Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

'Ghost jobs' are on the rise – and so are calls to ban them

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 253 posts

Re: 'Ghost jobs' are on the rise – and so are calls to ban them

#31

Post by VerifiedReports »

lovich wrote: post #19
rdtsc wrote: post #4

> Dr Escalera adds that she has also heard examples of companies posting jobs to obtain and sell data. How is that not illegal? Pretending to offer jobs just to suck in resumes to some database just seems like it should be illegal. Or just like running scams is illegal but they are in another country "so tough luck, you'll never get us"?

Because some animals are more equal than others and the government has decided that companies are not only citizens but the more equal group. Half the shit companies do that gets them a fine would land any individual in jail for committing the same action, but we let them get away with just paying it off. Simultaneously we give those organizations the same rights. It’s a system with three classes of citizen where the…

Citizens United, a monumental betrayal of every citizen.

Re: 'Ghost jobs' are on the rise – and so are calls to ban them

#32

Post by Xylakant »

avidiax wrote: post #20

We could at least require that all applications have a standardized format for resumé and a list of legally allowable questions. No more requiring the candidate to do 30 minutes of data entry to encode their resumé into your HR system. Then a ghost job wouldn't really waste much time, since uploading a JSON should take 30 seconds.

When we post a job ad on LinkedIn, I already get 30 spam answers in the first few minutes, people that have obviously spent not a single second reading the requirements. And you want to further automate this? I’ll just ask my people person to automate the response.

We really try to spend the time to answer every application, but since AI generated applications have become a thing, we have decided to not answer those. Why should I spent time if you haven’t spent the time?

Re: 'Ghost jobs' are on the rise – and so are calls to ban them

#33

Post by pastel8739 »

malikolivier wrote: post #10

I know companies that are posting vacancies that currently don't exist in order to keep good candidates on the hook. They tell the candidate that we should keep in touch for when the company is ready to hire them. I am not sure if it's bad or not. It's true that it kinda wastes the candidate's time. In some cases though, the candidate is so good that the company will create a position just for them.

I feel like if it’s clear from the listing that it’s a catch-all that might not correspond to any real vacancies, it’s fine. Otherwise I think it’s bad, since it’s lying.

Re: 'Ghost jobs' are on the rise – and so are calls to ban them

#34

Post by rando001111 »

bsder wrote: post #13

Can we please get back to using job fairs already? Why are companies so irritatingly resistant to getting back to doing things in-person and real-time?

Having gone to job fairs recently I found them to be pretty useless.

I got one lead where the guy gave me the link for good candidates and all the others were useless.

Re: 'Ghost jobs' are on the rise – and so are calls to ban them

#35

Post by Xylakant »

wickedsight wrote: post #18

I was applying for a while last year. Spending hours to write a cover letter and then either hearing nothing or getting a canned rejection letter is super frustrating. I've come to the conclusion that putting effort into an application is time wasted, so from now on AI is writing pretty much every single one of my cover letters. Doing that allows me to send out 5 applications in the time it normally takes me to do 1.…

I can tell you that our HR takes the time to write proper responses to every application, but we straight up delete AI written applications. I honor the effort put into any application, but if people haven’t spent the time, then why should we?

Re: 'Ghost jobs' are on the rise – and so are calls to ban them

#36

Post by pastel8739 »

avidiax wrote: post #30
pastel8739 wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies already get so many applications that applying is a crapshoot without a referral. I feel like this is the opposite of what we need.

The employers want applications so badly they are willing to post job ads that don't exist. The need for a referral to get human eyes on your resume is a different problem that isn't made better by making every application expensive for the applicant. Poor quality applicants have more time, you might say.

I disagree and think that increasing the cost of applying would indeed help this problem. If the number of applications is too high for humans to possibly review, what other possible solution could there be?

Re: 'Ghost jobs' are on the rise – and so are calls to ban them

#37

Post by 3eb7988a1663 »

wisty wrote: post #27
rdtsc wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how does that work as a growth indicator, are there any known organizations that track your growth based on how many job postings you do, and then use that data to indicate your growth? As a wild guess this may be part of the story a company tells itself. Every individual and company needs to tell themselves a nice "story" to feel good about themselves. In case of a company "damn, look how many jobs we're posting,…

It must fill some purpose though. I doubt it's entirely just marketing in most legitimate companies. Effectively a/b testing job adds? Or trying to get a range of candidates so they can find a good fit? Let's say you have, like, 10 jobs to do but you're only going to hire two people (either loading them up with more work, or internally reshuffling responsibilities, probably a bit of both). So you advertise for every…

I heard an argument that the fake jobs are actually to appease internal employees. "We know you are over-worked, but we are trying to get you some help. Look at these postings -too bad everyone who has applied thus far is a complete dud."

Re: 'Ghost jobs' are on the rise – and so are calls to ban them

#38

Post by terminalshort »

rdtsc wrote: post #4

> Dr Escalera adds that she has also heard examples of companies posting jobs to obtain and sell data. How is that not illegal? Pretending to offer jobs just to suck in resumes to some database just seems like it should be illegal. Or just like running scams is illegal but they are in another country "so tough luck, you'll never get us"?

It's technically fraud, but there aren't any damages.

Re: 'Ghost jobs' are on the rise – and so are calls to ban them

#39

Post by PeterStuer »

bryanrasmussen wrote: post #3

>it’s to raise stock value by fake growth indicators how does that work as a growth indicator, are there any known organizations that track your growth based on how many job postings you do, and then use that data to indicate your growth? I don't doubt that it could happen, but if it did we would have to know about it, I also don't doubt that I don't know about it, but I would like to know.

Traditionally the 'Carreers' tab on the website had to exist to project the image of a succesfull growing company.

It was always a delicate balance between on the one hand projecting success, and on the other not scaring clients you couldn't meet demand.

Re: 'Ghost jobs' are on the rise – and so are calls to ban them

#40

Post by Xylakant »

josefrichter wrote: post #26
rdtsc wrote: post #4

> Dr Escalera adds that she has also heard examples of companies posting jobs to obtain and sell data. How is that not illegal? Pretending to offer jobs just to suck in resumes to some database just seems like it should be illegal. Or just like running scams is illegal but they are in another country "so tough luck, you'll never get us"?

I believe it actually is illegal, via a set of more general rules on data collection, on what constitutes a fraud, etc. May not be spelled out exactly like this specific use case, but still very likely covered by law. Just difficult to prove.

It certainly would be illegal in Europe under the GDPR - data collected for one purpose (handling of applications) cannot be used for another without explicit, informed consent.
Post reply on HN