Either companies shouldn't be required to post publicly with the intent of hiring internally or an employee getting a referral kickback, or something needs to be figured out where the applicants aren't taken advantage of.
The federal government can (and routinely does) ask mid-sized to large companies for records of their job applicants to "prove" they are not discriminating against protected categories (women, minorities, the disabled, etc).
So if the CEO/hiring exec wants to hire his good old boy friend to a position no matter what the job will still be posted and applicants will be collected even if they have no chance of being hired.
Obviously I have no data on how prevalent this practice is but I've witnessed it firsthand, so it happens.
But, my understanding is that you are allowed to scrape sites as long as you don't impact their ability to deliver the site to other users. In other words, don't DDoS them. Sites tried to ban scraping but last I remember seeing it was not enforceable unless it was done at high rates or maliciously.
As for content, certain things like recipes aren't protected content because they are "listings of ingredients". I can imagine a job opening / title might follow that same logic, maybe the job requirements and benefits as well.
What is protected is the way it's presented and organized. So if you have the same jobs with the same filters and same layout you might be exposing yourself to trouble. You have to make changes in the way it's presented, which for copyright law is changing 50% or more.
So if you're scraping a job site and only showing remote jobs or jobs in a certain skill set, or you're showing the job along with some stats about the company you're probably in a safe spot. But again, if you want to make a business out of it it's probably good to talk to a lawyer first.
It would be easier for them to provide an RSS feed or a free API if they wanted to share their data.
The market doesn't work because its unbalanced. For example on a dating site where women do not reach out to men, the women will complain about the low quality, and the men has to mass message. Leading to very few matches.
It the employer would however actively search for candidates the market would be more balanced, and lead to more matches.
The problem is that instead of looking themselves, employers use recruiters. What if there would be recruiters in the dating market. That wouldn't work at all. You would tell the recruiter that you want someone that is intelligent and kind. But you still dont get any matches. Because you dont know what you want until you see it.
Im thinking of like an expo where workers show their skills and portfolios and the employees show what they are working on and the problems they are solving.
Remember: If they are able to hire you without a recruiter they save a LOT of money, so they WANT you to apply directly.
Btw: The problematic mass-appliers I was refering to are the ones that apply to every damn job on the entire website. Yes, we have those. No, I don't understand their motives either. The only thing they achieve is work for the job site and the HR department, ultimately resulting in the usage of automated pre-filtering that also harms actual applicants.
Like you could configure a few different resumes (Front-end heavy, Python focused, large company, small company) and apply to a buttload of jobs.
There are N amount of job postings, but recruiters and other "middle-men" have made it so that there are N * X * Y places a candidate has to apply to.
Where X are the amount of recruiters and Y are the recruitment platforms/boards.
They literally take their clients' requirements, shuffle them around, repackage them, adding editorial fluff and then post them to Y amount of platforms. This is information warfare and we are losing the battle.
This is the net-consequence of all the "distributed" effects we've been wanting for years. Instead, there should be one database. Or at the very least an identifiable entity even if you want to repackage something. I.e. each one of these postings needs to have an agreed UID for employer, employer's job posting, recruiter, and the type of roles it applies to. We need more structure to the data, not less and more distribution across the greater internet.
That is why they don't like scrapers, because they lead to consolidation, aggregation or deduplication of data that has been needlessly duplicated in order to confuse and obfuscate.
On a side, tech-related note, this is the same reason why I hate microservices architectures: a good chunk of them distribute and duplicate pieces of data.
That said I wouldn't be surprised if you get declined if the company realizes you did so.
Stripping away the middleman's ability to manipulate the presentation of search results is the most attractive feature here, in my opinion.
It would be interesting to search for ads that were posted a long time ago and are still unfilled.
And it would be intersting to see how that add "posted 12 hours ago" is the same one that was posted 6 months ago and is currently being posted by 5 different recruiters with almost identical wording apart from their boilerplate.
And it would also be interesting to see the different salaries/ranges that are mentioned on different copies of the same ad. I've noticed different recruiters sometimes post the same ad, but with a different salary ceiling. Guess which number I'd like to have when negotiating... And if I see a job whose salary has been creeping up for a few months, that's an interesting trend too.
I spend more than 6 hours daily searching for, screening, verifying and filtering hundreds of remote jobs. So it can save you time, energy, and frustration – and hopefully, help you find a job faster
I'll check out this tool at least for the scrapping part.
I have the same issue at signup as the GP - I find myself rather unsure what categories make sense for me on your signup page.
Similar to the GP, a mixture of embedded, servers, and webdev, except I wouldn't say I do just industrial. Feel free to look at my LinkedIn profile (the link is in my HN profile) if you think it could give you some ideas for additional categories on your signup page.
Though I think that, on the face of it, completely leaves out my interest in compilers, programming languages and toolchains, and in kernels/devices/embedded systems, which are a big part of my work in practice.
Maybe the "System" in "System/Devops" covers that, but those two are a peculiar match: I've might quite a few devops workers who consider software development to be slightly outside their knowledge, and something like C or C++ programming to be "very advanced". I find it peculiar that anyone can do devops without being a competent programmer but hey, it takes all sorts!
I'm just wondering wether non-web dev jobs don't exist anymore or are just out of fashion/not mentioned that often