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

51–60 of 253 posts

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

#51

Post by randycupertino »

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.

I saw this post on reddit where some sketchy AI company (Alpheva AI) is posting jobs and requesting a screenshot of all applicants having left their app a 5-star review in the app store as part of the application process:

https://www.reddit.com/r/recruitinghell/comments/1pp0iej/thi...

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

#52

Post by lovich »

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…

To add onto this, the single exception I am aware of to this rule is the result of the gas explosions in Massachusetts.

In that case the company in charge, Columbia Gas, "exited" the market but all the scuttlebutt I heard in the area was that the Mass government was threatening the corporate execution of revoking their charter, which lead to Columbia gas selling their business off at a loss to Eversource

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NiSource#Massachusetts_gas_lin...

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

#53

Post by vanviegen »

avidiax wrote: post #16
vanviegen wrote: post #9

My guess is that most of these jobs actually exist, in the sense that if a stellar candidate were to present theirselves, the organization would find a way to hire them.

The job exists, in the sense that Bob is currently doing it. Unless Bob turns in notice, your application will be in vain.

In larger organisations I think they'll usually be able to find work for an additional SuperBob. Perhaps not in smaller organisations, but I'd also expect them to be less likely to put up spurious vacancies.

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

#54

Post by fractallyte »

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?

Silicon Milkroundabout – in London, UK – is the Real Thing: https://www.siliconmilkroundabout.com/

Not just HR, but actual team leads and members who you can talk to and mutually evaluate each other, face to face. It's a superb event, highly recommended!

(Looks like they've introduced a new digital system too. Intriguing...)

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

#55

Post by zkmon »

My first job was in an industry where "ghost jobs" had a different meaning. Local mafia used to add fictitious names to the worker register at work sites, and someone would come and collect the pay in cash every month. The daily work reports would show these workers as engaged in some house-keeping work.

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

#56

Post by darreninthenet »

terminalshort wrote: post #38
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.

In the UK at least Fraud doesn't require any damages, just an intent to gain something of value on the criminals side.

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

#57

Post by HNisCIS »

VerifiedReports wrote: post #44
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.…

A place that physically operates near me posts job openings all the time, for which I'm well-qualified. After applying to several of them (with a very specific and targeted cover letter) and getting no response, my final attempt was to print out a letter and resume and physically take them over to their office. I was thinking this would make a positive impression and say hey, I'm really interested and I'm willing to…

Having been on the other end of this repeatedly (as an engineer with a desk near the door, not a hiring manager) and I hate it when people do this.

People are becoming much more adverse to bring panhandled or solicited in a way they cannot ignore, in the same way spam calls are more annoying than spam texts. It's not "initiative" or "extra mile" shit, it's taking advantage of someone's politeness to waste their time.

It also looks hopelessly boomerish, up there with expecting the firmness of a handshake to land a job. I've seen this happen dozens of times and the resumes always end up in the trash within minutes. I've never seen anyone hired this way.

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

#58

Post by dandare »

I am not sure if more regulation is a solution, but the lack of respect for job seekers is a real problem.

And not just with ghost jobs. My recent experience as a job seeker was harrowing - even with large, proud companies. I would pass multiple rounds of interviews with senior/director-level interviewers only to never hear back from the company - even after a direct request for an update or feedback. Just total ignorance. Again, this happened with a FAANG+ company.

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

#59

Post by YmiYugy »

terminalshort wrote: post #38
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.

This seems analogous to the following. A company asks users to fill out an online survey in exchange for participation in some raffle, except the company never pays out any prize. As with the job application there was never a guaranteed reward, but it's still easy to see the damage. The company induced to you to provide them with an economically valuable asset (filled out survey/application) for which you expected a fair chance at a reward. It seems plausible that you could claim damages at least up to the expected value.

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

#60

Post by 6LLvveMx2koXfwn »

vanviegen wrote: post #53
avidiax wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The job exists, in the sense that Bob is currently doing it. Unless Bob turns in notice, your application will be in vain.

In larger organisations I think they'll usually be able to find work for an additional SuperBob. Perhaps not in smaller organisations, but I'd also expect them to be less likely to put up spurious vacancies.

I want to meet this 'SuperBob', he made me lol.
Post reply on HN