How to politely state moral objection

Question

I am currently starting to look for my first job, and thanks to my soon to come degree, I have quite a lot of people knocking at my door.

For political reasons, I refuse to entertain any possibility of working with any kind of company that does defense or banking contracts. I am not ashamed of my political views, but as they are quite fringe and not necessarily relevant to most contracts, I don't see the point in talking about those in interviews.

As most of my job opportunities are coming from recruiters that work with several clients, I must always bring that up with them, as otherwise it leads to awkward job interviews where I must pretty much stop the guy talking to me when he talks about their missions 20 minutes into the interview process, saying that I can't work with them.

When I disclose simply that I can't join the company "for personal reasons" I always get pressed rather hard to develop on it, and I at least superficially elude that it is both political and non negotiable. Should I simply say "for political reasons" to get the point across faster? Should I stick to "personal reasons" and refuse to budge when pressed on it, or is my current strategy the one I should stick to?

EDIT: I should make clear that I am asking for the most polite way to disclose that I won't work in said field to recruiter, and avoid having to do to much explaining, as it is extremely awkward to have to dance around the subject when pressed on it.

I am not thinking about putting it into my resume, as it is not relevant to most interviews.

Answer 1

For political reasons, I refuse to entertain any possibility of working with any kind of company that does defense or banking contracts.

As most of my job opportunities are coming from recruiters that work with several clients, I must always bring that up with them, as otherwise it leads to awkward job interviews where I must pretty much stop the guy talking to me when he talks about their missions 20 minutes into the interview process, saying that I can't work with them.

When I disclose simply that I can't join the company "for personal reasons" I always get pressed rather hard to develop on it, and I at least superficially elude that it is both political and non negotiable. Should I simply say "for political reasons" to get the point across faster?

Recruiters who deal with multiple clients want to understand what you will do and what you won't do, in order to see if you would fit in a role with any of their clients.

Since this is obviously important to you, you need to be clear and direct.

Something like "For political reasons, I will not work with any company that does defense or banking contracts. That is not negotiable and I wouldn't want to waste anyone's time." should work.

This does not go on your resume, nor in your cover letter - these are not the proper places for "what I won't do".

Before you accept an interview with a company, make sure you determine for yourself if they meet your criteria. A good multi-client recruiter will do that for you. If you deal directly with someone from a company, you'll have to investigate for yourself.

Answer 2

I hold similar views that I will not compromise on.

I have now worked for, uh, decades as a software engineer. I never added anything like this to my resume, as I feel it encourages others to make assumptions about me, perhaps incorrectly. Adding this level of detail early in the process potentially cuts you off. For example, someone may assume you also refuse to work with Insurers, because in their mind, insurance is closely tied to banking.

When a position comes your way, just vet it yourself. Then you can let the recruiter / company know quickly. I always just said something like "I don't really want to work in [industry-type name]", and left it at that. Recruiters don't care what the basis of your objections are, and it doesn't matter: if you don't like it, you don't like it.

(FWIW: I always enjoy working for big banks.)

Answer 3

I don`t see why, if you so hellbent on avoiding specific companies, you choose to give the recruiters a runaround

You should state your moral compass with the recruiter, this way you would not be considered and processed for positions in that sector.

By not doing that, you come through a bit hypocritical, leaving an option to accept these contracts if you would not get another chance.

But by that time, recruiter may flag you as unstable and not promote you to the companies you like, but the ones he have no other resources

---- UPDATE ----

@shas As far as i remember , with recruiter you state your preference and how concrete they are. Any digging deeper in to whys should not be their business. And, IMHO, you answer to a deeper digging should be This is what i am looking for

You don`t have to apologize for your principles

2 times answering the same question from same recruiter, may show you how much do they listen to you and start filtering :)

Answer 4

I would advise you to find a better recruiter. A good recruiter will accept your preferences and only introduce potential employers to you that fit your criteria. A good recruiter also wouldn't plan 3 job interviews on the same day.

I have my fair share of experience with recruiters. Most are pretty useless, they just introduce you to as many employers as they can find within roughly 50 km of your house in the hope that one of them is a success. Those recruiters don't care at all about you and your wishes, all they care about is a chance to make quick money. But there are some recruiters that are good. One recruiter asked me what preferences I have and if there are types of companies where I wouldn't want to work for. That's the type of recruiter you'll want to do business with.

As already mentioned in the comments, it's important to do some research into the potential employers that you visit. If you have 3 job interviews on a single day and don't prepare for any of them, you'll come across as uninterested and there's a big risk of being late on the second or third job interview (job interviews can last half an hour, but also 2 hours).

Answer 5

There are ways of avoiding it entirely without bringing your politics into it.

Simply state that you would prefer to focus outside of the those industries. You don't need to justify anything. Certain industries appeal to certain people. I don't want to work in the financial industry either because I've done that and didn't like it. Same for the news industry.

Things have become so industry specific so that you can easily outline the ones you do and do not want to work for. The more complete a picture you can draw for a recruiter, the better.

If you emphasize what you WANT to do other than what you want to avoid, it will go much easier for you.

Look to industries that have nothing to do with the military or banking industries. Shipping, logistics, manufacturing, agricultural, et cet. are good examples, but there are many more.

Surprisingly, it's far easier to avoid the financial industry than most. They have a bad reputation and are hard for recruiters to place candidates, which is why they push so hard. Make it clear that you don't want to work for the financials and don't explain. The recruiters will assume that you know about the industry.

Again, put it in a positive way. "I want to look for jobs in "X" industry. You will also make yourself more marketable. It will also give you a bit of an edge, because when a job comes up for that industry, they will look at their notes and see that you mentioned it.

Answer 6

I think you're optimizing for the wrong thing. You are closing off all the positives that might come out of the interview process.

You're trying to make your interactions with these companies as short as possible. You're refusing a job that hasn't been offered to you. I suggest that you still go through the interview process.

You say:

I must pretty much stop the guy talking to me when he talks about their missions 20 minutes into the interview process, saying that I can't work with them.

Why do you think you must stop the guy? Go through the rest of the interview. If nothing else, it's good practice, which is something that you as a new job seeker can certainly use. See what comes of it. See what you can learn.

There are any number of possible outcomes from an interview, and if you cut the interview short, they can't happen.

Maybe you'll get a job offer, and then that's your time to decide if you want to work for the company or not. Maybe it's a really good job that you would love except for the part about working on defense contracts. Maybe the company will work into an employment agreement that you don't have to work on those contracts, if that's a reasonable arrangement. You don't know until you go through the process.

Maybe you'll get a job offer, and you turn down the offer because you don't want to work on defense contracts. The hiring manager might say "That's understandable. I was very impressed with your background. If you don't mind, I'd like to refer you to my colleague at XYZ Company, because XYZ might be a better fit for you." Good candidates are hard to find.

None of these things can happen if you just put the brakes on everything at the outset. You've already gone through getting to the interview stage (an achievement in itself), so play it out and see what happens.

Something else to consider is that if you're often applying to companies that work on things you don't want to work on, you're probably not doing enough research. You should already know going into the interview what kind of work the company does. It shouldn't be a surprise when the hiring manager tells you about it.

Finally, don't frame your preferences as a "moral" objection. You can just say "I prefer not to work in the defense or financial industries." I don't want to work in finance, either, but it's not a moral decision. I'm just not interested in it. You don't have to make it a bigger thing than it needs to be.

Answer 7

I personally also refuse to do defense work (I've not put much thought into finance but would probably also avoid it), and I always answer with some variant of

"Hi, I see the company you're working with is a defense company, and due to moral reasons, I won't work for them."

Or in response to

"Hi, do you have time to talk about an exciting job opportunity?"

I answer something like

"Hi, provided the company does not operate in the defense industry, I'm happy to talk about opportunities"

Recruiters typically send out large quantities of emails/linkedin requests, and they're not going to be offended if you decline or even ignore their invites, and if you flat out reject the possibility of working for a defense company, you leave them little room to negotiate or pry into your beliefs.

Answer 8

Another option worth pursuing is forgoing the recruiter all together and applying to jobs directly with companies. Most companies will have a career tab somewhere on the corporate website. Do some research into companies that you think are swell and see if they are not open to new hires.

Some companies do what is called informational interviews. Which is just a lowstress way to interact with companies and to get a feel for if you may want to work for them.

If you got a list of companies you would like to work for you may even consider reaching out to the head of HR of these companies on LinkedIn. Just a quick question on what there appetite for new personnel is currently. You can always ask and they can always say no, but there is no harm in asking.

You may find that interacting directly with HR of a like-minded company less frustrating. The company may appreciate the recruiter fees you may save them.

I would also advise you not to let your politics effect your work life. Unless you are walking into managerial position you will be in no position to tell management who the company can and cannot work for.

You may get a company who has not dealt with banks or the defense sector but they may apply for such a contract and they may get it.

You cannot expect them to turn away lucrative work just to appease the political views of some random code monkey.

If you where to quit a job that pays well and makes you happy over this then that would be shortsighted.

I don't know what the chances are of you working on a defense contract but software development and the financial services sector have been interwoven for as long as both have existed.

Answer 9

Before I blurt out my answer: I'm 55 years old. Today I'm a DBA but I've been a developer both 1099 and W2, own my own small company on the side and I've been hired and hired people. I've attended dozens and dozens of interviews over many years from both sides of the table.

With that out of the way, let me ask this: why do you feel the need to EVER "pretty much stop the guy talking to me" during an interview? This is a job interview. One of YOUR responsibilities when presented with an opportunity to interview is to do your research. It takes next to zero effort to avoid working directly for either industry you personally find odious and it takes only the smallest amount more to do the same for companies that services those same industries.

So, if I'm the guy on the opposite side of your interview desk and you were to "stop me from talking to you" several things about you become immediately clear:

1. You DIDN'T do your research and if you can't be assed enough to do this then what makes me think you'll display any more effort if you were an employee?
2. You COULD have simply exhibited some small semblance of manners, allow the interview to conclude then exit the building and politely decline any possible follow ups or offers should the be forthcoming. However...
3. ...because you CHOSE INSTEAD to be rude (because no matter how hard you try, shutting someone else up is simply flat out and incredibly rude) and did THAT in service to your politics tells me that you REALLY think everyone else NEEDS to know your stance on things despite the likely fact that the person you're speaking with has their own opinions and has likely developed them as a product of more life experience than you have.

TL/DR: you could have avoided the situation with the application of just the smallest amount of effort and even if the interview put you in that position anyway, it costs you nothing to sit still, be quiet, endure the experience and leave. If you WANT potential employers to meet your political expectation then put that shit on your resume. But, you likely know as well as I do that if you do that, chances are you won't get all that many interviews because employers of all stripes tend to avoid people who elevate their personal politics above all else. You probably know that too (which is why it's NOT on your resume already) which means you're being down low sly about yourself which is false to a degree...which is what the interview process is there to weed out in the first place. Do everyone involved a favor and straight up tell people in your resume or your cover letter that while you're seeking a position you'd prefer to avoid employment in industries X, Y and Z.

BTW, when you do eventually land a position in an acceptable industry, how exactly do you expect you'll receive your compensation? Avoiding banks is pretty nigh impossible, no?

Seriously, alter your initial presentation to let people know your principles are critically important to you and I promise hiring managers in those industries will respect the hell out of your wishes. It'd do everyone involved a huge solid.

Answer 10

You asked for how to state your criteria in a polite way. That is, your emphasis is on politeness.

Your emphasis should be on morality.

You would certainly let go of politeness if you have to otherwise let go of morality, right?

Mathemarically its proven that in general you can optimize only one variable.

You shouldn't say "personal reasons". Its not personal to you. Its something you strongly believe in and therefore wants others to follow too. Its not in anyway personal to you.

Something would be personal if it was a disability, a lack of skill, bad experience and worse some big blunder or fraud you did in an industry you are trying to avoid now. Unfortunately its the last one what your interviewer is very likely wondering about when you say "personal reasons".

You want to work in a like-minded company. You should state that you dont work in x, y industries because of moral reasons. This way you get allies.

Answer 11

You need to develop and state more precisely what your limits are.

I refuse to entertain any possibility of working with any kind of company that does defense or banking contracts

This, as stated, would surely alarm any potential hiring manager.

Absolutely every business ever has banking contracts and I cannot think of any business that could operate without them. One way or another you're going to be working for a company with ties to a bank, either by loans or for the absolutely vital purpose of handling money - usually both.

You need to be quite specific with recruiters about what exactly you mean by "banking contracts" (or defense) or you need to be prepared to drop this. It helps you establish clearly with recruiters the parameters you can fill and doesn't mean they waste either your time, their time or their clients' time.

Regarding interviews :

Should I simply say "for political reasons" to get the point across faster? Should I stick to "personal reasons" and refuse to budge when pressed on it, or is my current strategy the one I should stick to

Again making your position as precise as possible before applying (via recruiters) helps them. It may be that you can reach an accomodation by negotiation if they're interested in you, but you need to be crystal clear about your "red lines".

Broad terms like "defense" and "banking" are not as clear cut as you may think. Defense could cover things like riot shields, protective gear and so on with quite necessary applications in policing, etc.. "Banking" taken on face value would mean you'd be unemployable - businesses exist to make money and banks handle money. You need to develop more precise limits simply to help clarify with employers what they can reasonably expect of you.

Answer 12

As this is a hard line for you, just put it into your CV.

I'm a software engineering graduate looking for my first role. I will not work in the defence or banking sectors.

Is this direct? Yes. It it impolite? No: you're not being rude to anyone, and in the long run you're saving time for everyone involved - you, the recruiters and potential employers - by making it clear up front there are certain non-negotiable things about employing you.