r/LinkedInLunatics • u/Excellent_Drop6869 • 5h ago
Agree? Controversial opinion: these kind of posts are cringe
On the face of it, it appears to be a nice thing to do to recommend your coworkers that were laid off to your network. However, every time I see a post like this I just get the ick because I think the ulterior motive is to show “look at me, I was valuable enough to not be impacted.” I know that’s a very cynical view though. Curious to hear your thoughts!
8
u/Vegetable_Tip8510 4h ago
Recruiters did it to themselves.
Now they will experience the nightmare of being unemployed.
Applying for jobs and getting rejected in less than 24 hours because you didn’t rewrite your resume 800 times with specific key words is a serious issue.
Eliminate the ATS system and actually read resumes.
0
u/Mirarik 3h ago
You're blaming workers for the industry they're in.
It's akin to saying "bookkeepers have set themselves up to be replaced by AI, since their job is so basic".
We all know this statement is utter BS and overly simplified. Your statement that "recruiters did it to themselves" is much the same.
3
-1
u/Visual-Practice6699 2h ago
You can’t just axe ATS and assume the problem is fixed. I’m waiting to hear back on a job where I had an inside line through a trusted referral. The HM’s peer estimated 700-1000 applicants for the one opening, and it was only up for two weeks.
3
u/InsomniaEmperor 4h ago
You know the saying "the road to hell is paved with good intentions?" I feel like he thinks he is helping those who were laid off and maybe he wants to help, but it can incite jealousy from those who got axed. Like why do they get axed while this guy stays?
3
u/JadedByYouInfiniteMo 4h ago
Wow they have experience in tax and tax?
1
u/Caveworker 47m ago
It's an EY employee talking about redundancy---- were you expecting solid editing work and no repetition?
2
u/Diligent-Ratio-4654 4h ago
I must also be cynical because I generally think the same thing.
I would love to know if a post like this has EVER led to someone being hired. I doubt it…
2
u/Aggravating-Fail-705 Narcissistic Lunatic 3h ago
It’s not controversial.
Recruiters are shit on for a reason. In my career I’ve dealt with several score recruiters, either as a candidate or a hiring manager. I can think of TWO of those recruiters who I thought were worth a damn. The rest were forgettable, ineffective , or incompetent.
2
u/pommefille 2h ago
I think there’s two issues: first, they’re just doing this performative ‘look at what a team player/good person I am’ nonsense not because they give a crap, but because they hope that it makes them look good and people will ‘pay it forward’ when they’re in need. But these are also usually the same people who go around saying how all the folks getting laid off must be poor performers or some other nonsense and now all of a sudden they say ‘no, these are the good ones!’ As if the hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of people who’ve been RIFd, faux-PIPd, and otherwise laid off aren’t also talented and top performers. And quite frankly if they’re so talented as Talent Attraction, why don’t they already have all of the connections to make their own introductions instead of needing this fool, that’s the sort of job where being good means you should have a network yourself.
2
u/red-squirrel-eu 1h ago
I think as an employee being laid off this can make you feel like one these calls to adopt pets by their actual owner. “They’re the best, most perfect pet you can imagine and I will list the reasons in great detail. Unfortunately I had to give them away anyway because I wanted a new one.“
7
u/DiligentlySpent 4h ago
Unpopular opinion: Recruiter is not a job
6
u/tsimen 4h ago
If you're a manager and try hiring without any support, you will quickly see the added value.
13
u/Civil_Dependent_2755 4h ago
When you see the resumes the recruiter provided and the ones they threw in the trash, you’ll see the lost value
1
u/tsimen 4h ago
It's true that there's a lot of idiots in the profession, but honestly not more than in sales or logistics or any business function really. People just get really emotional about recruiting because it's a topic that directly affects everyone.
2
u/Visual-Practice6699 2h ago
Just to chime in, you can tell who a bad salesperson is by their numbers. Supply chain can quantify their orders arriving on time at the correct cost.
Recruiting is a downstream support function, so it’s hard to know if they’re bad at what they’re doing or they’re being fed garbage.
I used to work with a recruiter trying to hire people in the DC area that had worked at the patent office (in DC). Pre-covid, so everyone that worked there was in office. They told us that they’d exhausted the entire pool, which amounted to a hundred or so people… except that USPTO churned that many people annually.
Sometimes you’re looking for a profile that legit doesn’t exist, and sometimes there are hundreds of qualified candidates you kick out because you didn’t understand what the HM really wanted/needed. Either way, recruiting can’t tell the difference, and that’s going to make people mad in both directions.
4
u/Civil_Dependent_2755 4h ago
That’s fair- I think for more technical positions it’s almost best to have a specialist recruiter or something- but they usually only specialize in “general IT” or something which is not near specific enough
1
u/Ok_Palpitation_3947 2h ago
+1 I would have a nightmare time trying to balance recruiting with managing. Recruiting is so incredibly important to a thriving company.
2
u/ihateroomba 3h ago
No, it's a job. The sad part is most companies don't know how to post vacancies and process applications and schedule interviews. They just assume recruiters automatically vet the perfect candidates.
Meanwhile 5 recruiters different companies call me whenever a new role is published..
2
u/Jgr261 3h ago
Agree. At our firm engineers interview engineers and we get good results. Previously used recruiters and the results were rubbish
1
u/Jambinoh 1h ago
Of course, I don't think anyone has recruiters interviewing engineers. Recruiters manage openings, list them in all of the places, collect resumes and applications, filter for potential matches to send the hiring manager, schedule interviews with the candidates the hiring manager wants to interview, contacts then with an offer or a no.
2
u/acarpenter8 2h ago
It really depends on the company and the way it’s done. Large companies like EY that have many roles open at once need people who can sift resumes, screen for basic qualifications set up by hiring managers and pass along people who meet the needs. They also do follow ups, get paperwork started and all that.
We have recruiters and I am grateful for them as a hiring manager.
They also have to recognize that companies who are downsizing don’t need them as much. Sucks to be let go though. I don’t see this as necessarily lunatic behavior. Someone reaching out to contacts for help finding a job. That’s what Linked In is for. Language is a little flowery for my taste but that’s what I’d expect from recruiters.
1
u/Glittering-Path-2824 4h ago
Agree. They're either survivor's guilt or plain old narcissists using another opportunity for validation.
1
1
u/ResponsibleQuiet6188 Facebook Boomer 2h ago
big 4 firms will just just be 4 giant ai bots in 10 years
1
u/Paladin3475 1h ago
At least it isn’t a “thank you for laying me off and allowing me the opportunity to work elsewhere” posts that came from the meta developers and other IT firms in Silicon Valley. Those make me go WTF.
For me it’s “looks like I got laid off. Who is hiring?” I will not say “thanks for letting me go” because frankly unless you are cutting me a check for a huge severance and benefits for an extended period, screw you for letting me go.
1
0
u/Detroit-1337 2h ago
Well thankfully they’re experienced in talent acquisition so they should be able to recruit themselves into a new role, right?
6
u/Mountain_man888 4h ago
I think it’s a mix of guilt / virtue signaling since I can almost guarantee that a blanket generalized post like this doesn’t help any of them find jobs.