robbery is, it is a massive violation of corporate ethics and could be used as evidence of "bad faith."
Wage Theft/Breach of Contract: If your offer letter or handbook creates a binding promise (e.g., "Employees who score a 4 shall receive a 6% raise"), and they manipulated records to avoid paying it, you might have a claim for breach of contract or wage theft. However, most handbooks have "fine print" stating these are guidelines, not guarantees.
3. The "Past Changes" and Underpayment
If you were promised a 6% raise based on your score in previous years but were only paid 5%, that is a serious accounting "error" at best and intentional wage suppression at worst.
Suggested Steps for Resolution
| Action | Why it matters |
| Document Everything | Save copies of the review Eden actually wrote (if she still has it) and the version you signed. |
| The "Paper" Trail | Ask Eden (in writing/email) to confirm that the version with the sub-4 score is not the one she authored or signed. |
| Inquiry with HR | Approach HR with a "curiosity over confrontation" tone. Ask: "I noticed my raise didn't match the score threshold in previous years, and my manager mentioned a discrepancy in this year's signed version. Can you help me understand the calibration process?" |
| Legal Consultation | If the amount of money lost over the years is significant, an employment attorney can tell you if your company’s specific policies constitute a binding contract. |
A Note on "Calibration" vs. "Tampering"
There is a big difference between HR saying, "We can't afford 6% raises, so we are capping scores at 3.9," and HR saying, "Let's pretend the manager gave them a 3.9 so they don't find out we're cutting their raise." The first is a business decision; the second is deceptive and undermines the entire performance management system.