Got Ghosted names and shames companies that stop communicating | Hacker News Reader

Got Ghosted names and shames companies that stop communicating

gotghosted.fyi

65 pointsohjeez30 comments

This will end up biased by the largest employers. Kind of like crime maps--they make it seems like there's an extraordinary amount of crime concentrated in urban areas, but that is due (in part) because that's where a lot of people live. A small company might ghost 90% of applicants and have a low count of ghostings, whereas a large employer might ghost 2% of applicants and have a very large count of ghostings.

This website could be improved by recoding employers who did not ghost applicants.

So true. Another example: I would say I murder less than 1% of the people I meet, but do I meet a lot of people compared to the average person? Let's say we tallied up the total number of people I murdered this year and it came out to, I dunno, something in the neighborhood of 4. We can say it's no more than 4 just for argument's sake. That's 4 murders out of hundreds. Is that supposed to be bad?

What are the issues with using a field that has a "specific" normalized ghost rate with ghosting by 1,000 hires?

This is a really funny analogy, because crime maps within a city are very valuable.

https://x.com/gothamist/status/1816609920202019080

> Just 4% of New York City’s 120,000 blocks account for nearly all of the city’s shootings, according to the data.

just to add on, it is routine to hear crime statistics reported as "crime rates"

it's still true that crime rates might be higher when people are close to each other because "rural serial killers need comparatively a lot more travel time," but still, the idea of weighing crime statistics to make statistical sense of them is pretty well established.

Rank by ghost/headcount

Ha Ha, all maps are population maps

https://repository.hou.usra.edu/handle/20.500.11753/1254

It's probably easier to make a list of companies that don't ghost per company policy.

It would still be interesting to see how often those companies ghost.

But it's only interesting if it's recorded as a percentage of applicants, which this is not (and realistically can't be, because people don't go out of their way to report neutral or positive experiences on sites like this).

xkcd had something about heatmaps: https://xkcd.com/1138/

right, I don't see how this could be useful. Maybe if it could report how often people get ghosted? But that's going to have self selection bias

Useless list. This will be the 57th priority in the list of things that one would be worried when looking for a job.

i) If you are unemployed, you really don't have a choice.

ii) If you are talented and sought after, trust me you won't be ghosted.

Ghosting could be just one HR person or an orgs incompetency. To project that to your career prospects in that said company is completely irrational.

Not to mention without doing real statistical analysis, like total ghosts / total interviews by month.

Or how about gaming this list itself?

This list is for naive, populists who think that this matters.

>ii) If you are talented and sought after, trust me you won't be ghosted.

That assumes your talent actually gets through the automated HR filter after the recruiter has handed your over and collected their commission ...

If you are talented and known by enough hiring managers, trust me all filters will be lifted

So one vague, chimeric target and one numbers game are all a job seeker needs to bypass.

I haven't been ghosted much but I generally call companies before I apply for a job. It's a litmus test for me of how shit they are. No number to call or no person to talk to in person about the role then there is no point applying.

Try it sometime. Only apply to jobs you can jump on the blower and speak to someone about. Completely disregard employers and employment firms that don't have a point of contact that results in a person. They aren't worth your time. Also question the person if they will get back to you. Legit put the onus on the company to not ghost you. Call them back after your application has been in for say a week past deadline.

If the company your applying to can't handle all of that. Likelihood you will get ghosted during application is high. Not to mention their work environments probably toxic af if they can't manage to maintain basic manners and respect to their prospective employees.

Apply the same when pushing for contract jobs or work of any form. Set the standards you want.

Here, I found a more comprehensive list https://www.wsj.com/market-data/quotes/company-list

Perhaps I’m not plugged into etiquette but isn’t "ghosting" normal and standard procedure? I remember the first time I wasn’t "ghosted" (it was a FAANG) and I was totally shocked and was afraid the recruiter was going to get reprimanded.

That said, in retrospect perhaps it would be nice if fewer employers "ghosted" former prospective employees.

No. Ghosting is absolutely not normal behaviour once you have started any form of discussion. This isn't even a work thing. It's just common decency when you're engaging with other human beings to be polite and not waste their time. Doesn't anyone learn basic manners at school any more?

Part of the reason that recruitment has become such a toxic part of the industry is that so many people are just selfishly playing the game now. If that's their attitude to first contact then how awful are they going to be later if you do end up working together?

A little courtesy costs nothing and makes the world a nicer place for everyone.

Standard procedure? Maybe. Common? Definitely.

Normal? Absolutely not. It signals loud and wide that your time is not worth even a reply from the recruiter/HR and you are being treated as a disposable piece of crap. You can imagine how they would treat you if you actually got hired.

There is zero excuse for wasting the candidate's time like this. Even less today with all the "AI" automation the recruiting companies & HR uses - writing a form rejection e-mail is literally a one click affair.

Normal or standard aren't the right way to describe this kind of behavior.

Common? Yes. Professional? No. Courteous? Not at all.

The companies that get away with unprofessional or uncourteous behavior are typically the ones with lots of power in the job markets they operate in. That doesn't make this behavior acceptable any more than wage theft is, but it also doesn't notably harm these companies given the plentiful supply of candidates who are forced to put up with such behavior.

That doesn't make this behavior acceptable any more than wage theft is, but it also doesn't notably harm these companies given the plentiful supply of candidates who are forced to put up with such behavior.

* ...for now.

Generally you used to be able to count on at least a short polite rejection note if you've done at least a phone screen.

Most times I've applied anywhere they will at least send you a generic letter of rejection.

Ghosting is a legitimate way to deal with job candidates, as it is with potential romantic partners. The reason why is because crazies don't handle rejection very well, and you don't want to incur their wrath, both from a safety and a liability standpoint.

When I interviewed folks at a big tech company, I'd tell them after the interview if my review was going to be largely favorable and why. Definitely gave them feedback on what to improve and how to improve it.

Getting ghosted sucks. As being told why you didn't make it.

Most companies ban giving feedback for the simple fact that the hiring process is not objective and it’s super easy to accidentally incriminate yourself.

How old are we? This is the pettiest shit I've ever seen. Grow up.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com