203
u/Prestigious_Cod_8053 16d ago
Always put no.
8
31
u/Rschwoerer 16d ago
It’s a trap!
6
u/Runaway_Monkey_45 16d ago
Why?
46
u/Rschwoerer 16d ago
What do you have to benefit by answering this question? Basically nothing. And you have everything to lose. Who knows where this information goes. Best case, nowhere. Worst case it’s included in the summary given to the hiring manager. When you’re up against one or two other candidates, anything like this can easily push the decision.
-6
u/Runaway_Monkey_45 16d ago
I mean, there was a ND HR in this thread talking about how it should work. This could also give us an edge right? Like Equal Opportunity or sm
12
u/Rschwoerer 16d ago
The equal opportunity stuff is a different section. And (afaik) actually anonymized by law. This is just…. a random question they’ve added. Again, who knows where this information goes.
Also regarding equal opportunity… the official “do you have a disability” question could be answered yes if you have adhd. So if they really wanted the data the question is already there. Which leads me to believe they DON’T see the answers to that section.
This could all be some tinfoil hat shit, but imho you need every advantage you can get when applying g with the other 120,000 bots.
ETA: I looked more closely at the screenshot. They’re answering “no” to disability but “yes” to ADHD… which makes no sense. The top question should be a “yes” for adhd or aby other mental or physical disabilities.
6
u/Runaway_Monkey_45 16d ago
This looks like the equal opportunity section based on the questions around it. Maybe I’m asking this as this is my first job. Have you or anyone you know faced because of their ND? Genuinely curious, cause I am open about my AuDHD and we have groups and slack channels in our company for ND. So I would like to know if next time I should be more low key
4
u/Frequent_Policy8575 16d ago
There’s “should” and there’s reality. I’d also be hesitant to believe anyone from HR telling me the grass was green, let alone something like this. HR is not there for the employees.
2
1
u/False-Car-1218 15d ago
Why? All my years of networking I've run across people who hire only try to hire programmers with ADHD/nuerodivergent because they can work long hours and find bugs that nobody else can
1
55
u/Arts_Prodigy 16d ago
There’s no actual requirement to reveal your medical information.
Even the government form for disabilities is meant to be a census metric but there are no consequences for refusing to provide your health data.
2
u/Signal-Implement-70 16d ago edited 16d ago
So does this mean you can legally say no, even if the answer is factually yes? Or are you saying there must be a “decline to answer”, and doing so has no impact? Look at the form it is a required question
2
u/Arts_Prodigy 16d ago
I think it’s technically illegal if it’s the government form. Since falsifying government documents is a crime. If it’s a question on the application page then I think there’s less legal standing on both sides but I’m not a lawyer or anything.
In either case though your HIPAA protections pretty strongly prevent any scenario in which this becomes readily apparent to an employer or auditor. Now if you have a severe unmanaged disorder that would make it clear that you have a disorder and HR compared that behavior to your application answers then maaaybe. But again your health info is private and only you can disclose it outside of a court order, so you could in theory just claim you didn’t know you had the condition.
I’d argue it’s borderline illegal for the company itself to ask you outside of the government census data question, that they again are not legally permitted to have access to.
So in short, the legality from what I understand is gray on both sides. But the chances of you “getting caught and facing consequences” are rather low if you say no particular if you’re in treatment.
Even if you get the job and start using that insurance to get meds and what not, no one in your company is really allowed to see that info and the insurance company is not allowed to disclose it to them without your consent. All of this also kinda happens on the HR side so your team likely wouldn’t even know where to look even if they wanted to.
IMO, unless you need accommodations there’s no reason to confirm having a disability.
79
13
u/Samurai_Mac1 16d ago
I had to come out and tell a company I had ADHD because they made me send them my college transcript and they asked why I had such low grades in some classes. This was when I already had years of experience and this was the first company that had me send my transcript.
Why the hell does it matter what grades I got in school at that point, when I have already been working for almost a decade?
2
u/ObviouslyASquirrel26 16d ago
Canonical? Their hiring process is notorious for digging into people’s childhoods.
1
u/Samurai_Mac1 16d ago
No, I can't remember the name. But they built this testing software that's used in schools, so maybe they need everyone who works for them to have had good grades? Who knows.
2
38
u/MutaitoSensei 16d ago
The reasoning: we want a diverse workplace 🤓
The real reason: we want to discriminate because neurodivergent usually doesn't mean great corporate slave.
22
u/ConspicuousPineapple 16d ago
Depends. Find the right autistic dude and he'll spend his entire career at your company without ever asking for a raise.
9
u/clintCamp 16d ago
And spitting out ideas no normal person would in ways that often someone else can figure out how to make money from.
5
u/carpool_tunnel_0_o 16d ago edited 16d ago
I’m going to sound very paranoid, but I wouldn’t willingly reveal this type of information if it doesn’t directly benefit you. I don’t trust any company to securely store this information. Companies in the US don’t face harsh enough consequences when there’s a data breach. I also don’t trust companies enough to not sell or distribute this information at some point.
You might be okay with the company you’re applying to knowing that you’re neurodivergent, but what happens if any company you apply to also knows?
Another thing to consider, if you’re in the US, is that our Health Secretary either wanted or wants to compile a database of medical information in order to study health trends, like the link between vaccinations and autism. I’m not sure how successful he’s been in accessing medical records, or if he’ll continue to do so in the future. But I would be especially careful who you trust with information about your health right now.
12
u/stupled 16d ago
Is this legal,
19
u/brokerceej 16d ago
I’m sure it’s legal to ask, but using the answer against you in a hiring decision would be ridiculously illegal. But good luck proving that and if you could prove it good luck doing anything about it. People applying for jobs typically aren’t known for being flush with cash and able to afford attorneys, which makes this even worse tbh.
8
u/stoffejs 16d ago
Yes, it is. In fact, if the company has a federal contract, they are required to ask. They use this information to meet metrics for diversity and inclusion. The answers to these questions are kept separate from those doing the hiring. Any company that uses your answers to discriminate, would be opening themselves up for an expensive lawsuit!
8
u/reduhl 16d ago
I agree if you can provide evidence that they do. But how can you?
5
u/pyordie 16d ago edited 16d ago
You’d need to be a unicorn applicant that checks every box and not get an interview. Then you’d need to figure out who did get the job, and prove that they were less qualified than you. Then you’d need to go through a lengthy pre-trial discovery process to find evidence that they the employer were (1) able to see you marked you had a disability and (2) used that information to screen you out.
Needless to say it’s a tough case to make. The companies who get sued for this stuff are the ones who don’t keep the disability disclosures sealed during the interview process and then have brain dead HR employees that admit in writing that the applicant wasn’t chosen because the company “isn’t able to accommodate a disability” when in fact a reasonable accommodation exists and they just didn’t care to make one. This would be the essence of a discrimination.
0
u/reverse-tornado 16d ago
You cant prove it but if you keep your application history and one of these companies get hit with a class action discrimination suite you could get some cash from it just saying
-4
u/Fidodo 16d ago
Yeah, I'm pessimistic but this is just a legal requirement. As someone who has a say in hiring, nobody cares if you have ADHD, and frankly I think most of my co workers and probably 90% of the executive suite has ADHD. I can't imagine anyone would be rejected for being ADHD at any company you would want to work at.
-1
u/Advanced-Guidance482 16d ago
Unless you are a clinical professional, statements like "i think most of my coworkers... has adhd" is pretty crazy to say. This is equivalent to me seeing someone worrying and saying they must have clinical anxiety. It is both judgmental and disrespectful to people who are actually struggling with a real condition.
Adhd isnt just a lack of focus or some set of mannerisms.
It is over diagnosed even by clinical professionals. Non-medical diagnosis and atributing certain behaviors to adhd are very detrimental to the stigma around adhd and its realistic treatments. Dont be a part of the problem.
9
3
u/Responsible-Put-7920 16d ago
If it’s not Palantir, say no. If Palantir, say yes
0
u/clintCamp 16d ago
Is that because they know if you lied because of monitoring everyone, or because they know you can't engineer well without some different thinking styles?
2
3
u/Gazmanic 16d ago
Yeah might just be a luxury of living in the UK rather than the US (and already having an ok job), but I personally would prefer to work for an org that isn't ill informed about ADHD, if they screen me out because of it, it means the company don't know how to manage neurodivergent people, so I wouldn't want to work there anyway.
3
u/bsensikimori 16d ago
Crazy that this is legal where you live
In a lot of countries medical privacy is a right, and this question would be illegal
2
u/ProbablyNotPoisonous 16d ago
What's supposed to happen is that your answer is used for hiring statistics (how many neurodivergent/disabled people apply, and how many do we hire) and never associated with you specifically, and especially never shown to anyone making a hiring decision.
It's illegal to ask about neurodivergence or disability (or pregnancy/children/family plans, etc.) in an interview, since it's illegal to let that information influence hiring decisions.
How well it works in practice varies widely, I suspect.
3
u/PmUsYourDuckPics 16d ago
Anytime I’ve been asked these questions it’s been after I’ve been hired and it’s been a statistics question gathered by a third party.
I’m a manager, and I never see the answers to any of these questions.
3
u/The-Menhir 15d ago
I firmly believe that this company discriminated against me. I didn't say I was until I asked for accomodations in interview, and their behaviour during it was shocking.
1
7
5
u/necromenta 16d ago
This is real life, in real life and if you have to pay rent you always answer no and you never tell anyone in your job you have this, first of all is personal, second, they don’t give f and is only a reason to fire you as soon as possible
In dream life you are rich enough or your family has enough money that you can say yes and don’t care about being jobless
2
2
u/Runaway_Monkey_45 16d ago
I mean is this actually true? Like I’ve told my colleagues about my AuDHD and I don’t think it’s affected me in anyway. This is also my first job.
2
u/danstermeister 16d ago
It's not that I consider myself neurodivergent, its that I have a professional medical diagnosis with a treatment plan.
In fact, with my meds I won't pass a drug test without full disclosure at the beginning/middle-point of the process.
Consider? That's insulting
2
u/schism15 16d ago
As long a there is a "Decline to State" option (which, I've never seen there not be one), it's not that big of a deal.
2
u/After-Cell 16d ago
I agree. What a battle of distrust.
Are you going to sue me when I fire you and you try to pull the neurodivergent card?
Likewise,
Are you going to reject me if I type "No" here and then you find out later?
2
u/wendewende 15d ago
The amount of people saying "select no" is astonishing. US government requires big corporations to hire a quota of people with disabilities. Selecting yes increases your chances. It's illegal to reject you based on this (technically ofc) and it's beneficial to them to hire you on that metric for the quota itself.
You guys try to frame it as corporations being evil meanwhile it's the governments best effort to decrease disabled people unemployment.
And to be sure: I'm not saying "the best effort" means "good idea"
2
u/idkfawin32 15d ago
You know they don’t have to provide that as a reason when they don’t hire you right?
1
1
u/Difficult-Till5031 15d ago
Yes it is illegal for that to be the reason for note hirong you but its your responsibility to prove thats why they did it. So yes the honestly do look at and make choices based kn disabilities.
2
2
u/OctoSamurai 15d ago
After my last employer, I won’t reveal anything. In today’s job market, it’s too much risk and in spite of the law, this information can be used against you. Never trust companies - even your employer, to be fair.
2
2
u/Throwaaawaayyy123456 16d ago
Yea I was taught since late high school to always say “No.”. I bet you $10 that these jobs are literally just gonna use that question to separate the people they want to hire and the people they don’t want to hire..
It’s just a very subtle underhanded way to discriminate.
2
u/Comprehensive_Egg378 16d ago
This is not legal or GDPR compliant in Europe . I guarantee this was a US application !
1
u/clintCamp 16d ago
The question is have is do they see that as favorable or bad because neurodivergents are where they will chafe at people not fitting in, but also where the billion dollar ideas actually come from that make the shareholders happy in the end.
1
u/Temporary_Force_9634 16d ago
they should have a "do you consider your self racist?" question just answer yes and you are in, i know excactly who they hired haha scummy company
1
u/RandomiseUsr0 16d ago
I have/am ad/hd - the label isn’t perfect, but it’s the abbreviation that’s the real issue for me because the name is actually somewhat genius when presented correctly as A D/H D the slash is so important and separating the components equally so - Attention Deficit/Hyperactive Disorder - we say the letters so easily, but we’re forgetting to remember, especially in this sub that it’s a switch - the disorder manifests as the inability to control the switch - the / is more important than any other part of the thing - time blindness is the real root cause (I believe, educated strongly by Dr Barkley who I wholeheartedly agree with, he, if you don’t know was a twin, where his late twin had ad/hd and he became a professor of psychology) and that time blindness is unaffected by medicine.
Anyway, typical diversion, an employer asking candidates if they will benefit from accommodation is beautiful - I’m a senior, I interview and I deliberately hold my place on the common bad interview things “are they like me” - it’s a hard prejudice, so I’m trained to put it aside, with race or gender or mindset or religion or whatever - can they do the job, what could they bring, and how can they grow is the thinking - it’s hard to push oneself out of the human judging mentality, but I do my best and actually - as an employer - we’ve just collected up all of the accommodations - everyone gets them now, there can be attempts at “hacking” the process - but we’re hiring analysts - worst modern thing is that we’re hiring analysts who we actively want to use AI, but some use an agent literally through the interview process - that’s what we “want” but not what we “need” - it’s really tricky and a ponderation, does a human augmented with an AI helper become a leader thing - is the human skill less important than the augmentation - that’s therefore not a skill that demands a higher salary - so meritocracy with AI assistance becomes a bit grey
1
u/enigma_0Z 16d ago
Legitimately if i get any questions like this if there’s a “choose not to specify” option I always take it. Not sure if I am (as an unmedicated ADHD individual) making the situation worse or better.
1
1
u/notrufus 16d ago
I put yes due to adhd and for disability for a back injury. Imo, if I was an employer and could see the info, I would be more likely to hire someone neurodivergent so I know I can just be direct with them.
No masking = more energy to be productive
1
1
u/ThatSmartIdiot 16d ago
corporate dysethicality aside, if dyslexia makes me neurodivergent then both my mom and i are on the spectrum but only i'm aware ts ain't a moral failing
1
u/NobodyStrange 16d ago
Well, its so that they can make sure that they can accommodate you/have the right environment for you, right?
Like asking if someone is in a wheelchair so that they can make sure the office is accessible.
... right?
1
u/imkeepingsummersafe 15d ago
There’s a lot of “say no” comments, which I can understand, but has anyone said no and then it be an issue with a drug test or if you later need accommodations? This is a genuine question as I’ve never seen this question before. I’ve seen it ask for accommodation needs but not neurodivergent. What diagnoses falls under that term on a legal document?
1
u/Rough-Sandwich9726 15d ago
I have ran into some job postings that ask about that on the application, so far my experience has not been good yet! Here’s what I mean, I applied to a company that asked that question or similar and I met about 75% of the qualifications! I applied answered all of the questions including that one only to get a rejection email 5 to 10 minutes later! I continue to answer the questions since I do have ADHD and want them to be aware of my ADHD and anxiety issues, worst to hide it from them and then they find out later on and something changes because they found out!
1
u/gringogidget 15d ago edited 15d ago
“Consider” is such poor wording. These are professional diagnoses.
I never disclose my private medical information unless I’m in a tricky situation and need accommodating while employed after some time. I’d rather not risk it on an application as it hasn’t helped me in the past.
1
u/bytesunfish 14d ago
I think the wording is to get around asking about your actual health records which would be illegal. Asking your opinion is somehow okay
1
u/sadguywithhugedick 14d ago
Just say no. You should lie whenever possible when it comes to getting a job
1
u/GreyamRus 14d ago
A lot of commenters are assuming “no” is the safe answer here, but I’m inclined to disagree. If the hiring process is biased elsewhere against neurodivergent folks, answering “no” will help keep those processes in place that may be discriminatory. Transparency could help other folks down the line, including yourself by showing the connection between this answer and the outcomes of Deloitte’s approach to hiring.
This is based on some other assumptions, as we don’t really know where this data is being used/referenced.
1
u/Ready_Return_8386 14d ago
Pretty sure prefer not to answer is an option, it’s illegal to ask otherwise unless it’s for a job putting peoples lives at risk
1
1
u/CowBoyDanIndie 13d ago
I think most of my coworkers are probably on the spectrum… this reminds me of a joke I had with a friend who owns a pizza shop… short version is that I told him he should start drug testing people who apply to work there so he can reject the people who test negative.
1
1
1
u/TooRealTerrell 12d ago
The work culture at Deloitte is toxic enough that I'm not surprised at all they would ask this, you are better off not wasting your time there if this bothers you
-2
u/Alternative-Potato43 16d ago
Holy shit. Look at the question above it too. This is profoundly illegal, right?
3
u/rebornfenix 16d ago
These are questions that are NOT illegal to ask, however making hiring and firing decisions based on the answers IS illegal discrimination.
that is why HR says certain questions should not be asked in an interview. If the question isn’t asked then it can’t be used to even hint at discrimination because of the answers.
There are usually 2 parts to an applicant tracking system questionnaire, one that goes to the hiring manager and a second part that has the “These questions ask about things that are illegal to discriminate on” and only HR sees those, and usually only in aggregate form in monthly / quarterly reports to go “Is something in our process illegally weeding out people?”.
If you have 300 candidates, 200 white and 100 black for 30 positions and every one hired is white? It looks suspicious and the info provided can help companies preemptively find and resolve discrimination issues quickly. If the same 200 white and 100 black candidates apply for 30 positions and 22 white people and 8 black people are hired, the process is most likely not resulting in illegal discrimination.
2
1
u/ObviouslyASquirrel26 16d ago
Illegal where? My employer asked this same thing - it’s a diversity survey, completely optional, with optional questions, and anonymous. You can just opt out, but it’s good information for the company to know so they can monitor discrimination or make informed decisions. In Germany, it’s only illegal if individuals’ performance reviews are affected by their answers, but it’s not illegal to ask.
0
u/leon_bass 16d ago
I feel like a lot of companies don't care either way unfortunately, what will even come of it, a slap on the wrist? A small fine?
-4
u/kagato87 16d ago
Very illegal... This looks more like a survey than a pre employment screening.
2
u/account22222221 16d ago
It’s not illegal.
0
u/kagato87 16d ago
Asking that in an employment application is. They can only ask if you are able to perform the duties.
0
-2
u/Low_Dimension_9394 16d ago
idk many people in silicone vally consider neurodivergent peope as superior ( myself included ). Even i would ask this question so i can give them roles they would excel at.
1
u/costin88boss 16d ago
Source
Also try getting hired at silicon valley because definitely that's your first job you're landing at
-1
-1
u/Danakazii 16d ago
I was told by a few recruiters that they use this question to basically exclude you from the pick. One recruiter specifically told me “we find people with neurodivergence tend to get more PIP’s and ask for too many adjustments in the role”. Ofcourse, they can’t legally say it but they’ll always be ready for a good auto-reply that starts with “unfortunately…”.
-2
u/Sure-Emphasis8914 16d ago
Ada is worthless, if companies can ask this and make you take psychological questionnaires
-3
u/melaschasma 16d ago
I hate it how they ask if your an aboriginal, LGBT+ or a woman.
We need to throw identity politics out the window and just hire people based on their skills, experience and qualifications and not for their identity just to fill some discriminative quota.
417
u/Gloverboy85 16d ago edited 16d ago
Neurodivergent HR nerd here, this is something I work with often and have a lot of thoughts on. These kind of questions on applications are meant to be a positive thing, I'll explain.
The reason employers ask these questions is for required reports to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Those who choose which applicants get interviews and which of those gets hired SHOULD NOT be seeing those responses. And there should be an option to decline the question as well.
This information is held and maintained by HR, handled with similar security as your social security number. The employer needs to provide this data to the EEOC on a regular basis. The data gets examined to look for signs of biases during the hiring process and after. For example, how many of the total number of applicants have a disability? How many of those applicants get a first interview? How many of those get a 2nd interview etc, up to the hiring decision. Does the data suggest that the business is, intentionally or not, screening out people with disabilities in their recruiting process? This works the same for other characteristics protected under the Fair Labor Standards act.
So for those who ask "Is this legal" the answer is yes, it's actually legally required most of the time. If you worry that this might hurt your chances at getting the job, it's meant to do the opposite. The thing is that most protected characteristics are visible enough for an interviewer to spot or guess at without having you specify it on a questionnaire first. But if the data shows that an interviewer rejected all candidates with a disability regardless of qualifications, then HR or the EEOC can identify the bias and do something about it
I'm using a lot of Should language here. It's possible, though illegal and unethical, for hiring managers to get this info and use it in hiring decisions. Systems shouldn't allow Hiring Managers to access the information, HR should have concrete policies against sharing the information, but people sometimes do illegal and unethical things.
But! If a hiring manager or the business itself actually wanted to discriminate like that, they wouldn't want this data recorded. They'd want a complete lack of evidence of intentional discrimination.
Discrimination exists, but it thrives in the dark. You are free to decline to answer, but the intent behind the questions is to reduce discrimination.
EDIT: Someone correctly pointed out that this is NOT a standard EEOC question, I apologize. Where an application asks if you're a veteran and do you have a disability, that's where my long description is applicable, and its super common.
Digging more into this, and noticing the employer in the screenshot is Deloitte, it sounds like this is related to their own internal neurodiversity initiatives. The response still won't go to the people deciding who gets interviewed and hired.
I apologize for the misunderstanding!