4 ms·
> A lot of resumes are not even for the job she posts. I don't see how this can be a problem. People do look for jobs by contacting companies. Isn't the goal o
by rewmie 3y ago
> A lot of resumes are not even for the job she posts.
I don't see how this can be a problem. People do look for jobs by contacting companies. Isn't the goal of a recruiter to check potential candidates?
> Bots and other 3rd party recruiters are also trying to game the system so they drown real candidates.
I fail to see how this problem is avoided by ignoring the company's inbox.
> When a resumes is from her link, there are high chances it's a real person who took the time to read the job description.
I don't but it. This does not pass the smell test, as screening does not depend on which input you use.
It sounds like someone is failing to meet their job requirements.
- solarmist 3y agoReally? You don’t see how a recruiter would miss things if there’s 100+ spam/totally unqualified resumes for every legitimate one?
- rewmie 3y ago> Really? You don’t see how a recruiter would miss things if there’s 100+ spam/totally unqualified resumes for every legitimate one? Your comment makes no sense. You're arguing that a recruiter should miss 100% of all contacts because otherwise they would miss things. It's like arguing to throw the baby out with the bath water because otherwise your recruiter would miss things like the soap.
- solarmist 3y agoWhere did I say everything? I didn't say that.