←back to thread

Fake job seekers are flooding US companies that are hiring for remote positions

(www.cnbc.com)
182 points arizen | 4 comments | 09 Apr 25 12:39 UTC | HN request time: 0.609s | source
Show context
specialp ◴[09 Apr 25 13:31 UTC] No.43631863[source]▶
Another remote employment fraud that is much more prevalent is "Overemployment". You will get an applicant that is very skilled and hits the interview out of the park. But then when hired they are working many jobs and just trying to steal as many paychecks as they can until you fire them. They keep their first jobs resume clean and they all check out.

There is a Reddit community with over 400k members to show how prevalent this is [1]. There's lots of tactics like not allowing mentions on LinkedIn so they can't be publicly mentioned and seen by other unsuspecting employers, and just maintaining plausible deniability about why they can't make an on camera meeting. It is technically not illegal so it is very lucrative and hard to detect.

https://www.reddit.com/r/overemployed/top/

replies(17): >>43632025 #>>43632074 #>>43632113 #>>43632149 #>>43632180 #>>43632224 #>>43632228 #>>43632262 #>>43632350 #>>43632412 #>>43632465 #>>43633817 #>>43634550 #>>43634671 #>>43635126 #>>43638484 #>>43639175 #
SkyeCA ◴[09 Apr 25 13:57 UTC] No.43632180[source]▶
I have approximately zero sympathy for companies in this situation. They've done everything possible to quash worker's rights, collude on wages, and commit billions in wage theft against the very poorest of workers.

As they say, "Turnabout is fair play".

replies(5): >>43632380 #>>43633247 #>>43633614 #>>43633771 #>>43635896 #
throwaway647837 ◴[09 Apr 25 15:30 UTC] No.43633247[source]▶
You should have some sympathy for the person who got robbed out of a job because someone else just wanted to make even more money. Companies aren't the main victims of the overemployed.
replies(2): >>43634677 #>>43634824 #
1. vkou ◴[09 Apr 25 17:30 UTC] No.43634824[source]▶
You're not entitled to a job. If someone else is working two, nobody's 'robbing' you.

If you think you are, I'll counterpoint it by insisting that I'm entitled to a house. Why should someone else have two, or more, or two hundred, when I don't even have one? Some landlord hoarding of them is, after all, robbing me.

replies(3): >>43634959 #>>43635204 #>>43635483 #
2. Rumudiez ◴[09 Apr 25 17:42 UTC] No.43634959[source]▶
People are actually entitled to fair access to food, water and shelter. And yes, landlords (both individual and corporate) are robbing people of the opportunity to own property and establish long term communities
3. bcrosby95 ◴[09 Apr 25 18:01 UTC] No.43635204[source]▶
That's all fine and good until enough people are jobless and homeless and they come to take all our heads. And I wouldn't even blame 'em for it. If one side of the agreement won't uphold the social contract, it breaks down, and "survival of the fittest" is an ugly world most of us have never had to experience.
4. antifa ◴[09 Apr 25 18:20 UTC] No.43635483[source]▶
I'm entitled to a house. Why should someone else have two, or more, or two hundred, when I don't even have one? Some landlord hoarding of them is, after all, robbing me.

You are entitled to a place to live, and the option of choosing it to specifically be a somewhat normal house in your general area, and landlords actually are robbing a huge portion of the population from their right to own a home. The average age of a first time home owner is rising and it's not rising consensually. The US has been tilting away from the rational middle ground between "no landlords" and "landlords own everything" over the last few decades.