Meals provided, good benefits
Restaurants with good business are basically always short-staffed, and applicants are generally hired (for back-of-house positions). The salary is NT$1,500 higher than at other branches, so you can imagine that the workload is also heavier. There are morning, afternoon, and evening shifts. When new employees first join, they rotate through shifts for two or three months, including the hellish closing shift. Every time I closed, it took three hours, which was unbelievable. There were tons of miscellaneous tasks, and I was busy from the moment I started work until I got off. I could not even drink the equivalent of one bottle of water. Although chain restaurants offer good benefits, they also have lots of nitpicky requirements (you must take off your chef’s uniform whenever you leave the kitchen, and you also have to wear a chef’s hat and hairnet), making them different from ordinary small restaurants outside. There are unwritten rules about taking leave (on Saturdays, you can only take personal leave or annual leave; on Fridays and Sundays, you can each only take one day off per month). There are also unwritten rules about clocking in (you must be fully dressed before clocking in). Two people share one locker, and you even have to clock in and out for break times. Food preparation during meal periods is also bizarre: you are never allowed to prepare too much. The company deducts money from the employee benefits fund, resulting in employees having to prepare ingredients while serving orders and compete with the stove and grill stations for workspace. Some ingredients and sauces are vacuum-sealed and frozen and should be able to keep for a while, but instead you have to estimate the number of customers and prepare ingredients accordingly every time. When there are many customers during a meal period, there is simply no time to prepare ingredients and then serve orders immediately; all your time is completely taken up. Then cleaning up at closing is another kind of hell.
If you want to make money, come here. If you want to learn something, get lost. If you want to be a kitchen worker, come here. If you want to be a chef, get lost.
1. The starting salary is relatively high
2. Meals are provided
1. Frequently required to work overtime without compensation
2. Far too many mandatory holidays, and you have to request leave if you want time off
3. Unless your supervisor likes you, you’ll remain at the entry level for life
4. The bonus system is quite vague; if your supervisor doesn’t like you, you’ll receive several times less than others
5. They say there are annual salary increases, but I’ve never received one
Nothing notable occurred during the interview.
Went to No. 101, Section 1, Guangfu Road, Sanchong District, New Taipei City for the interview.
Upon arrival, I could not find the entrance.
I asked warehouse employees at the dock, but was directly ignored.
After calling, I waited about 3–5 minutes before a woman brought someone inside.
If you want to know where the entrance is, use Google Maps to look up
Lane 99, Section 1, Guangfu Road, Sanchong District, Taiwan.
On the map, you will see a glass door—that is the main entrance.
After entering and taking the elevator, the female employee brought me to a place that looked like an employee cafeteria.
The interview was on Wednesday afternoon, but the office area was extremely deserted and dimly lit.
They provided a standard GoldenMalt interview form, like other companies, for collecting personal information.
The form was unusually small. I have interviewed with many companies, and GoldenMalt’s form really had very small fields.
First, a woman came to conduct the interview, and later a middle-aged man joined her.
Watching the two of them squeeze into the seats opposite me made me feel cramped, and I felt sorry for the employees as well.
This cramped feeling was not only about the physical space, but also about the capacity of GoldenMalt as a company.
At the beginning of the interview, they asked for a self-introduction, why I left my previous job, and what plans I had.
After that, most of the questions had nothing to do with my professional expertise.
The company did not introduce its brand, salary structure, job duties, or benefits, clearly treating the interviewee perfunctorily.
When I asked a second time, they were still evasive; only when I asked a third time did they vaguely mention them. When I began asking follow-up questions, the answers differed from what had been said the third time.
They avoided answering questions about the salary structure and salary adjustments, only saying that they would discuss them if I was hired.
If they hire you, are they really sure there will still be room for negotiation? They were clearly brushing me off.
Their answers about benefits were incoherent. If this had not been an interview, I would have thought they were having a breakdown.
1. For a warehouse position requiring scheduled shifts and rotating shifts, the salary might have been considered acceptable in 2018–2020, but today it is well below average.
2. It sounded like they expected you not to leave even after finishing your work, effectively forcing unpaid overtime.
3. The warehouse is connected to the retail stores. They mentioned that, because the stores could not recruit enough people, there were many days when leave was prohibited.
4. To take regular days off, you have to request leave.
5. During the interview, the cramped space, irrelevant answers, and avoidance of questions about benefits all clearly highlighted the company’s perfunctory attitude.
6. A strange culture: judging from the warehouse supervisor’s tone, they seem to believe that speed equals ability and do not care about accuracy.
7. Compared with doing the job well and being able to work independently, they seem to prefer someone who will obey and is a blank slate.
I do not really recommend applying. Those who are offered a position should think carefully. The conditions are not particularly good, and the company gives off a strange feeling in many ways.
None
At the beginning of the interview, I had trouble finding the entrance. After calling, I went inside.
I arrived at a place that looked like a warehouse. I was taken through piles of goods to the staff cafeteria for the interview.
The lighting was dim, and I could hardly see anyone.
The place was very large, which seemed quite unusual.
First, I had to fill out a standard interview form. However, some sections, such as reasons for leaving previous jobs and reasons for applying, were difficult to explain in just a few words, and the boxes were extremely small, so I had to write a verbal explanation instead.
Also, the format and design of the form were very different from the position I had applied for.
Now for the main point: the supervisor was a somewhat older woman. From the moment she arrived, she had a very unpleasant expression. Her tone was airy and very quiet, which made me feel extremely uncomfortable. I could barely hear her asking me to begin my self-introduction.
Following my usual approach, I played a video as an opening—an overview of my work that was less than a minute long. But I quickly realized that she was not watching it at all and did not seem interested in watching it. Her eyes were fixed on her own computer, and I was completely dumbfounded.
Since the job description on 104 listed a wide range of content-production duties and did not provide any links for reference—and I could not even find anything through my own searches—I directly asked, as is customary in an interview, whether I could see some actual examples of the work required for this position. I hoped that explaining them alongside the examples would make it easier to understand.
But I really could not have imagined that such a reasonable request—one that had never been rejected before—would receive such an impolite response from her.
She said, “You should look it up yourself first. That takes a lot of time,” and so on.
She said that I was supposed to be the one showing her my work.
Please—was this my first interview? Would things I found myself really be faster and clearer than if you simply showed me examples and explained them?
Besides, she had a computer with her. Would it really have taken that much time to turn it around and explain things?
And the most ridiculous part is that I really dislike it when a supervisor sees a candidate’s work for the first time only after arriving at the interview, supposedly to understand it. That is what truly disrespects the interviewee.
Beforehand, I had asked HR to make sure the supervisor reviewed my work first.
HR also replied that she had.
So I asked her directly at the interview: “I asked about this beforehand. Based on the type of work in my portfolio, which projects do you think fit this position? Or is there any case you would like me to introduce in detail?”
At the same time, I used my tablet to list the projects one by one for her to choose from.
When she heard this question, she panicked and began stammering and pretending to be busy. Only then did she start opening files on her own computer to look at them!!!
After one or two minutes of silence, she started bluffing, saying that she had seen the video I had just shared and wanted to ask about a technical detail.
Anyone could tell from your tone that you were making it up on the spot, okay?
I still explained it politely.
Then she launched into a half-hour explanation of the job responsibilities.
It was extremely scattered and illogical, and she did not accompany it with a single video. Isn’t that what truly wastes time?
Anyway, after she finished talking,
I unusually turned her down directly, saying that she did not need to notify me because I was not interested.
Oh, right—the job responsibilities were also unbelievable and involved taking advantage of one person extensively.
There was only one person on the team, yet they were expected to produce content unrelated to their professional expertise.
Only a fool would take the job.
Meals are provided
That's it
Interviewed at the headquarters
Scheduled for an afternoon interview, but the office area on the first floor looked extremely deserted
My interest dropped by half
During the interview, they asked a bunch of questions unrelated to the profession
It looked like I wouldn't learn anything
My interest dropped by another half
Even if I got accepted, I wouldn't dare go
Part-time workers who want to trade their labor for money are fine; among full-time positions, every role except store manager and assistant store manager is shit.
1. Supervisors decide everything, and they act like two-faced people—one way in front of headquarters and another in private. Interpersonal and personnel issues that affect work in the store are simply left unresolved. Therefore, you need to be good at sucking up; otherwise, no matter how much you contribute in your field of work, you will always receive the lowest bonus.
2. Cliques are a serious problem, and people are unfriendly toward newcomers. You may be labeled because of one minor issue, and then you will never be able to shake that label for the rest of your life.
3. Supervisors have poor judgment, yet when a real problem arises, they do not tolerate being questioned—it's authoritarian and dictatorial.
4. Hygiene and quality control are inadequate. Most things are judged by “[fast = capable],” resulting in cleaning being taken seriously only during inspections.
5. Putting customers first has led to an inability to distinguish right from wrong; unreasonable customer requests are all approved out of fear of complaints.
None
1. The interviewer was not punctual. The interview was scheduled for 3:00 p.m. The job applicant arrived on time, but another staff member said that the store manager was not there and asked whether the interview could be rescheduled to 5:00 p.m.
I was genuinely dumbfounded. I had already ridden across districts to attend the interview and could not go home, so I had no choice but to say that I would come back for the interview at 5:30 p.m.
2. The interviewer's name for the applicant was wrong.
3. The job posting was for a Counter Service Specialist, but they were actually looking for a management trainee. They also did not clearly explain the management trainee's salary structure or job responsibilities.
4. They did not allow sufficient time for the interview. After only ten minutes, a staff member came over and asked the store manager: “The customer who reserved this seat has arrived. Should we change seats?”
The store manager replied: “No, just keep them waiting a bit. It’ll be done soon.”
Then the manager said to me, “Thank you for coming to the interview today. I’ll send your information to the head office HR department. Wait three days after Monday.”
Me: “?? Has the interview ended?”
Store manager: “Yes. Go home and wait for notification from the head office. If you receive a notification, that means there will be a second interview. If you don’t receive one within three days, there’s no need to wait!”
Me: (Speechless and dumbfounded) “Then… thank you.”
From start to finish, all I did was introduce myself and answer two questions from the store manager: one asking what I had gained from my previous job, and another asking me to give the manager one sentence or one reason why they should hire me.
That’s it~~~ They did not introduce the company brand, salary, benefits, or job responsibilities at all. It was obvious that they just wanted to dismiss the interviewee as quickly as possible.
A terrible interview. They were impolite and disrespectful to the interviewee. I waited for two and a half hours, and it was a waste of time.
None
They’ve been recruiting all 365 days of the year. I’ve submitted my résumé several times but never received a response. Are they really hiring?