Anyone Else Concerned

[Tom Sawyer]

You're being defensive against an attack that doesn't exist.

Maybe you missed this?

Maybe they're doing what every other corporation does these days and lists shadow jobs to give investors the perception of growth when in reality 90% of the jobs are already occupied.

 

[Johnologue]

Do you really believe this? How can every other corporation justify the expense of a department designed solely for deception? It makes no sense (except to conspiracy theorists.)

I was replying to this. You can see what I was replying to in my post.

 

[Johnologue]

Or, let me put it this way: You seem concerned about "sides" here. Pro/anti-Slate.
My issue is that you said something nonsensical and were incredibly obnoxious when criticized.

If you care about making Slate look "good", don't represent them by dismissing real facts and acting like a troll. Or, if you're being insincere and trying to make Slate's supporters look "bad", you're doing an excellent job of it.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Or, let me put it this way: You seem concerned about "sides" here. Pro/anti-Slate.
My issue is that you said something nonsensical and were incredibly obnoxious when criticized.

If you care about making Slate look "good", don't represent them by dismissing real facts and acting like a troll. Or, if you're being insincere and trying to make Slate's supporters look "bad", you're doing an excellent job of it.

Okay, I think we're talking past one another at this point.

My initial reaction wasn't towards your comment but towards another post. You jumped in after that, seemingly defending the practice of fake job postings - something I find puzzling and non-productive for any company to engage in.

If you want to support and defend the practice, go right ahead.

In the end, I see no evidence that Slate is posting fake jobs. I see it as a baseless accusation.

There may be other companies doing it, but can you (or anyone) prove Slate is?

 

[beatle]

I'm not trying to bash Slate down, I'm rooting for them.

My signature speaks to how difficult it is to start a new EV company considering all the others who have tried and failed.

Having "I'll be impressed if Slate actually makes it to production... " in your signature sounds more like a troll than a perpetual "duh" observation about how it's hard to start a car company. Imagine if your boss walked around telling you, "I'll be impressed if you meet your deadline" at every encounter. That rings more like some kind of backhanded passive-aggressive motivation to me than real encouragement. I certainly wouldn't want to hear this from someone "rooting" for me.

 

[Johnologue]

If you want to support and defend the practice, go right ahead.

In the end, I see no evidence that Slate is posting fake jobs. I see it as a baseless accusation.

I wasn't defending ghost jobs, and pivoting to claim that was my position (even after calling the supposed accusation "cynical") is openly ridiculous.
I said they were real and provided an array of articles criticizing or warning against the practice.

If you are confused about anything I've said, you may reread my previous messages.
I will not be engaging further, as it's clear you will continue to engage in disingenuous argument tactics like this until you can "win".
(Fun fact: This forum has an "ignore" feature!)

If anyone else is confused about my position after subsequent replies by Tom, I'd be happy to clarify. I don't think I've left room for ambiguity.

 

[bloo]

I'll be happy if Slate actually makes it to production.

 

[Driven5]

1) Slate has job postings that don't seem to be closing.
2) This could mean multiple things on the bad-good spectrum.
3) Ghost jobs have become a common practice by existing corporate ('BS in BS postings') HR ('deception') departments.
4) This is one possible 'not good' explanation for (1) above.
5) It's also not likely in startups, like SLATE, vs larger corporations.
5) There is nothing controversial about any of this.

I'll be impressed if people actually reflect before they (over) react.

 

[Letas]

1) Slate has job postings that don't seem to be closing.
2) This could mean multiple things on the bad-good spectrum.
3) Ghost jobs have become a common practice by existing corporate ('BS in BS postings') HR ('deception') departments.
4) This is one possible 'not good' explanation for (1) above.
5) It's also not likely in startups, like SLATE, vs larger corporations.
5) There is nothing controversial about any of this.

I'll be impressed if people actually reflect before they (over) react.

Ghost jobs also become a thing in startups on accident, due to disorganization and lack of structure. Someone asks for a job posting, it gets approved, the requester leaves the company, it just remains open. VP that approved it leaves, new VP doesn't approve it, etc. Lots of ways it happens unintentionally.

And from a company standpoint, it makes sense to leave them open. Costs nothing, adds data collection. Just a fact of the current job market.

I agree it's not a big deal. Of the open listings, I only see 4/75 that are 30+ days old. Granted that could be some slightly dishonest reporting there (again, common practice, not a big deal), but really not concerning at all. If I posted a listing today for a senior role, likely requiring relocation (to a non-metro), I would 100% expect it to take at least a month to fill that role.

 

[cadblu]

And from a company standpoint, it makes sense to leave them open. Costs nothing, adds data collection. Just a fact of the current job market.

Slate is trying to ramp up and fill key positions at the Warsaw assembly site, with HR at corporate headquarters in Troy. From my experience, I'm sure most interviews are held remotely via Zoom calls, so location of the candidate doesn't present a problem...until it's time to meet in person and get hired. There are limited apartments available for rent in the local Warsaw community, so I'm not sure if this is a gating factor to fill posts. Many times, companies will post openings for more than one candidate in a challenging or high-profile position, both as a lead and an associate, to better accommodate the experience level of the talent pool that applies for the position. In itself, this is not ghosting or overstating the hiring plan. I see many openings on Linked In are for senior level, group leaders, managers, etc. which have a minimum of 8-12 years of directly related experience. Not everyone who applies is going to meet that threshold, but in a desperate need for boots on the ground, they would then have the option of hiring a lesser experienced candidate at lower pay with headroom to grow into the senior level.

 

[Letas]

Slate is trying to ramp up and fill key positions at the Warsaw assembly site, with HR at corporate headquarters in Troy. From my experience, I'm sure most interviews are held remotely via Zoom calls, so location of the candidate doesn't present a problem...until it's time to meet in person and get hired. There are limited apartments available for rent in the local Warsaw community, so I'm not sure if this is a gating factor to fill posts. Many times, companies will post openings for more than one candidate in a challenging or high-profile position, both as a lead and an associate, to better accommodate the experience level of the talent pool that applies for the position. In itself, this is not ghosting or overstating the hiring plan. I see many openings on Linked In are for senior level, group leaders, managers, etc. which have a minimum of 8-12 years of directly related experience. Not everyone who applies is going to meet that threshold, but in a desperate need for boots on the ground, they would then have the option of hiring a lesser experienced candidate at lower pay with headroom to grow into the senior level.

Yep, I was just saying the location is tough because it adds relocation and generally lengthens the hiring process in my experience. I'd assume everything is done remotely until final rounds/site visits, like you said. But it can take longer to offer with relocation assistance, because it is an additional cost to be approved/adds complexity (standard stipend, company sponsored?). Generally the offer-> acceptance period for relocations is longer as well, as people have to pick up their lives and move.



I don't think (just glancing) Slate's job board is any concern. My only question would be the big gap between positions posted 3 days or less ago, and 30+. Perhaps an EOY pause on postings just lapsed. But now we are getting way too into details about something that doesn't particularly matter.

 

[KevinRS]

My sister is in a management type position far removed from anything like Slate, but I do know that she has multiple times after applying for a job, and doing video interviews, travelled across the country for in person interviews, and not gotten the job. I'm assuming most places don't wait to do in person until they have a final candidate and just want to make sure they fit in person, but have multiple candidates travel for those in person interviews.

 

[Luxrage]

Do you really believe this? How can every other corporation justify the expense of a department designed solely for deception? It makes no sense (except to conspiracy theorists.)

I feel like I watched a Netflix show about that

 

[atx_ev]

Why the absolutely rancid attitude about this? Whatever.

Here. A job site, a mainstream news outlet, and Wikipedia with citations from several other mainstream news outlets. Business Insider, WSJ, Fox Business, Newsweek, Reuters, Financial Times, CNBC. The burden of proof is absolutely not on me to defend a claim made by this many mainstream sources. You can read those citation articles at your leisure while enjoying that popcorn of yours.

https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/news/ghost-job
https://www.npr.org/2025/11/02/nx-s...verywhere-heres-how-to-avoid-falling-for-them
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_job

Also it is literally HR that does it. It isnt anything nefarious. You have to keep a pipeline of candidates. It can take a month to get someone through the recruiting pipeline. If you let it go dry then you have 30 days to your first hire + 2 weeks for them to give notice. If you keep the pipeline going, you can start hiring at any time because you always have people ready to go.


we do this at my company, with the caveat if we found a true 1% er we would hire them regardless of "openings".