←back to thread

446 points Teever | 3 comments | | HN request time: 0.029s | source
Show context
LorenPechtel ◴[] No.45029568[source]
Only 17%??

Last time I was job hunting I found that 80%+ of postings were either dupes or bogus. Very vague description of the job? I'm going to keep seeing it for a long time, clearly they are not actually filling the role. Very specific, odd set of requirements, they're going through the motions but they've already picked the person and the ad is designed to match only that person.

I think they're going about this backwards. Leave the ad up, but they are required to amend it with external hire/internal hire/H-1B when the position is filled. Let people see what has happened in the past. And all jobs must be associated with some entity and indicate how long that entity has existed.

replies(4): >>45029638 #>>45030436 #>>45032384 #>>45039564 #
nickff ◴[] No.45029638[source]
Those 'one specific person' ads are usually there to comply with an internal requirement or external regulation/law, so they wouldn't be able to say that it was filled, because that would be an admission that the whole process was a sham.
replies(2): >>45029663 #>>45029688 #
LorenPechtel ◴[] No.45029688[source]
It would be filled, they would be required to say so. Yes, it's going to look bad, that's the point.
replies(1): >>45029732 #
nickff ◴[] No.45029732[source]
The requirement which is driving the posting is a requirement that they search for candidates other than the one specific person they have in mind. If they post it with 'already filled' in the posting, they would not be complying with the requirement. The requirement is usually driven by a law or some policy created outside the hiring process for that position, so the hiring manager(s) are not permitted to do what you suggest.
replies(3): >>45029798 #>>45029974 #>>45030013 #
em-bee ◴[] No.45029798{3}[source]
the suggestion is to change the law.
replies(1): >>45031226 #
philipallstar ◴[] No.45031226{4}[source]
Reducing regulations around H1B requirements (and fixing that by just reducing H1Bs) and internal hiring would be the way to solve it.
replies(1): >>45032399 #
1. TrousersHoisted ◴[] No.45032399{5}[source]
H1Bs aren't the only problem, though.
replies(2): >>45033232 #>>45037380 #
2. edoceo ◴[] No.45033232[source]
They (H1B) seem to the "low hanging fruit" many (not just in this thread) are pointing to. I spend time in hiring circles and I hear this sentiment frequently. And the Ghost Post issue too. I think Ghost is bigger issue than H1B. Don't have a good solution.
3. philipallstar ◴[] No.45037380[source]
They're enough, and they cause many other problems. If we limit ghost jobs to salary benchmarking then that's a massive reduction.