
Google Jobs Search - richardboegli
https://blog.google/products/search/connecting-more-americans-jobs/
======
sytelus
The Jobs problem is not search problem (i.e. it isn't difficult to discover
available jobs) but rather a trust problem. In this setting you have suppliers
and consumers with many to many relationship.

The good supplier doesn't want to spend their energy in reviewing vast
quantity of available consumers. At the same time good consumers don't want to
go after every available suppliers. There is also good likelyhood that bad
suppliers as well as bad consumers are trying to masquerade as good ones. This
is the same setting as dating website or Amazon product website. The solution
that humans seem to prefer is somehow build the trust model. In case of Amazon
product website, you look at reviews and ratings by others. In case of dating
website you look at characteristics that you have learned to trust such as
what's in the photos, what person is doing for living, what degrees do they
have and so on. In case of jobs, companies look at who is referring to who or
if you are already at other top company (which is the reason why most people
get jobs because of referrals, not by posting resumes). The trust model is
developed individually and can massively be different from person to person.

I'm in fact more certain that virtually all companies _ignore_ resumes posted
on their website and most interviews happen solely because recruiter actively
identified candidate from other similar company/university or referrals.
However this may be more true in skilled jobs.

~~~
65827
You're wrong because you can't even get to the "search problem", many of the
current popular job boards are such unusable garbage that it's effectively
impossible to wade through them and apply to jobs without inadvertently having
your data stolen or spyware installed, it's that terrible. Something like
monster.com or dice.com is more dangerous than the deep web at this point.

As much as I hate Google, someone has to come along and become the authority
to put these all in one place and hopefully drive all these terrible
sites/recruiters out of business.

~~~
jcranberry
Yes, it is a search problem, but in the sense of a matching problem or finding
maxima given a dataset. The parent commenter was illustrating the difference
between the problems of having a paucity of data (applicants) and assigning an
accurate value ("trust") to determine the data with the greatest value (most
qualified or desired applicants).

------
a5seo
I bet the founders of Indeed are glad they sold it when they did.

Any business that depends on putting their own search results inside of
Google's is going to be a target of "forward integration."

~~~
trca
Google has said numerous times they don't want to get involved in any further
steps of the job applicant process more than they are with this search tool.

~~~
shostack
Which makes sense, because this is the step in the funnel where they can make
the highest margins. There is incredibly strong user intent, and their
existing ads product can plug in nicely.

That combined means advertisers (read: companies trying to hire) could find a
lot of value in using this over other options, and that could mean a large
revenue opportunity for Google.

------
Futurebot
This factoid should not be uncritically repeated as this blog post does:

"At the same time, 46 percent of U.S. employers face talent shortages and have
issues filling open positions with the right candidate."

"Talk of a skills gap in the labor market is 'an incredible cop out'":

[http://www.businessinsider.com/no-skills-gap-in-labor-
market...](http://www.businessinsider.com/no-skills-gap-in-labor-market-as-
wages-staganant-2017-6)

Doubly so for technology:

[http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/opinion/contributors/2...](http://www.greenvilleonline.com/story/opinion/contributors/2016/02/08/there-
no-shortage-stem-workers/79871624/)

[https://medium.com/i-m-h-o/stem-still-no-
shortage-c6f6eed505...](https://medium.com/i-m-h-o/stem-still-no-
shortage-c6f6eed505c1)

~~~
pm90
> Doubly so for technology:

I think its very disingenuous to use the reputation of the article to also
push for a " no skills shortage in technology" view. The original article is
well researched and based on facts, whereas the blog posts you link are not.

~~~
Futurebot
Disagree that it's disingenuous. Let's try some more:

General: [https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/31/opinion/krugman-jobs-
and-...](https://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/31/opinion/krugman-jobs-and-skills-
and-zombies.html?_r=0)

[http://www.epi.org/publication/shortage-skilled-
workers/](http://www.epi.org/publication/shortage-skilled-workers/)

Tech: [https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-
myt...](https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-myth-of-
americas-tech-talent-shortage/275319/)

More tech: [http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/education/the-stem-
crisis-i...](http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/education/the-stem-crisis-is-a-
myth)

Manufacturing:
[https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/08/160815134829.h...](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/08/160815134829.htm)

------
naturalgradient
Not to be flippant, but ever since LinkedIn has become unbearably slow and
buggy to use (since the UI update), any pressure to improve is welcome.

~~~
clairity
this won't have any bearing on linkedin because they see themselves as a
(professional) social network, not a jobs site (even though recruiting is a
decent chunk of revenue).

jobs seem to be a natural extension of google's search service, and a direct
competitive response to indeed. these job search results will be useful to
people but i don't see it changing the industry. discovery is an important
step in getting a job but it's only one step.

(i say this as someone working on the matching problem between employers and
employees.)

~~~
indymike
80% of their revenue comes from selling recruiter accounts.

------
aphextron
This sounds amazing. I honestly think recruiters can be entirely replaced by a
decent A.I. and good scheduling software. And we would all be better off.

~~~
jnordwick
Noooo!! Recruiters are so useful. They do a lot of leg work for you. They have
access to many openings that aren't public. They can provide introductions to
people you've always wanted to speak to. And they can convince good companies
to create an opening for you if you would fit really well with the company.

I get to send my resume to a few recruiters and they call me with all the
openings that fit my skill set and i would be interested in. They make looking
for a new position so much easier. Often they work in teams so you get
multiple people doing this for you at the same time. Plus you build a
relationship with them, their team, and the company so you with them better
next time too.

They are invaluable.

I do have to say though that there is enormous variability in their skill. The
secret is to only work with a few that have access to different contacts and
that you trust. Don't spray your resume out there to bad recruiting companies.

I have noticed a difference between industries though. In my main industry
(finance and financial technology) recruiters tend to be very knowledgeable
and work very diligently to give you leads that fit your skills and
priorities. I've noticed that in other industries like web or internet start
up they can be atrocious. I get all sorts of random crap from them so you
probably need to be extra careful in certain industries.

But i would never give up my recruiters. They take a lot of pain out of me
trying to find a new position.

I have a lot of love for my recruiters. I wouldn't have nearly the career i do
now without them.

~~~
aphextron
You''re describing _good_ recruiters, which are rare and far between. The
majority is spam unfortunately. The problem I think is the incentive
structure. When you see human beings as nothing more than a commission, the
tactics get cutthroat.

~~~
jnordwick
I deal with more good recruiters than bad recruiters. I'm picky and the
industry might make a big difference.

I also spend the time to really talk to the recruiter the first couple times
so he knows a lot about me and what I'm looking for. And i don't feel he would
work out for me, i don't work with him.

I takes communication and i think part of the problem is on the job seekers
side. Too many are uncommunicative.

~~~
ryandrake
Any recommendations? The only recruiters I've ever interacted with are working
for or on behalf of employers. They're looking to fill their position and if
I'm not that person, I don't hear from them ever again. It would be awesome to
have someone always out there looking on my behalf. Does that kind of
recruiter even exist?

~~~
jnordwick
In-house recruiters are a lot different. I've met some very persistent ones
that even after you say not interested they keep calling you (I'm glad one did
because he broke me down and i finally interviewed and had great success at
the company).

To find new external recruiters i look at the job listings (Indeed, LinkedIn,
etc) and see if i notice the same recruiting firm listed at jobs i find
interesting. Then i get in touch with the recruiter directly and have a
discussion with him. So i kind of look for recruiters more than i look for
jobs.

------
k2xl
My initial reaction using Google Jobs search compared to LinkedIn:

\- Not enough jobs. LinkedIn seems to have more jobs posted for the things I
searched for. While many recruiters still post to Indeed, Glassdoor,
ZipRecruiter etc... The beef of postings, from my experience, is found on
LinkedIn. \- Not easy to apply. LinkedIn has the ability to more easily apply.
Yes, one could argue this is a bad thing (since companies get spammed with
candidates) but I think with AI a lot of bad candidates could get filtered out
more easily. \- No social network. Since so many professionals use LinkedIn,
it's easier to find people you know who work at a company you are applying
for.

I think this is a long, long way to beating LinkedIn for job search.

------
sna1l
I wonder if the end goal here is for Google to start selling "Promoted Jobs"
advertisements.

I'm also a little concerned if this gets popular that competitors jobs will
happen to be further down the list than they should be, but that's probably
just my paranoia.

~~~
mundo
I don't think you're being paranoid enough; the end goal here is for Google to
be the biggest and best source of every kind of information anyone would ever
want, ever.

~~~
halflings
Paranoid? That's the official company-wide mission/slogan:

"Google's mission is to organize the world's information and make it
universally accessible and useful."
[https://www.google.com/intl/en/about/](https://www.google.com/intl/en/about/)

Nothing wrong with that as far as I'm concerned.

~~~
kuschku
Nothing is wrong with a monopoly as long as it’s controlled democratically by
all who use it.

In the next years, either we’ll have to break Google up, ban them from the
European markets, or find a way for all citizen to have control over Google.
And if we end up with the German government straight up buying Google.

But a single person having control over a monopoly that becomes a necessity in
your life is becoming close to autocracy. It’s not that problematic yet, but
if Google actually takes over the employment market, self-driving cars, and
more (same with Amazon, if they actually manage to take over all Retail), then
there’s a massive issue.

Autocratic Corporations should never be allowed to hold any monopoly –
Cooperatives would be a better alternative for that.

~~~
throwanem
> a monopoly as long as it’s controlled democratically by all who use it

Another word for this arrangement is "government".

~~~
robotresearcher
That's a subset of possible governments.

~~~
throwanem
Sure. But in this context I was more interested in pointing out that that's a
kind of government, than in parsing differences between various such kinds.

------
GrumpyNl
Does Google have a deal with these companies? Will this be the start of the
end of all those job sites? is Google just testing the waters? So many
questions.

~~~
Consultant32452
"Hi, I noticed you have a job opening. Would you like me to fill that position
with a small python script?"

~Google AI

~~~
downrightmike
"Hey Google, what's happening? Aahh, now, are you going to go ahead and have
those TPS reports for us this afternoon?"
[http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0001873/quotes](http://www.imdb.com/character/ch0001873/quotes)

------
vinayan3
I tried out the example in the post and didn't get any of the contextualized
information. Guess it isn't rolled out to everyone yet or do you have to sign
up somewhere to see it?

~~~
guessmyname
I am not in the US but used a free VPN to search for "golang jobs" [1]

Once you click one of those postings you get a screen like this [2]

However, be aware of the date filter because the posts listed here are older
than what Google says. Many, if not all, of the posts scrapped from
remoteok.io are several months old, even years, so the "x days ago" that
Google shows is just the time when the post was indexed rather than the time
the post was created. So you are still prone to see useless posts.

[1] [https://i.imgur.com/jMjoIso.png](https://i.imgur.com/jMjoIso.png)

[2] [https://i.imgur.com/zBIlxU1.png](https://i.imgur.com/zBIlxU1.png)

------
SEJeff
"Hi I'd like to connect with you on GoogleJobs"

~~~
vthallam
Gmail + Google Jobs could be probably their own career network.

~~~
komali2
Probably. If I was monster/linkedin I'd get chills on reading this news.
Luckily the google employees interviewed were saying things along the lines of
"we just want to make it easier for people to find jobs on these providers,
not replace the providers."

CEO of Monster said basically the same thing - I can't find the quote on
mobile, but essentially "This fits with our goal, which is for candidates to
find a good fit. This will be difficult times, however, for jobs sites that
depend on SEO."

EDIT: found the article [https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/20/google-launches-
its-ai-pow...](https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/20/google-launches-its-ai-
powered-jobs-search-engine/)

~~~
skinnymuch
Is Monster still big? I thought it "lost" compared to Indeed, Career Builder
and to a certain extent, LinkedIn. Vs 10 years ago, Monster was the site.

~~~
komali2
Dunno, but I get the best "passive" response rate from recruiters on Monster -
i.e., out of the blue calls increased by a huge margin when I put my resume on
it.

------
blairanderson
OK google, now find me an employer that wants to pay more...

Kudos to google, hopefully this helps majority of America find jerbs.

most hackernews readers think this is stupid because our industry has
different problems. Our jobs problem is: \- "employers often lie because they
want to pay less than a typical employee is worth"

but also at the same time:

\- "applicants often lie about their experiences and such"

So there are 4 quadrants: honest/dishonest applicants and honest/dishonest
employers and where they overlap is small.

Niche job boards FTW

------
setq
Not sure I like this. The reason I tend to use external job sites is that they
don't know who I am so I don't have to spend three weeks beating off
recruiters with a shitty stick. Google knows who I am.

~~~
eliben
Not every person looking for a job has to "beat off recruiters" \- some folks
would be happy to hear from _any_ recruiter, I imagine

~~~
kzisme
When I hear these sorts of comments I'm always curious how long these people
have been working. It obviously isn't everyone receiving cold calls and such,
so what sets them apart?

~~~
komali2
Even as a software engineer, I love hearing from recruiters. Sometimes I get a
call a day. Great.

The more opportunities = the more likelihood for a great opportunity. I'm
always polite, tell them I'm not looking now, send me the job description and
I'll forward it to my friends who are, reply to their email and tell them it's
my preferred method of communicating.

Lets me build up a nice fat folder in Inbox of "jobs", filled daily by
recruiters. I can skim it, see none of the companies I'm interested in, and
click "done" on the whole folder. Takes a couple seconds, no skin off my
bones, and the last time I was job hunting it meant my search took about a
month to find something that really is a perfect fit.

So, why not spend a couple minutes a day dealing with recruiters?

~~~
ryandrake
This is my attitude as well. There is no down side to politely replying to
recruiters, even if the role they have for you is not interesting. The best
that can happen is that slim chance you'll find your dream job. The worst? I
dunno--the recruiter doesn't get back to you?

------
wonderous
No thanks, Google already has its fingers in too many pots.

My guess is this is a response to Microsoft buying LinkedIn.

~~~
jhall1468
Or, you know, a natural progression for a company whose sole goal is to help
you find whatever it is you are looking for.

~~~
JorgeGT
> goal is to help you find whatever it is you are looking for.

Oh, I thought the goal was to obtain incredibly detailed consumer profiles by
offering to search whatever it is you are looking for, and then sell targeted
ads based on those profiles, in order to obtain monetary profit.

~~~
komali2
>[https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/20/google-launches-its-ai-
pow...](https://techcrunch.com/2017/06/20/google-launches-its-ai-powered-jobs-
search-engine/)

In the techrunch article, the interviewed employee says they won't be using
prior knowledge to drive jobs search results. Sure, ads may become more
targeted, but this isn't your typical "users also bought..." type deal.

------
kylestlb
Aggregating the glassdoor/indeed/etc scores at the bottom of the posting is a
nice little feature. Excited to see this grow.

------
jorgemf
This reminds me the time google launched google maps in mobile. Now all job
aggregators has suddenly decreased their value.

------
happy-go-lucky
> Connecting more Americans with jobs

Isn't that being "nationalistic"? Can't you be universal? Come on, Google!

~~~
dctoedt
Baby steps to prove the concept before scaling up — crawl before walking, walk
before running. Even for Google.

~~~
happy-go-lucky
You're right, but Google would be limping without non-Americans :)

~~~
iooi
Google gets half of its revenue from the US

[1] [https://www.recode.net/2017/4/29/15479932/alphabet-
revenue-g...](https://www.recode.net/2017/4/29/15479932/alphabet-revenue-
geography)

~~~
happy-go-lucky
Fine, can they leave out the other half?

~~~
soldierofhayley
Leave out from what?

------
dag11
I wonder how they dogfooded this. :-P

~~~
vitus
There were many internal memes.

"Hmm, not sure if Google is trying to tell me something..."

------
mxuribe
I wonder if this means that instead of applying across numerous - way too many
- career/job search sites (and filling in the same thing over and over
again)...that maybe I can just fill stuff out once, and be done...and let the
"machines" do the work for me? ;-)

------
swiley
These large companies can and do use lock-in with their tools to shape
people's lives the way they want. This is the extreme end of where Google
wants to be, I hope I'll never end up having to use any more of the things
they develop.

------
mcovey
I searched "jobs near me" in Firefox and saw nothing special. Apparently it
only works in Chrome based browsers.

Even if I paste the URL of the special jobs result page back into Firefox, I
get redirected back to a standard Google results page.

[https://www.google.com/search?q=jobs+near+me&ibp=htl;jobs](https://www.google.com/search?q=jobs+near+me&ibp=htl;jobs)

Edit: after running "forget about this site" in the history, it now works. I
guess some cookie or account setting was blocking it.

------
headmelted
When I read the opening paragraph I was sure this was going to be using Google
Lens with street view data to index offline jobs from window postings.

Honestly the wording makes me think it just wasn't ready in time for the
announcement, although I'm not sure how they'd have up-to-date data.

It's one of the few applications of AI over street view data that doesn't
utterly creep me out and actually seems quite useful.

------
steveadoo
Off topic - but I haven't been able to right click text and bring up the
context menu on google's blog for a few months now..

------
sergiotapia
What is the URL for Google Jobs Search? You'd think they'd put the URL front
and center...

~~~
guessmyname
This is the URL [1] where FOOBAR is whatever job you want.

You will have to be _IN_ the US, near, or using a VPN routing through the US
to see the new feature, otherwise you will get the same old results that you
have been getting so far. Notice that if you are going to use a VPN you MUST
NOT be logged into your Google account, otherwise the search engine will
ignore your request because it will detect that your account is not from the
countries selected for this release.

[https://www.google.com/search?q=FOOBAR+jobs](https://www.google.com/search?q=FOOBAR+jobs)

------
selllikesybok
The interface needs a lot of work. It's feels not just mobile first, but
mobile only.

Also, maybe I'm just not a typical user, but it would be nice to have some
better control over location, or at least indication of how close to the
target location each job is.

------
supremesaboteur
Is this the only major feature that has come out of Google search in the last
year ? Are they not focusing on search anymore ?

------
rbanffy
Am I the only one who noticed the vintage Macs that don't belong together the
second-gen iPad next to them?

------
throwasehasdwi
How long will it be until employers can look up all the information Google has
about me? More importantly, how long will it be until users will be expected
to give access to their "likes, skills, and interests" for targeted
recruiting? At least LinkedIn is easy enough to keep separate from the rest of
my life. Google knows everything about me.

~~~
euyyn
> How long will it be until employers can look up all the information Google
> has about me?

Why would that be necessary? Advertisers don't get any information at all
about you and it works.

------
frgtpsswrdlame
Google has so much information about me already, I'm not sure I actually want
to give them data about my employment as well.

~~~
s3r3nity
I empathize, but I'm pretty sure that Google already knows a bit about your
employment, and/or is doing really good modeling to figure it out
probabilistically. (Ex: if you make Google searches between 9-5 in a certain
location consistently, you most likely work there.)

~~~
frgtpsswrdlame
I'm not sure this is really a defense... I try and practice a certain level of
privacy (not enough) but I don't really like how much google is aggregating on
me. Just recently I had a problem with my car (Honda Civic) so I searched some
youtube videos on it and ended up ordering a part online, now my Google News
feed is showing me a whole bunch of articles for the Civic Type-R and asking
me if I'm interested in Honda. That's my mistake for being lax but I'm
starting to think that maybe we should reconsider our relationship with our
personal data. Google relies on individuals like me to make small slips which
permanently compromise our privacy.

------
horsecaptin
What about craigslist?

------
ruleabidinguser
is this for trump?

