Routine phone screening. Two at the face to face. Very inexperienced as the walk me through the resume means you don't know HOW to professionally interview a candidate or read a career summary statement on the resume. The cover letter cited specifics which demonstrated the track record of qualifications. Savvy interviewers know how to pick what parts of a resume need expounding on. It is obvious the culture caters to a certain "type" of employee. The community assured me since I wasn't a member of the prominent group backing of this credit union coupled with not being of the specific age group represented in all the group media shots, they were just going through the motions for appearance sake and they actually bet me that I didn't have a true chance. Most were stunned I got through the ATS, phone screen, and face to face. Evidently that is usually where the sifting takes place to have only those facets in the hiring pool. The recruiter was interactive until after the process. People were friendly in a stepford sort of way. When asked specific questions about the training, the expectations, the next steps in the hiring process. It switched to very vague, very generalized, almost to the point of avoidance. Immediately giving the "don't call us, we'll call you" vibe. Oh we have many interviews to conduct, oh you will hear from the recruiter, which is an indication there is usually no further interest. The dismissal email was the generic from HR not the recruiter, the qualifications are lacking. Which was most certainly not accurate. The recruiter wasn't involved and ceased all communication which wasn't the impression given during the phone interview or on emails prior. Most companies opt for the generalized email, but the impression given was that it would be handled more personally. None of my references were contacted. Reading other sources it sounds like garnering the award for the best place to work might not be given on merit as one would hope. The community won the bet.