I recently interviewed for a Shift Supervisor position at Con Edison, and the experience was frustrating and disappointing. The so-called "technical" interview process felt disorganized and did not seem to place real value on candidates' experience. Some of the technical questions were unclear or redundant—such as being asked about chemicals used in operations and then separately about boiler performance parameters. These two topics are closely related because improper regulation of chemicals can directly impact boiler performance, efficiency, and longevity. Instead of being tested on my ability to understand and manage these interactions, I was given disjointed questions that didn’t assess real-world problem-solving. Additionally, I was asked a character or leadership-style question, which seemed irrelevant to assessing my technical competence. While leadership is important, it should not be a deciding factor over actual hands-on experience. The entire process felt subjective rather than a fair evaluation of my skills. A more structured sit-down technical test would be a much better way to assess candidates separately from the interview. A third-party hiring agency went out of their way to secure me this interview, yet it quickly became clear that Con Edison strongly prefers to hire internally. I got the distinct impression that I was only there to satisfy an "outside interview" quota and that my time was ultimately wasted. I checked the box of having the maritime experience they were supposedly looking for, but in the end, that didn’t seem to matter. If there was never a real intention to consider external candidates, they should have been upfront about it instead of putting me through a drawn-out process with no real opportunity. To make matters worse, there was zero guidance on how to obtain a New York Boiler License, despite it being mentioned as a necessary qualification. I was told that I would receive follow-up information on how to obtain it, but that never happened. If this license was a deciding factor in the hiring process, then Con Edison should create a better segway for mariners and other external candidates to obtain it. Instead of leaving applicants to figure it out on their own, they should offer clear guidance or a structured pathway to help qualified candidates meet their requirements. Overall, this experience felt like a box-checking exercise rather than a genuine opportunity. If Con Edison wants to attract and fairly assess external candidates, they need to improve their interview structure, provide meaningful guidance for licensing requirements, and be upfront about their hiring priorities.