14 ms·
I've had negative reviews flat out removed by a company that was paying glass door for some sort of premium service. I extensively reviewed the rules and reword
by fuzz4lyfe 8y ago
I've had negative reviews flat out removed by a company that was paying glass door for some sort of premium service. I extensively reviewed the rules and reworded my comments and they were removed yet again. My points were fully factually true and were not anything too untoward (pay raises were promised to members of a new team, they never materialized, most team members left). For what it's worth, Path Forward IT is not a great place to work. advancement rarely comes with rewards and abuse of salary agreements abound(work all night to get a system up and running, they still require 8 hours behind a desk even if it would be unproductive. Flexibility works one way there).
- lgleason 8y agoI've had this happen as well! Basically I think they use the removal option as their revenue model....until people figure out that their reviews are not accurate.
- _Microft 8y agoNext-level revenue model: users can pay to read removed reviews.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- ducktypegoose 8y agoSomebody give this guy a raise.
- lowercased 8y agoDouble dip surprise(?) - they'll still have ads around them.
- jstarfish 8y agoI've often thought about setting up a scraper for sites like this and republishing the deleted content.
- throwawaymath 8y agoYou would be sued, probably successfully, into oblivion. The terms of service [1] for Glassdoor are pretty clear that you agree to not: Introduce software or automated agents to Glassdoor, or access Glassdoor so as to produce multiple accounts, generate automated messages, or to scrape, strip or mine data from Glassdoor without our express written permission; Copy, modify or create derivative works of Glassdoor or any Content (excluding Your Content) without our express written permission); Copy or use the information, Content (excluding Your Content), or data on Glassdoor in connection with a competitive service, as determined by Glassdoor; Interfere with, disrupt, or create an undue burden on Glassdoor or the networks or services connected to Glassdoor; Now, since reviews are public information and not hidden behind an authentication wall (i.e. no account signup required), there is a compelling argument that you can scrape the website without having technically agreed to those terms and conditions. In particular, the robots.txt [2] for Glassdoor does not disallow automated crawling of the /Reviews/ endpoint. But this would still likely result in a protracted lawsuit, even if you ultimately win. ________________________________________ 1. https://www.glassdoor.com/about/terms.htm https://www.glassdoor.com/about/terms.htm 2. https://www.glassdoor.com/robots.txt https://www.glassdoor.com/robots.txt
- Lenad 8y agoOne could still go to archive.org There's quite a lot of snapshot. Indeed they are not interfering with Glassdoor per se.
- StudentStuff 8y agoDidn't LinkedIn just lose a court case over very similar anti-scraping terms? Offering something publicly on the internet, then attempting to block certain uses using your ToS seems like Glassdoor being an Indian giver...
- throwawaymath 8y agoHence my second paragraph, yes. You’d definitely be sued, and it would definitely be expensive. You might not lose.
- josho 8y agoI just went over to glassdoor, curiously after signing up a dummy account they have a banner claiming: "Your trust is our top concern, so companies can't alter or remove reviews." But, I noticed from a past review that there is some kind of 'approval' required. So, yes it seems they can remove reviews by not approving. Sigh.
- switch007 8y agoWorded like that, it seems it doesn't rule out Glassdoor doing it on a company's behalf.
- josho 8y agoIf I remember correctly the approval was likely automatic. So, I suspect you could pay to have certain keyword filled reviews automatically be disapproved--obviously this would only be used to filter out swear words or proprietary details of the company.
- sevensor 8y ago> Flexibility works one way there A former boss put it like this, "Sure we have flex time! You can arrive any time before 8 and leave any time after 6."
- FireBeyond 8y agoDilbert cartoon: Catbert: "Alice, the experts say you need to balance work and home life. You worked 80 hours last week... that's less than half of the hours in a week. Give us some balance, you selfish hag." Alice: "This conversation took a nasty turn."
- commandlinefan 8y agoLet me guess, he laughed when he said it like he was super funny, too, right? Like when I used to ask one former boss which of the ten tasks he'd just assigned to me was highest priority he'd say, "yes!" and laugh like he'd just told the greatest joke and then run out of the room (seriously) before I could pin him down on an actual decision.
- chaostheory 8y agoimo this is endemic in areas with poor job markets where there's really about 1 or 2 large employers. It's not just time to leave the company; you need to leave the whole area as well.
- ChuckNorris89 8y agoThat's pretty much how it's like in most cities in Europe apart from the few large tech hubs. If you burn yourself with a couple of bad managers you might not have anywhere else to go without leaving your family behind and being accused of job hopping so employees just have to put up with it. At my second to last job I put up with a manager that had severe anger management issues and would swear at employees and throw things at staff. I left over 2 years ago. Since then he's been promoted. The company had also won several "Best place to work" awards in the past.
- commandlinefan 8y agoI guess that's less effort for the executives than just "stop acting like a jerk"...
- 52-6F-62 8y agoI think in a lot of those cases, they don't even know they're jerks and couldn't believe they are. I'm reminded of Burroughs... “Thou shalt not be such a shit, you don't know you are one.”
- siruncledrew 8y agoGlassdoor is basically workplace Yelp. It started out useful for job hunting, now it's also a gamed system with pay-for-PR.
- dlubarov 8y agoFWIW, Yelp advertising has no effect on reviews. Allegedly some sales reps claimed that they could manipulate reviews, but such claims would have been empty threats/promises. This has been tested in court several times; see e.g. the 9th circuit's opinion on Levitt v. Yelp! Inc: > the business owners pled insufficient facts to make out a plausible claim that Yelp authored negative reviews of their businesses (I interned at Yelp in 2009.) Edit: This is what Yelp says about it: https://www.yelp.com/advertiser_faq https://www.yelp.com/advertiser_faq
- kortilla 8y agoYelp not authoring negative reviews is significantly different than offering tools to hide real negative reviews.
- Retric 8y agoWhat is so strange about this is companies like Yelp become utterly useless. Having completely destroyed the value of their brand Yelp still gets traffic at least until the next briefly honest startup shows up.
- dlubarov 8y agoI should have quoted the district court's ruling, which goes more in depth. They weren't convinced that changes to the plantiffs' rating were related to their interactions with Yelp: > The SAC purports to document fluctuations in plaintiffs’ overall star ratings that apparently correlate with their advertising decisions, but it in actuality only provides select snapshots of plaintiffs’ overall star ratings. [...] Chan’s mixture of positive and negative reviews fluctuated over time irrespective of the activities complained of in the SAC, and in the absence of a more complete picture of Chan’s reviews, the court cannot equate a few drops in overall star ratings to an implied threat of harm from Yelp. These fluctuations could just as easily be the result of planted ads by plaintiffs, the functioning of Yelp’s automated filter, or negative attacks from competitors or former employees.
- burtonator 8y agoI don't understand why you would want to be a shitty boss. Not only is it good karma but it's good business. Loyal employees are awesome. Any bump in the road and they have your back. Maybe when you're some massive megacorp it makes sense but I hope I'm never to the point where I have to run a mathematical calculation on whether it makes sense to treat people with respect.
- bunderbunder 8y agoThe Peter principle is a very powerful force.
- john_moscow 8y agoBecause the type of people that tends to stick at middle management positions is the one that's good at kissing ass to their bosses. Now if you're stuck kissing ass all day, for your own self-esteem's sake you need to show power over someone less "important" by making them suffer. There's no logic here, no mathematical calculations done, just petty emotions and selection bias.
- lrem 8y agoBut would megacorps try that? Working in one, we fully expect that vast majority of candidates know someone on the inside. Hence, cheating on glassdoor and such would logically only add "liars" to whatever their insider friend would tell them. Not a great deal, if you ask me. Edit: having gone through the article: none of the companies here are close to "megacorp". The biggest one seems to be SAP.
- Udik 8y ago> negative reviews flat out removed And if wording or details were the issue, they could at the very least leave the review score, as a proof of their good faith. Nope.
- Reedx 8y ago> removed by a company that was paying glass door for some sort of premium service Is there any proof of this? Source?
- fuzz4lyfe 8y agoThe reviews were deleted seconds after they were posted and their profile has a icon that indicates they pay glassdoor for additional services. A coworker that also left had the same experience I did when he posted his review.
- Vadoff 8y agoBlind is rapidly becoming the new glassdoor.
- philpem 8y agoBlind? Sorry, never heard of it -- what is it?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- bogomipz 8y agoI've witnessed similar on two occasions. These were typical flakey SV recruiters were completely unprofessional and disrespectful of my time. In fact the experience was so bad in each of these that I really felt compelled to write a review in the hopes that others might avoid also wasting lots of time. Both reviews were taken down within 24 hours of being posted.
- timcederman 8y agoAnd then Glassdoor refuses to remove reviews that are obviously irrelevant. I noticed a review for SurveyMonkey from someone who takes panel sruveys (i.e. absolutely not someone who works there) and after it was flagged I got this response from Glassdoor: "Thank you for flagging the post titled “survey taker” for additional review. We take our Community Guidelines very seriously. Before any reviews are posted on Glassdoor, our moderators review them to ensure they meet our Guidelines. A manager has reviewed the post you flagged and decided it does meet our guidelines. Therefore, the post will remain on the site."
- bartread 8y ago> I've had negative reviews flat out removed by a company that was paying glass door for some sort of premium service. You don't even need to pay Glassdoor. At $PREVIOUS_EMPLOYER I managed to get a negative review by an employee who we'd let go removed just by asking them. Don't be too horrified yet because it gets worse: I stand by asking them to remove it. The review was extremely negative and posted by somebody who, in the less than 3 months they worked for us, had been nothing but trouble: lazy, arrogant, obnoxious, demanding, complaining, entitled. Nothing was ever good enough for this person, and they absolutely slagged us off in the review as a result. No company is perfect but the criticism was entirely unfair, so I asked Glassdoor to remove it, explaining why in reasonable detail. They could have refused and there would have been nothing I could do, but within a few days it was gone. Funny thing was that I wasn't even in love with $PREVIOUS_EMPLOYER myself at the time[1], but the review was so out of order that it simply pissed me off. Your situation sounds quite different, with objective grounds for grievance, so I can certainly understand the frustration. [1] This is something of an understatement: I was by this point hugely disillusioned, but the review still offended my sense of fair play.
- Jach 8y agoWhat changes did you make to the hiring process to better filter such people out?
- bartread 8y agoEvery now and again you make a bad hire: even companies with the best hiring processes do. Hence the probation period, and letting this person go during that period. Not to say we didn't do a retro to see if there were improvements that could be made, but you're never going to be perfect at hiring. What you do need is robust processes, and the appropriate culture to support them, to deal with the situation quickly on the rare occasions when you do hire someone you shouldn't have. (Btw, bad hires are extremely costly, even at entry level, not just in terms of hiring costs or productivity, but in terms of the effect they have on people around them: they can be a serious morale drain and, whilst their departure often leads to a bump in morale, the effects can be quite long-lasting. A bad hire in a leadership role is positively dangerous, because you multiply all of the above - and actually it becomes likely you'll lose people who work for them - and on top of this you risk serious erosion of trust in those more senior leaders who hired the person in the first place, which leads to further problems with retention.)
- chongli 8y agoThis tells me that Glassdoor is completely untrustworthy, just like Yelp. I wish there was some sort of business model for an honest review site that protected against this sort of naked corruption. Does anyone have any ideas?
- mushufasa 8y agoI'm also interested in this question. Here's a half-idea for discussion purposes: Review sites must be free for readers and reviewers. So, the revenue either has to somehow come from 1. end-users indirectly (like how HackerNews helps YCombinator attract quality investments) 2. a group that has users' best interests at heart, as well as a financial incentive (google's personalization helps readers find relevant searches as well as helping advertisers target... maybe not a 100% perfect example but you get the idea) 3. a diverse array of paying customers such that no one interest overpowers the others. Any ideas in Glassdoor's context?
- chii 8y agoWhy must reviews be free? Tech magazines used to do reviews (of gadgets), and they ain't free to read? at least, not the trustworthy ones.
- mushufasa 8y agoAre you talking about print publications? As far as I know Consumer Reports is the only one that does this still. Consumer Reports is a nonprofit, and they're run like a media company. Their staff research and write the content, pretty well! I don't think this would work for user-generated content -- who would pay to be able to write an anonymous review? I do think user-generated content is necessary for job reviews; you can't buy the experience of being an employee off the shelf and subject it to objective tests, like with technology products.
- chii 8y agoIt doesn't have to be paid to write - but you have to pay to view the reviews just like you'd have to pay to read a magazine.
- renlo 8y agoI wrote a Glassdoor review where I stated that the company had asked us to write positive reviews. I wrote this review a year or so after we were asked to put up the positive reviews. Someone who worked at the company wrote a counterfactual response to my review that it had never happened; we were never asked to leave positive reviews according to this person. It did happen though. I wonder if the person was a new-hire who wasn't aware or if they were being intentionally misleading. There's no recourse to leave a response to the Company's response, so they got the last word in the matter. It's always kind of bothered me that they got to set the facts like that.
- willart4food 8y agoThe YELP business model!