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

171–180 of 253 posts

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

#171

Post by danaris »

hmmmhmmhm wrote: post #92
pydry wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I am not sure if more regulation is a solution Nothing else is going to fix this.

Maybe official 'name and blame' service where anybody could post their experience under their real name?

Unfortunately, in America, at least, that would be likely to lead to a lot of lawsuits—lawsuits that should be shot down under the SLAPP category, but it takes enough money and time just to respond to a lawsuit that many people would be unwilling to take the risk by posting anything.

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

#172

Post by jagoff »

harvey9 wrote: post #146
WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #5

I was an employment counselor in the late 1990s. Even then, ½ to ¾ of realistic, worthwhile jobs were phantoms. FF to now and hiring portals silently drop viable applicants for a long list of never disclosed reasons. I know temp agencies that hire, send the employee out on 1 job then never again. I've never know a time when hiring wasn't crap for entire classes of viable applicants.

How come temp agencies would only send someone out on one job? They make money based on placements so unless that worker has bad feedback from clients it would make sense to place them again.

You seem to underestimate their pool of applicants

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

#173

Post by Y_Y »

VerifiedReports wrote: post #31
lovich wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> The provisions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 restricting unions, corporations, and profitable organizations from independent political spending and prohibiting the broadcasting of political media funded by them within sixty days of general elections or thirty days of primary elections violate the freedom of speech that is protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. United States District Court for the District of Columbia reversed.

I'm sure we're on the same side, but I want to point out that that case didn't make a huge difference. By that I mean it removed a ban on political broadcasts near elections, most of the "money is speech, super pacs can do anything at all" stuff was already legal.

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

#174

Post by moralestapia »

danaris wrote: post #163
terminalshort wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, you go ahead and sue someone for the few minutes of your time it took to send in a application for a fake job. Then you'll really see what wasting time looks like.

But this is part of the problem with crimes and enforcement in the modern age: sure, I might have only wasted a few minutes of my time. But I'm just one of hundreds or thousands of people who were tricked into wasting that time, by this one act. Multiply this across all the fraudulent job postings, and it really starts to add up. It's clear (to me, at least) that we need better laws to handle this sort of wide-but-sh…

I recently learned of [1], which is a good example of "too small for me to sue" but still worth going through it collectively.

1: https://www.canadianbreadsettlement.ca/

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

#175

Post by jagoff »

GJim wrote: post #104
josefrichter wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cover letters are dead imho. Even before AI came to play.

Total opposite here. If you can't be bothered with a simple cover letter (a paragraph or two is fine) highlighting why you are a good fit and just send a CV..... Frankly, it comes across as low effort spamming.

[flagged]

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

#176

Post by jagoff »

VerifiedReports wrote: post #23
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.

Let's resolve this right now: It's bad. No... it's worse than that; it's THEFT, and monumentally offensive. It's time that everyone, EVERYONE stop giving entities a free pass on stealing from us by deliberately wasting our time. In every aspect of life, every hour of our day, we're being ripped off. From the assholes blocking the passing lane, to "ghost jobs," to non-functioning subscription-cancellation phone number…

[flagged]

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

#177

Post by throwaway_2494 »

HNisCIS wrote: post #57
VerifiedReports wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 Gen Z to want all communication to be asynchronous and ignorable. If you guys have your way, we’ll all be connecting via API like 1U machines in a rack somewhere.

Seriously—if you’re going to go overboard, so can I.

WTF is it with everything having to be mediated by a machine these days? People can’t get around without GPS, remember phone numbers, or now even do their work or homework without 'AI.'

How do you explain how people managed to do all of these things before without assistance? And how do you square that with telling 'boomers'—who were able to do these things—that they’re stupid and that you’re somehow better?

Seriously, it’s like we used to have weightlifting competitions where humans physically lifted weights overhead, and then you guys decided, "Nah, that’s too old and boomerish. From now on, all weightlifting competitions will use forklifts. Anyone who wants to lift the weights themselves is boomerish and stupid."

And where's your solidarity? If you lose your job, you may find yourself wishing you could meet people in person, when all your 'ignoreable,' electronically submitted job applications somehow get thrown away.

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

#178

Post by palmotea »

terminalshort wrote: post #145
moralestapia wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your time might be worthless but mine isn't.

Yeah, you go ahead and sue someone for the few minutes of your time it took to send in a application for a fake job. Then you'll really see what wasting time looks like.

> Yeah, you go ahead and sue someone for the few minutes of your time it took to send in a application for a fake job. Then you'll really see what wasting time looks like.

1. That is exactly what class actions are for, because small damages multiplied by many people are big damages.

2. That's also why we need punitive damages, so someone can't get away with unlawful actions by deliberately coasting along under the threshold where it makes sense to sue. For instance, IIRC, you can collect something like $5000 from someone who doesn't put you on their "do not call list" when requested. That amount has nothing to do with the value of the "few minutes of your time it took to" answer a telemarketing call.

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

#179

Post by nticompass »

PeterStuer wrote: post #48
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?

Job fairs? You meen those gigs for meeting the junior HR promo girls that hands you a flyer with the company's carreers url, some branded post-it's and a mini pouch of gummi bears?

Exactly! I love getting free stuff. I don't care if it's a crappy company-branded pen, give me all the free swag!
Post reply on HN