Recent days have seen an unusual recruitment condition for a certain position in a new business unit in Zhumadian City. Netizens questioned the establishment of a “tailored position” by the unit, which limits the difficulty of competition for high-educated applicants, catering to those with lower educational backgrounds.
On October 21st, a netizen posted that in the 2025 unified recruitment examination for business units in Zhumadian City, there is a position at the Xinchai County Investment Service Center that does not limit to a specific major for junior college graduates, while restricting undergraduate applicants to ten major categories such as economics and law, and limiting postgraduate applicants to four discipline categories including economics, law, literature, and management.
This kind of recruitment requirement which is “lenient for lower educational backgrounds and strict for higher educational backgrounds” has sparked doubts among netizens, suggesting that the position may be a tailored “tailored position” for specific individuals.
Netizens expressed their skepticism, saying, “No limit on junior college education, but all kinds of restrictions for higher education??? This is really the first time I’ve heard of this, so absurd.” They further added, “There is indeed suspicion of favoritism towards internal junior college applicants; usually, the higher the level, the fewer restrictions there are. It doesn’t make sense to have a position that restricts majors for undergraduates and opens up for postgraduates, which is also logically unreasonable.”
“While it sounds like there are no restrictions for junior college graduates to apply, everyone’s level is similar. Even though there might be a preliminary test, there’s still the interview stage. But if undergraduates come in too, it’s likely they won’t even make it to the list for the written test.”
On October 23rd, in an original interview conducted by First Scene, employees at the Xinchai County Investment Service Center stated that the recruitment conditions for the position were set by the leadership according to the needs of the position, not for specific individuals.
However, this response failed to provide a specific explanation of the relationship between the specific job requirements and the restrictions on majors, leading to criticism such as being “evasive” and “lack of transparency.”