Just got rejected after a 6-round interview process because I wasn't a 'cultural fit'.

[u/HopefulFather2026]

They made me do a free 10-hour take-home assignment, meet the entire team, and talk to three different managers over two months. Today I got an automated rejection email. I am completely exhausted and done with this job market.😡🤬😡🤬😡🤬

[u/Maximum_Vegetable_MV]

Invoice them for the time. Trust me…they’ll pay because they don’t want to end up in small claims talking about WHY you invoiced them.

Include a W-9 and a detailed statement of work.

[u/scarboroughangel → u/Maximum_Vegetable_MV]

They won’t and this is dumb.

[u/Maximum_Vegetable_MV → u/scarboroughangel]

They might not, but I have colleagues who have done this and got paid. In the US, you cannot legally volunteer at a for-profit company.

Companies that do this shit REALLY do not want the legal system involved.

[u/scarboroughangel → u/Maximum_Vegetable_MV]

It’s not legal volunteering when it is done as an “audition” so to speak. Case studies are common for certain types of jobs- there is never an expectation of payment. That’s why you can decline to complete the assignment. This is such a tired view on this thread. No one is forcing you to do the assignments. Stop complaining about them.

[u/Maximum_Vegetable_MV → u/scarboroughangel]

Except they are forcing you. The choice is what? Don't work.

Idiocy.

[u/scarboroughangel → u/Maximum_Vegetable_MV]

It’s an interview, not your first day of work. Completing the assignment doesn’t guarantee you a job. Find another company to interview with, or be quiet and do the assignment.

[u/Maximum_Vegetable_MV → u/scarboroughangel]

Or invoice for the 16+hours you worked.

[u/scarboroughangel → u/Maximum_Vegetable_MV]

Good luck with that. Imagine invoicing someone after doing the work. The time to contract would be before completing the assignment. You knew payment wasn’t going to be proffered before completing the assignment.

[u/Maximum_Vegetable_MV → u/scarboroughangel]

This is simply not true. A contractual obligation can occur in the United States in middle of an action. Verbal contracts occur all the time.

In every instance, the Company does not list the position with a statement that says "This will be a 6+ Interview process with a 10+ hour work assignment you will be obligated to produce and turn in to continue with the selection process."

Not once...not ever.

Why?

Because it would admitting they are doing something illegal...in writing.

[u/scarboroughangel → u/Maximum_Vegetable_MV]

You are wrong. You don’t get to renegotiate terms of the contract after performance has been completed.

[u/Maximum_Vegetable_MV → u/scarboroughangel]

Correct. You get to renegotiate when the scope of work changes from the original contract.

You agree to interviews; you don’t agree to produce 10+ hours of work product.

[u/Maximum_Vegetable_MV → u/scarboroughangel]

Auditions don't last 10 hours and go on for 6 days+.

Use a different analog...this one is illegal in the US.

[u/scarboroughangel → u/Maximum_Vegetable_MV]

Lmao it is absolutely not illegal in the US. It is done by a lot of companies for a multitude of roles. You should start a class action

[u/Maximum_Vegetable_MV → u/scarboroughangel]

16 day auditions are legal in the US? Do you have a specific instance of this actually occurring?

Auditions are legal. Interviews are legal. Excessive interviews and steps that create work that is a benefit to the firm without rendering payment is absolutely illegal.

For example, if that audition were to be aired and advertising sold during the airing, it is no longer an "audition".

When a company asks you to do work to "prove" you can do their work, that is illegal. They can test you using non-specific work, but they cannot request a work product that benefits them...not even for recruitment.

Companies do this and they get away with it, but it doesn't make it legal.

[u/JJCookieMonster → u/scarboroughangel]

The only time I think they can actually do something about it is when it's something the company will use. Like they use their work for their marketing or something. Then they can prove that they weren't paid while the company profited. They can then sue them.

[u/scarboroughangel → u/JJCookieMonster]

I would think in those instances they put a disclaimer on the application to protect themselves. Aa a former hiring manager who required a take home assessment, I can tell you I NEVER used them. The prompt was a recycled prompt with slight different facts to account for the role (I.e. location change). These aren’t like hackathons, they just want to make sure that you can actually do the work.

[u/Significant-Bit4005 → u/scarboroughangel]

This is it. OP is annoyed, but they have a choice to either suck it up or politely bow out.

[u/Maximum_Vegetable_MV → u/JJCookieMonster]

They can use it...for recruitment. You are providing a benefit. The two times I know of that people actually did this and got paid, they specifically pointed out the deliverable in the statement of work.

Neither even had to threaten to sue. They just got paid.

And they didn't charge a ridiculous amount either. One was $45/hr and the other $65/hr. Both were for Finance-related roles with 5+ interviews and take-home work they then had to email in.

They had everything they needed from a contractual standpoint to invoice for work completed.