Virtual interviews should always be an option.

10 Comments

1. Juan BastainOctober 19,2026 at 3:51AM UTC
   Offering a virtual option for the initial screening round significantly speeds up the hiring process for both parties. It reduces scheduling friction and allows employed candidates to participate Uno Online without taking leave for a 30-minute conversation.
2. AnonymousOctober 19,2026 at 2:54PM UTC

   OP: That is literally what I wrote.........

3. Paulla Fetzek, MSEdOctober 21,2026 at 1:15PM UTC

   I appreciate what you're saying! However, I'm going to play Devil's Advocate here:

   1. If someone really wants the job, they'll find the way to get in.
   2. If someone can't take time to go for multiple interviews then perhaps they shouldn't have scheduled them.
   3. In person interviews are more than just talking. It's observing a person's behavior, seeing how they interact with people around them. How they treat things in the business (by this I mean chairs, tables, cups, etc).
   4. In person interviews don't have to worry about a slow internet connection, poor sound quality, or a police car with sirens blaring speeding past on the street.

   Interviews aren't done for the benefit of the interested party. They're done for the benefit of the company hiring. There are instances where I believe virtual interviews should be considered:

   - if a company is looking at someone remote

   -if a person has a disability that makes short trips difficult

   -if a person falls ill but is well enough to do an interview but doesn't want to get others sick

   Other than this, many companies won't find virtual interviews of any benefit at all.

   Please keep in mind my comments are from the perspective of one who's been working professionally for over 36 years, and am somewhat "old school" when it comes to work and policies. ?

4. Kristie KendallOctober 23,2026 at 12:37PM UTC

   What about places who only offer virtual but you do better in person?

5. AnonymousOctober 23,2026 at 3:17PM UTC

   As a hiring manager, I want to meet the people in person. We do not have 100% virtual / remote /work from home environment so I want to meet the candidate. They will be expected to come in on a hybrid schedule so if I am getting a bunch of flack about an in-person interview, I actually see that as a red flag.

   Frankly, if I was a candidate, I would want in person as well as an opportunity to see the office space (at least the entry, conf room), etc. I am however, very cognizant of time for the interviewee. I don't do 30 min interviews - if I am done with you in 30 min, you don't need to worry about additional interviews. I want sufficient time to assess the candidate and expect they should want the same - assess the manager, organization, etc. If it is an HR screening interview, those are typically virtual.

   I can't speak to all hiring managers but if you are called back for a 2nd hour long interview, then you should be happy to make arrangements as that means we are seriously considering you.

6. Kim PfeifferOctober 23,2026 at 4:12PM UTC

   Generally, there is a 10-minute screening interview before hand. If there is going to be a short initial interview before the two-hour interview, that could easily be done virtual.

7. AnonymousOctober 23,2026 at 4:39PM UTC

   Looking for a new job is not a luxury, it is a decision to move on. If you see a job post and apply you are the seller and need to do what the hiring team expects including showing up in person to an interview and actual work. If you are recruited to a company (they reach out to you) then you are the buyer and can gracefully decline going in because you are employed. Not every company has or wants remote workers. Interviews that happen in person generally go far better than those over zoom or other video calls as you often cannot make a real connection without body language and other interactions that cannot be reproduced by online usage. Make the time to carefully consider your next employer by how you are treated during the interview no matter how it is held as that is often how you get treated when employed there. It's an important decision and if you cannot make the time to go in and meet those prospective new managers and co-workers you may be in for worse days ahead should you take that new role. I for one would always choose going in.

8. AnonymousOctober 25,2026 at 8:45PM UTC

   Agree. Nothing has been more irritating to take the time off and spend money on dry cleaning, transportation, maybe a meal (depends on when, etc.). only to not get the job or worse, find that they never should have interviewed in the first place (years ago I interviewed for an internship but went through the entire interview only for the interviewer to realize I was no longer in school and therefore ineligible--nothing in the post said otherwise!). It sucks.

9. NicoHoffmannNovember 3,2026 at 3:10PM UTC
   Für ein erstes Gespräch von 30 Minuten wäre ein Videotermin wirklich eine praktische Wahl, gerade wenn Bewerber noch arbeiten. Schön wäre, wenn Unternehmen schon in der Einladung sagen würden, welche Gesprächsrunden online möglich sind. Für eine kurze Pause nach dem Bewerbungsthema kann nine casino geprüft werden, wenn das Ausgabenlimit vorher feststeht.
10. Steven MockNovember 7,2026 at 5:05AM UTC

    I agree, and I'd go further than just the first round. A 30-minute conversation does not need a day off, travel, and a new outfit to prove someone is serious about a job. Virtual as the default for early rounds also widens the pool — you hear from good people who can't easily take time away from a current job, caregiving, or a long commute. In-person still has a place later, when both sides want to meet the team and see the workplace. Offering the choice costs an employer very little, and it tells a candidate a lot about how that employer treats people's time.