[dandare]

I am not sure if more regulation is a solution, but the lack of respect for job seekers is a real problem.

And not just with ghost jobs. My recent experience as a job seeker was harrowing - even with large, proud companies. I would pass multiple rounds of interviews with senior/director-level interviewers only to never hear back from the company - even after a direct request for an update or feedback. Just total ignorance. Again, this happened with a FAANG+ company.

[Jur]

In the Netherlands by law you have the right to retrieve any written internal correspondence regarding your interviews as to ascertain it was a fair decision and decision making process.

Side effect of this is also to keep any bias out of the equation and, being on the other side, easier to call out colleagues making inappropriate or downright discriminating comments (which in my experience unfortunately happens everywhere still)

[geraldwhen]

The unintended side effect of this is that HR coaches you to be as vague as possible in responses. I can’t give real feedback because some feedback may seem dissimilar to other feedback and look like discrimination if you blur your eyes.

So everyone gets the same form letter.

[lukan]

Isn't the side effect also giving incentive to those companies to just not be honest in internal communication? But do the real conversation via call or different channel?

[pjc50]

Unfortunately, many companies have chosen to comply with anti-discrimination laws by not giving any feedback. Nothing is less discriminatory than an empty string.

[hmmmhmmhm]

If you make such request, how can you enforce to get all of the comms? I'm curious, would some government institution step in and audit their mail servers, slack channels, google hangouts and all other channels to obtain all of the information?

[andy99]

If there is regulation, it should be about monopolies in general and not trying to micromanage hiring. Companies behave this way because they are in a position to do so. In a real competitive environment they wouldn’t. Poorly thought through band-aid rules don’t change that, in fact they would almost certainly favour the big monopolies with the worst hiring practices who have big HR departments that can handle and game compliance.

[LorenPechtel]

I don't think it's a non-competitive environment, but that the interests are out of alignment. The penalty for the manager who makes a bad hire is a lot worse than the manager who fails to make a hire.

And we also have the same problem that plagues modern life: the glut of choices leading people to think they can do better than they can. The pool is effectively infinite, there must be a better option somewhere. Companies don't hire. Dating has become very hard. Both lie behind very superficial screening gates that do not represent actual value.

[hexbin010]

> I am not sure if more regulation is a solution,

But if we do create more legislation, make sure it's regulatory capture in a weak disguise but celebrate it with lots of political spin!

[random9749832]

I got feedback from FAANG+ once after multiple rounds with director / manager etc.

I just got told I didn't seem "motivated" enough despite spending several rounds / days / hours interviewing and bunch of leetcode questions. Not even that I wasn't skilled or good enough or didn't pass the questions. Pretty sure the last guy just didn't like me for whatever reason.

[suyash]

Apple did that to me as well.

[another_twist]

Definitely one of the As in the FAANG. In fact both the As have terrible recruiting practices. One is a known ghoster and given that you were ghosted after a senior level meeting tells me which one.

[sparrish]

Care to share with the rest of the class?

[gedy]

Glassdoor pulled that crap with me ironically after a lot of interviews for a senior position that they reached out to me for.

[zwnow]

I wonder why people still apply to FAANG companies, there is nothing to be won by working for them. Your work has zero impact, you're actively paid to enshittify stuff over making it better, you have horrible bureaucracy within the company, they lay off thousands of people per year so your job never really is secure, all of FAANG is ethically corrupt beyond means. I'd never hire a FAANG employee to be honest, while working there your skill actively declines because all you really do there is play corporate charade and hope not being laid off.

[mckn1ght]

Aside from the fact that you have no real job security anywhere, people take FAANG jobs for money. Both the high pay at the company itself, and the idea that once FAANG is on your resume, it will command the best jobs afterwards too.

I think they have to pay that high because the work sucks so much in reality. That's the equilibrium point between the demand for people to work there, and the supply of people willing to put up with it.

[pjc50]

I was going to say "money" then post some links to example jobs .. but of course FAANG for US/CA jobs don't advertise salaries.

[sokoloff]

I can think of hundreds of thousands of reasons per year that people might seek employment at a FAANG company.

[Delphiza]

Money, mostly

[jamesnorden]

Money.

[integralid]

As a bright eyed young engineer I worked for a year in FAANG and loved it[1]. Free lunches, all that scale, opportunities to learn, kool-aid, and at that point i truly believed the company cared about making the world a better place [2]. So regarding:

>there is nothing to be won by working for them

As you can see above, not everyone sees it like that. And HR is working hard to pretend you're a big deal and not just a cog. People who read HN are a bit of a bubble in being disillusioned.

>I'd never hire a FAANG employee

Uhh, ok?

[1] but I had enough pride to quit after a year when they pulled off something I was not OK with.

[2] to be fair, I think at that time most employees did

[mixmastamyk]

“No one goes there anymore, it’s too crowded.”

[unmole]

This sounds like a cope.

[pydry]

>I am not sure if more regulation is a solution

Nothing else is going to fix this.

[DavidPiper]

I happen to agree with you, but it's also worth mentioning that solving whatever problem is creating the need to post ghost jobs in the first place would also make posting them unnecessary (presumably insecurity about the company's ability to assess, hire and retain high quality talent.)

But those are very hard, company-specific problems to solve, hence my agreement :-)

[hmmmhmmhm]

Maybe official 'name and blame' service where anybody could post their experience under their real name?