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

241–250 of 253 posts

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

#241

Post by VerifiedReports »

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.…

Instead of lashing out at people who respect themselves and others, why don't you blame your employer for making you the de-facto receptionist?

Your reaction betrays your embitteredness and naívete, calling others "boomerish" while missing the fact that your ways are in fact already the old ways. I'd say you're the one being mocked, except you're not even getting that much attention... you're hopelessly faffing at an AI firewall and never reaching a human eyeball. But hey, keep pecking that "auto-apply" button like a trained pigeon. Maybe someday you'll get a pellet.

"Taking advantage of someone's politeness?" Hahaha! It's pretty clear you have no idea what politeness is.

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

#242

Post by VerifiedReports »

jagoff wrote: post #176
VerifiedReports wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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]

Some are; I'm not.

I should say way too many are; and they act shocked when you take issue with being stolen from... as if YOU'RE the one with the problem. Pathetic.

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

#243

Post by GJim »

jijijijij wrote: post #211
GJim wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you consider briefly highlighting the relevant parts of your experience to a potential employer as "fucking shit" , then perhaps you are unsuitable for the role being offered.

I am sure, you hold the employer to the same standards. For example disclosing salary range information beforehand, or writing rejection letters afterwards, so applicants going through the trouble of doing their part aren't wasting their time and energy. Right?

> I am sure, you hold the employer to the same standards

I most certainly do!

Incidentally, the very idea of not providing a salary range is truly baffling. I'm amazed any such advertisements generate applicants; other than those phoning up the HR department to tell them to stop pissing about and please state the salary.

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

#244

Post by 6510 »

It simply should be required to post all job openings with a government agency that will negotiate the terms and fine you horrifically if your offer smells like bullshit. It should go as far as to force the company to hire the best fitting candidate. Elaborate investigations if the candidate turns out a poor fit. Lavish unemployment benefits but you do have to show up at the agency at 8am 5 days per week to follow courses and take tests. If we don't have the employee you need in stock we will build one.

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

#245

Post by ben_w »

_heimdall wrote: post #213
pjc50 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The branches (including SCOTUS) are not meaningfully different when they are controlled by the same party.

That's a very pessimistic view. That boils our system of three branches of government to a purely partisan game of capture the flag in which we all lose if one team captures all three at one. SCOTUS is a bit different as it both isn't driven by political parties and justices have a history of more frequently breaking with the party they are seen as aligned with.

2024 has not been a year for optimism about the American system of checks and balances functioning as advertised.

Even more broadly, there's an old quote:

  There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and cartridge (or ammo). Please use in that order.
The soap box is under threat: https://reason.com/2025/12/18/this-tennessee-man-spent-37-da... and https://www.npr.org/2025/04/08/nx-s1-5349472/students-protes...

The ballot box is under threat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_backsliding_in_the_...

Judiciary is under threat: https://www.gov.harvard.edu/2025/07/24/the-u-s-judicial-cris... and https://judicature.duke.edu/articles/judicial-independence-t...

That just (to much the same horror and sense of unreality I had watching the 9/11 attacks unfold) leaves the ammo box.

Now, I'm British by birth, a country where even the police are not routinely armed, so the American view that weapons are a "fundamental right" is utterly alien to me, and this difference is one of the reasons why I never seriously considered moving to Silicon Valley at any point in my career.

Trump seems pro 2nd Amendment: is that because he is afraid and needs them to like him, or because isn't afraid as he has an army and a secret service to keep him safe, or does he just plain like guns and hasn't even thought about personal risk despite getting shot at?

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

#246

Post by _heimdall »

ben_w wrote: post #245
_heimdall wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a very pessimistic view. That boils our system of three branches of government to a purely partisan game of capture the flag in which we all lose if one team captures all three at one. SCOTUS is a bit different as it both isn't driven by political parties and justices have a history of more frequently breaking with the party they are seen as aligned with.

2024 has not been a year for optimism about the American system of checks and balances functioning as advertised. Even more broadly, there's an old quote: There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and cartridge (or ammo). Please use in that order. The soap box is under threat: https://reason.com/2025/12/18/this-tennessee-man-spent-37-da... and https://www.npr.org/2025/04/08/nx-s1-…

Well no disagreement there, unfortunately.

I definitely agree our democracy seems to be under attack on multiple fronts, and at least the people I'm often around regardless of political affiliation seem to have lost sight of how our system is intended to work.

A violent civil war wouldn't surprise me, though I don't think we're close to it yet and I hope I never see it happen. Though I would prefer seeing that rather than seeing our system successfully destroyed and replaced with what seems to be coming up, an authoritarian socialism of one form or another.

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

#247

Post by amypetrik8 »

Dayshine wrote: post #158
YmiYugy wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Except a job offer is generally non binding, so they could interview you, offer the job, then withdraw it. So never being offered a job because it doesn't exist doesn't lose you anything.

>So never being offered a job because it doesn't exist doesn't lose you anything.

Ah well look, if the job posting was just to collect resumes with zero intention to actually hire, you did lose some things:

- actual time spent applying to a job that was never open - emotional damage on focus to try to get this job - loss of free market value of your data (company profited from this data, when you could have profited from it) - damages for acquisition of your personal data under a fraudulent basis (when otherwise, maybe you did not want your data shared)

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

#248

Post by abustamam »

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.…

A few years back, before I was an engineer, I worked at a local learning center franchise for a few years. We accepted online applications, but 99% of the people we hired came in through the front door and handed me a resume. I was not in charge of hiring, I just passed the resume to my boss (the owner). I never felt inconvenienced by this "role" I was given.

Some time after that, I was working for a consulting firm, but my desk was not at the entrance; another engineer's was. I distinctly remember a sharply dressed college student walking in, giving that engineer a resume, saying a few things, and leaving. His resume got passed up the chain and he got hired later. The only person I know who gave a paper resume.

If you're getting a lot of foot traffic that wastes your time, maybe bring that up with your employer?

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

#249

Post by dogemaster2032 »

ConspiracyFact wrote: post #240
dogemaster2032 wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In English we don’t write commas or periods outside the quotes. The proper way is to write them inside the quotation. - “defect,” a flaw, an error. - about giving a dam.” Don’t get me started about “for purposes TBD later.”

The other person who replied to you noted that this is not true in British English, but beyond that, it appears to me that my generation (Millennials) essentially all came to the same conclusion, which is that punctuation should only be included in the quotation if it's literally part of the text being quoted. (This probably has something to do with the programming mindset.) If you write >The senator said that the bi…

Your point that this is a generational change is interesting and reminds me of boomers who still write double space after a period.

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

#250

Post by josefrichter »

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.

That's in ideal world. In real world there's maybe 1% chance your cover letter will reach a human being.
Post reply on HN