4 ms·
This is making that company not look very good, is it?!
by f1shy 2y ago
This is making that company not look very good, is it?!
- grajaganDev 2y agoIt is not making that company look very good. Enticing job seekers to waste their very precious time is not ethical. Edit: fix double negative.
- b112 2y agoJust an FYI.. the double negative means you said it makes the company look good. (I don't think you intended that)
- grajaganDev 2y agoThank you - fixed it.
- duxup 2y agoDoesn't hurt them either I don't think. Nobody knows. It sucks because the whole job hunting system is borked.
- chgs 2y agoIf 500 people apply for a fake job and don’t get to an interview or personal response stage, then when they need a real job filling they’ve already wiped out a lot of applicants who won’t bother applying next time.
- PittleyDunkin 2y ago> Doesn't hurt them either I don't think. Well those are 3000 resumes that won't be resubmitted when you actually want to hire. Many of those resumes will belong to people who since found work. Weeding through that would be a nightmare, so you'd have to toss it and write it off as a loss. Or you could just post jobs when you're actually interested in hiring and turn it off when you have enough applications to process. Super interested candidates can always cold email.
- duxup 2y agoThey don't care about those 3k and they could reach out. And maybe next round they do apply again. I sure don't remember when I last was applying who I applied for except some big names that ... yeah I'd submit it again if I was looking. I don't like the system, but I don't think they're hurt by it.
- chgs 2y agoAwful company. They could post “here are our standard job roles, we aren’t actively hiring but if you’re the perfect match please tell us why”, which warns the prospective applicant.
- fullshark 2y agoWhat do you mean? They have open roles so they must be growing? Seems like a good investment.