Can you perform a public service and track which companies reject/ghost the most applicants?
That way job seekers can save a lot of time by blacklisting those companies.
Because I'm hearing horror stories of people applying for hundreds of jobs and barely receiving any responses, much less rejection letters. Which should probably be an illegal practice for any tax ID holder that lists job openings publicly.
Its probably a good idea to standardize things for everyones benefit and thats where the protocol key word kicks in.
Tangentially on a personal note I find it offensive to use the word protocol when proposing a solution in the beginning at this early stage. My reservations extend all the way to MCP as well, glueing things together to make it work for your own use case isn't a worthy candidate to be a protocol. There is no mention of any committee members other than Recruitics which makes it hard to capture all the use cases, concerns, long term vision from different parties.
That way job seekers can save a lot of time by blacklisting those companies.
Because I'm hearing horror stories of people applying for hundreds of jobs and barely receiving any responses, much less rejection letters. Which should probably be an illegal practice for any tax ID holder that lists job openings publicly.
Tangentially on a personal note I find it offensive to use the word protocol when proposing a solution in the beginning at this early stage. My reservations extend all the way to MCP as well, glueing things together to make it work for your own use case isn't a worthy candidate to be a protocol. There is no mention of any committee members other than Recruitics which makes it hard to capture all the use cases, concerns, long term vision from different parties.
How does the recruiting industry see itself surviving if it is just going to turn into "AI said this guy"?