M.A. / Virtually unheard of two decades ago, AIDS is, at the turn of the century, one of the best known and most talked about disease on the globe. A decade ago, HIV was regarded primarily as a serious health crisis. What had first appeared to be a disease confined to certain well-defined populations such as gay men and haemophiliacs became a disease that threatened everyone, everywhere. AIDS has become a fullblown threat to development and its social and economic consequences are felt widely not only in the workplace but also in the human resource field and the economy in general. The HIV epidemic is the most important challenge facing South Africa since the birth of democracy. The implications of HIV in the workplace are scary. Even though HIV affects all of us, it has become a workplace issue that must be addressed simply because work is one of the most important dimensions in the life of the individual. The workplace can be a scene of prejudice, discrimination, rejection and harassment, for people affected by HIV, and those feelings are fuelled by ignorance and fear of infection. HIV-positive employees suffer high levels of depression, anxiety, fear and a great degree of uncertainty associated with the diagnosis. Instead of rejecting, stigmatising and isolating positive employees, a collective commitment is needed by the workplace to treat positive employees with dignity and respect. Because the workplace is such an important element in the individual's life, it has been demonstrated to be life lengthening and fulfilling for employees to remain in familiar, supportive and productive surroundings even after being diagnosed HIV-positive (Masi, 1993). The researcher examined how HIV affects employee functioning in the work environment. A qualitative research design is followed using a framework based on Straus and Corbin (1990). Purposive, non-probability sampling is used. Data is captured by using an unstructured, open-ended interview schedule. In this study data analysis is completed manually. Literature is reviewed to validate the findings and lastly conclusions and recommendations are presented.

Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) / Initial research on structuring the interview process investigated structure’s impact on the interview’s psychometric properties (e.g., reliability and validity). In contrast, the empirical literature has begun to consider the impact of increased interview structure on job applicant reactions to the interview and the companies that utilize them. Current research has studied the effects of interviewer characteristics on applicant reactions and the effects of different types of selection procedures on applicant fairness reactions. In addition, while studies have examined the impact of applicants’ perceived control on their reactions to selection procedures, few studies have examined this impact specifically for the employment interview. Given the widespread use of the interview in selection, this study adds to current research by focusing on applicant reactions to four elements of the interview identified as being salient to applicants (i.e., the degree to which the interviewee perceives that applicants are asked the same questions, the use of situational or behavioral type questions, controlling the use of ancillary information by the interviewer, and the degree to which questions from the applicant are controlled). In addition, this study focused on need for control as a moderator of the relationships between interview structure and fairness perceptions, recommendation intentions, and acceptance intentions. Participants consisted of 161 students voluntarily participating in three different interviewing scenarios: unstructured, semi-structured, and structured interviewing scenario. The participants completed post-interview measures asking them about their perceptions of fairness, their intention to recommend the company to others, and their intention of accepting an offer if one is made by the company. Although the hypothesized relationships between elements of structure and applicant evaluations of the interview were largely not supported, the results did indicate that student applicants perceived semi-structured and structured interviews to be fairer than unstructured interviews. In addition, the results suggest that more structured interviews may lead to lower behavioral intent to recommend the job to others or accept a job offer. Implications of the results are discussed in terms of how interview structure relates to the candidates’ perception of fairness, recommendation intentions, and acceptance intentions.