Live data from Hacker News

Ghost jobs are wreaking havoc on tech workers

sfgate.com

91–100 of 264 posts

Re: Ghost jobs are wreaking havoc on tech workers

#91
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's against the rules to call out hiring companies in the thread, primarily because we don't want off-topic arguments and because it would be too easy to exploit it for shenanigans. But since people have been increasingly saying that this is a problem, let's do something about it. My current thought is to add a new instruction at the top asking companies to please only post in the thread if they're committed to resp…

Two questions: 1) How would the feedback loop work from users who do not receive a response? 2) Are you concerned about a possible "chilling effect" for startups that don't want to post for fear of being spammed? As an aside, been browsing HN for years and always wanted to say that you're doing the Lord's work.

(1) I don't know, and (2) I am now. That would be bad!

But presumably they have to deal with that problem already anyway.

Re: Ghost jobs are wreaking havoc on tech workers

#92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's an outrage once you work at these companies and behold the sheer dysfunction and they're all getting paid wages native American citizens would take.

The model that Americans would take any job if the wages were high enough is simple but obviously false. For manual labor there's no amount of money you could pay Americans to be farmworkers. For desk jobs there's no amount that'll overcome Americans' cultural belief that you can't do math unless you were born as a special sort of person who is "good at math".

1 million/year? There’s definitely an amount that’d allow to find enough workers locally. The other question is how much would the produce cost and how many people would be willing to pay.

Re: Ghost jobs are wreaking havoc on tech workers

#93
This is just one example. While tech jobs are diverse, the well-heeled players substantially set the tone and they have gone berserk: over the last few years they have neutron bombed entire zip codes claiming hard times, then posted record-shattering EPS beats, then hired back a bunch of people at substantially lower compensation in a phenomenon so pervasive to have a catchy name: “boomerang”. It’s not even the first time recently got popped for wage fixing, Don’t Poach Gate was like 15 years ago. They’re giving us all the finger in the Crimson, and we will do nothing because we can do nothing.

It’s a trivial abuse of monopsony pricing power, it’s illegal in the sense that the laws as written prohibit it on a common-sense, “intended by the legislature” sense, a lawyer can tell you if it’s maybe legal via stare decis via activist judges bench legislating.

But more importantly it has destroyed what loose social contract there was: they cannot in fact run these businesses at 60-70% of peak headcount sustainably: they can merely coast on previous investments long enough to crush salaries and then clean up the mess because there isn’t any real competition. They can distort hiring to where McCarthyist vibe checks and loyalty tests hit a precision/recall that is Pareto optimized for the minimum amount of competence that admits an endorsement of their nepo baby “nice trumps kind” mythology.

And they’re going to get away with it at the level that matters: the individual incentives of executives are nothing to do with the long term interests of shareholders or the commons on this: progress is stalling out in a way that will never show up on a quarterly report in time to matter to the executives.

And you can see it in real time: we haven’t had such an embarrassing crop of people who were someone’s roommate at Harvard running the show in at least 30 years, the outcomes are awful, the software sucks, the products suck, and the game is soft communist friction around leaving the platform.

Re: Ghost jobs are wreaking havoc on tech workers

#94
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's against the rules to call out hiring companies in the thread, primarily because we don't want off-topic arguments and because it would be too easy to exploit it for shenanigans. But since people have been increasingly saying that this is a problem, let's do something about it. My current thought is to add a new instruction at the top asking companies to please only post in the thread if they're committed to resp…

"Dear [applicant name], thank you for sending us your application. We have decided not to progress your application further. While making our decision we've noted your extensive experience at [previous company] and feel that your skillsets are highly valuable in the industry and hope you find success in your job search soon." I actually received that from a major tech company, unfilled mail merge aliases included.

Haha, at least they told you no. rejection letters are rarely more informative even if they are more verbose

Re: Ghost jobs are wreaking havoc on tech workers

#95
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean the reason I can think of off the top of my head is that one is wasting the time of people who are looking for a job so they can continue to live, and the other is wasting the time of a person who's job is reviewing resumes?

I don't agree with the attitude of the grandparent poster either, but work at a small company where I've been on the receiving end of many extremely low-effort applications from ineligible individuals, so it definitely goes both ways. Companies are also bombarded with spam from recruiters, just as candidates are.

Sure but what I'm saying is that the stakes for a company having to go through spam applications are significantly lower than the people trying to find a job who are getting spammed with dead ends while their savings drain lower and lower.

Re: Ghost jobs are wreaking havoc on tech workers

#96
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two questions: 1) How would the feedback loop work from users who do not receive a response? 2) Are you concerned about a possible "chilling effect" for startups that don't want to post for fear of being spammed? As an aside, been browsing HN for years and always wanted to say that you're doing the Lord's work.

(1) I don't know, and (2) I am now. That would be bad! But presumably they have to deal with that problem already anyway.

Presumably you guys don’t want to create a report button for just this situation. I never know what to think when I see downvotes in the Who’s Hiring thread. There’s no way for me to tell if someone hates the CEO (eg, if Twitter posted job openings), or they’ve noticed the same position filed three months in a row. I’ve seen a few of those before you got around to detaching them.

Re: Ghost jobs are wreaking havoc on tech workers

#97

This is just one example. While tech jobs are diverse, the well-heeled players substantially set the tone and they have gone berserk: over the last few years they have neutron bombed entire zip codes claiming hard times, then posted record-shattering EPS beats, then hired back a bunch of people at substantially lower compensation in a phenomenon so pervasive to have a catchy name: “boomerang”. It’s not even the first…

Unions

Re: Ghost jobs are wreaking havoc on tech workers

#98
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's going to be hard to enforce that, unless you go through ycombinator.com/jobs But I agree that's fair to expect from companies. Yes, they have potentially hundreds of applicants, but writing "We're sorry to inform that you have not been selected to interview" probably takes less than a minute, so spending less than an hour rejecting every applicant seems in line with the time I'd expect each candidate to…

There's little enforcement happening in those threads anyway—they're too free-form, and manual intervention is too expensive. But adding a rule should hopefully still make a difference.

Good luck! I still wonder if you can't you sidestep the free-form and manual intervention stuff by giving those threads some shape via a monthly posting feature on ycombinator.com/jobs?

At the end of the day the challenges likely stem from "Who's hiring?" being just a thread with comments on a very spartan message board. I would have said you can solve these issues with an app or website, but you already have one, so it would be easier to just leverage that and then the sky is the limit–add any features you want!

Re: Ghost jobs are wreaking havoc on tech workers

#99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a cost to the employer. Any smallish 1-2 hour meeting with a couple of people on it can easily cost thousands if you work out people’s hourly wage. Add on the context-switching costs impacting the rest of their workdays. Then add the reputational damage among jobseekers - when word gets out that a company is a timewaster, qualified people will be less likely to apply.

Talent acquisition is the cost of being in business. Hiring is hard, I admit. Being efficient while remaining within legal and regulatory frameworks is fine and expected, fraud and misrepresentation through job postings with no intent to hire is not.

I know; I’m saying it bites these companies in the ass when their hiring is broken.

Re: Ghost jobs are wreaking havoc on tech workers

#100
post #58

The article doesn't really discuss the legality of this, which I'd be curious to hear the opinion of a lawyer. In other cases, it's considered criminal if a company deliberately puts out false information about itself. E.g., if you lie about your companies products (like Theranos), it's pretty clear that this is not legal. I don't see why it should be legal to lie about your job opportunities.

ah the ol “Everything is securities fraud”. I could see it. Company posts jobs for department that is being divested/going out of business/etc, this misleads investors, ergo: securities fraud.
Post reply on HN