←back to thread

391 points JSeymourATL | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
duxup ◴[] No.42136673[source]
>The trend could be due to the low marginal cost of posting additional job ads and to maintain a pipeline of talents. After adjusting for yearly trends, I find that ghost jobs can explain the recent disconnect in the Beveridge Curve in the past fifteen years. The results show that policy-makers should be aware of such a practice as it causes significant job fatigue and distorts market signals.

Very interesting.

I certainly have "gotten" what I thought was a ghost job. I went through the whole process ... they "wanted" to hire me. But didn't actually have a start date / couldn't actually hire me. For everyone involved though they seemed to be able to justify posting the job, interviews, because IMO, it made THEM look busy / effective.

The whole hiring people industrial complex seems oriented to be focused on the process of hiring (high fives for ever more complex hiring processes / delays) ... and not at all on the outcome (did we hire someone, were they good?).

It's the ultimate system where simply doing anything is "success" / and more processes rewarded, and there's almost no good measureless about outcomes for the company.

replies(5): >>42136736 #>>42136852 #>>42136874 #>>42137977 #>>42138597 #
charliebwrites ◴[] No.42136736[source]
> to maintain a pipeline of talents

See, this is the part I don’t understand.

If they don’t have real jobs available, what’s the point of building this “pipeline”?

Are they genuinely going to plan to use this pipeline for future roles? Because simply posting a real job in the future will still get 1000s of applications which builds _real_ pipeline

I don’t see recruiters going back through a bunch of old resumes to find “the one”. That’s not how that works and isn’t an efficient use of time

Seems like a bunch of busy work for nothing

replies(7): >>42136756 #>>42136764 #>>42136796 #>>42136876 #>>42136897 #>>42136921 #>>42137095 #
tossandthrow ◴[] No.42136796[source]
Also, you can't really use the pipeline a year after the fact.

It is super embarrassing when a company heavily delayed gets back on an application.

replies(2): >>42136895 #>>42138349 #
kazinator ◴[] No.42136895[source]
That's where the ghosting comes in. If you're always ghosting, then you always have recent people to get back to, not months old.

The pipeline isn't a lossless FIFO queue, in other words. People go in one end and are dropped out the other. In between are the recents you can call if a spot actually opens up.

replies(1): >>42137843 #
tossandthrow ◴[] No.42137843{3}[source]
Exactly, you don't build up a catalogue of people you can get back to.

Ie. this technique does not make sense - search for people on demand instead.

replies(2): >>42137958 #>>42138855 #
kazinator ◴[] No.42138855{4}[source]
Searching for people from scratch in reaction to a sudden demand will have much more latency than having someone you can pull from a recent roster of validated candidates.

It's exactly the same like how an integrated circuit can pull a sudden power demand from a capacitor placed next to it (often required by the datasheet), rather than from the power supply upstream, so there is no voltage sag affecting it and nearby components.

Or, in computing, prefetch and speculative execution, and such.

replies(1): >>42144661 #
1. tossandthrow ◴[] No.42144661{5}[source]
If you have a "sudden demand" demand I would say that you have other issues in your HR planning strategy.

You should not plan to do projects that require you to hire a special resource tomorrow.

And also: Having an open pipeline really does not hedge for that, and you open pipeline might not align with your sudden need.