Indeed, Glassdoor To Cut 1,300 Jobs in AI-Focused Consolidation (bloomberg.com) 26
Indeed and Glassdoor -- both owned by the Japanese group Recruit Holdings -- are cutting roughly 1,300 jobs as part of a broader move to combine operations and shift more focus toward AI. From a report: The cuts will mostly affect people in the US, especially within teams including research and development and people and sustainability, Recruit Holdings Chief Executive Officer Hisayuki "Deko" Idekoba said in a memo to employees. The company didn't give a specific reason for the cuts, but Idekoba said in his email that "AI is changing the world, and we must adapt by ensuring our product delivers truly great experiences."
Indeed? (Score:2)
Indeed, Glassdoor to show them the door.
Re: (Score:2)
Eh, they just needed some new customers (Score:5, Funny)
One way to get more people to look for a job is to fire them.
Re: (Score:2)
One way to get more people to look for a job is to fire them.
People looking for jobs are not their customers.
Companies trying to hire are their customers.
Firing people and increasing the number of unemployed makes it easier for hiring companies, so they will spend less money advertising openings on Indeed/Glassdoor.
Re: (Score:2)
[...] requires that everybody working in recruiting have a valid I-9.
Would you care to explain the leap in logic that you made when you decided that "everybody" included AI? Typically, everybody is defined as "every person". Are we already at the point where AI are persons? That would be news to me. And if they are "persons" and therefore require an I-9, could you explain why suddenly it's a non-human that can't have a valid I-9, rather than a non-person?
Re: (Score:1)
You're assigning agency to the AI. Parent is wondering why you're assigning agency to a non-human.
A human operates the AI.
Re: (Score:2)
Because I have seen agentic systems that don't use any kind of human to reject people
It doesn't need to. Still, its behavior is the responsibility of the people who deployed it.
If the AI makes racist decisions, then the people who deployed it are guilty of making racist decisions. The law does not preclude a tool making those decisions on behalf of a person.
Re: (Score:2)
Your computer, email app, pdf viewer, printer, scanner, and mobile phone, are all non-human and naturually can't have a valid I-9 ...therefore under federal law also cannot 'be used' to work in hiring or staffing? Is that your position here?
AI probably cannot legally make hiring decisions, but as a tool to process, summarize, grade,rank, or perform social media correlation or other pre-background-check type stuff ... it probably can be used by a human just like any other tool.
That said, It probably shouldn'
Re: (Score:2)
By this logic, Indeed and Glassdoor wouldn't be allowed to use *computers* for hiring and staffing. AI does not change this equation, it's just another kind of software that runs on computers. Despite the hype, it is no more replacing humans than "regular" software replaces humans.
No sane person would demand that staffing agencies decline to use computers.
AI isn't replacing people... (Score:1)
...they'll keep repeating.
Could be AI-related, could be routine cuts (Score:2)
We're cutting 1300 jobs because we're so awesome with these futuristic AI tools, they're no longer needed....we're
Re: (Score:1)
and please Wall Street
Glassdoor is privately owned.
What sounds more likely?
1) Literally every single announcement that jobs are being cut because work can be done by machines now is a falsehood to hide reduced profitability, or
2) That an advancement in technology has reduced the amount of labor required to do a job?
Here's the thing, how you use AI isn't representative of how businesses do.
We're not throwing shit into ChatGPT and hoping the output of a human comes out.
We have complex agentic systems with very high output
Re: (Score:2)
If you job could be replaced by a shell script, then I guess the job had a limited run length anyway.
This stinks more of tariff retaliation as the lost jobs were mainly in the US... any reason for that? The US has made doing business with them harder in a global economy.
Seems like this was always the way it was going to play out, US business move out of foreign nations and foreign nations move out of the US. I don't see it going any other way when there's added tax on trade, the simple thing is to not trade
will they be using indeed.com to look for new jobs (Score:3)
tremendous economic growth (Score:5, Insightful)
We off shore all our manufacturing jobs. We turn over all our service jobs to automated computer systems (AI or simple phone trees). Luckily we chased all the immigrants out, so there is plenty of agricultural work for people to do.
6 am to 4 pm in the fields and under the sun for $7.25 an hour. Seasonal full-time agricultural work doesn't get healthcare or dental benefits, so you're on your own there.
I wonder at what point people stop making excuses for the bourgeoisie. We saw Occupy Wall Street fizzle out almost immediately, a combination of poor organization and a lack of appetite from mainstream America. Guess if you already have a job, you're not interested in rocking the boat.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
in the fields and under the sun for $7.25 an hour.
The median wage in America for agricultural labor is $17 per hour.
$22 per hour in California.
The lowest is Georgia, at $11 per hour.
Bullshit (Score:4, Interesting)
I do think that the actual wages in the field are probably around 9 to $12 an hour. That's because the median monthly income in Mexico is floating around 1700 a month so you literally have to compete with living in Mexico now.
But that's $17 an hour median wage is definitely not the reality on the ground. Not with how much exploitation is going on. And especially not without using slave labor via the prison system.
Speaking of which the prison population in America has been going down every year since 2009. It's going to get real scary real soon. Because private prisons are going to want to keep their cash cows going and they're going to want to keep access to that sweet sweet slave labor.
Pretty soon jaywalking is going to have a 9 month sentence. Jokes aside if you're paying attention online you can already see cops hassling people they didn't use to, like regular white folk, because they're just aren't enough arrests to be made.
Re: (Score:2)
It's $17-$22 an hour here in California, it's tracked inflation pretty closely. And the pay depends on what you're doing, picking strawberries pays better than tomatoes or olives. Other jobs don't need much labor, like corn and soybeans, where mechanical harvesters are the norm.
But it's baffling to me why you think that employers would continue to pay those rates in the hypothetical scenario that a bunch of inexperienced Americans, many of them straight out of the service industry, started doing serious phy
1,300??? (Score:2)