The Week in Jobs: Texas Targets Ghost Jobs, AI Spying on Employees, & a Shrinking Workforce

Pete and Peter open with a story job seekers have been waiting years for: the Texas Attorney General is going after LinkedIn over ghost job postings, subpoenas included. Estimates put fake job postings at 20% to 33% of what's out there, and Texas now joins New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Kentucky, and California in taking legal aim at the practice. They also dig into an overlooked wrinkle: the federal government itself requires companies sponsoring H-1B visas to post jobs publicly even when a candidate is already chosen, and plenty of private employers quietly do the same thing. They cover what candidates can do to protect themselves from the fraud that follows fake postings, since handing over something like a Social Security number to the wrong company can cost real money.

From there, they discuss a Wall Street Journal story on employers hiring firms to research employees' online activity, including tools that claim up to 70% accuracy at unmasking anonymous profiles. Pete and Peter debate where legitimate screening ends and employers digging into private lives begins, and argue that most of it has no business being an employer's concern.

They also break down a second Wall Street Journal piece on how a shrinking labor force, with more workers projected to leave than enter over the next four years, could make AI's rise easier to absorb. Job openings and unemployed workers currently sit at close to a 1-to-1 ratio, and the economy has historically needed roughly 250,000 new jobs a month just to hold that balance. As the workforce shrinks, that number could approach zero, potentially shifting some leverage back toward workers even as AI adoption continues.

Layoffs this week: Verizon is closing 274 retail stores nationwide, and Volkswagen confirmed the largest layoff in automotive industry history. On a brighter note, weekly unemployment claims came in at 208,000, a historically low number.

4 Corner Resources' quarterly Employee Mindset Survey analysis is still underway. Pete and Peter will dedicate a full episode to those results soon. In the meantime, visit www.4cornerresources.com for hiring and job search resources.

Transcript

Fresh Job Market Headlines

Pete Newsome 0:00

Welcome back to the weekend jobs. Today is Friday, July 17th. Peter, this is an interesting week we've just gone through in the news.

Peter Porebski 0:08

Yeah, we've got uh we've got some some some good stuff to talk about. Uh some new uh some new studies that came out and some new articles.

Pete Newsome 0:15

So it is not the same story, different day.

Peter Porebski 0:18

I know we're we're actually gonna have some some fresh stuff to talk about.

Pete Newsome 0:22

Now, of course, it invariably there were still some big layoff announcements, lots of AI news, but that's just that's just the way it is now.

Peter Porebski 0:30

We just feel like that's par for the course at this point.

Pete Newsome 0:33

Yeah, we're not getting away from it.

Ghost Jobs And Texas Crackdown

Pete Newsome 0:35

But let's let's get this kicked off right away with a story that job seekers, anyone in the market right now, candidates, it's been driving them crazy. And now finally, someone is stepping up to do something about it. And we're talking about ghost jobs. This has been a growing problem for years, and now the Texas Attorney General is saying, enough's enough, putting a stop to it. What do you think about that?

Peter Porebski 1:01

Yeah, it's it's it's something that we've I know we've talked about a little bit, where you know, people job seekers have always felt like there's a lot of these fake jobs, and then LinkedIn has confirmed that there's lots of the jobs on there that are not necessarily real active um hiring. And it's it's really interesting to see the government actually take a step to try and prosecute this. Now, how they're going to prove that a job is not real versus that that's that's something that we're we've yet to see, but it's it's a step in the right direction, in my opinion, and it's something that's going to definitely affect how people, you know, people, uh, these hiring managers, what they think before they put their jobs online.

Pete Newsome 1:41

Yeah, I and this is a big problem. And we'll talk about the different facets of it because it's not just one thing, but there this isn't the first government uh entity to go after it. A number of state legislatures have already put some bills in place to prevent it. I think there's five of them. I I know New York has been aggressive with it, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, I think Kentucky as well. So uh, and then California, right? California, these are all states, of course, that are very pro-worker. Uh so no surprise there. But to see Texas step up, that's an interesting uh thing to see. And they're going after LinkedIn specifically. It looks like they're going to have subpoenas forthcoming, and they're gonna get it underneath what is actually going on here. So let's just talk about what a ghost job is first, right? It's it's a it's it's a blanket term for a fake job posting. So employer post a job opening for a position that's not really real, that they have no intention of hiring for. And we'll go through the reasons why as well. But what I find ironic here is the government itself, the federal government specifically, is one of the biggest offenders of this because they require their organizations, their agencies, or anyone who's using an H1, uh sponsoring an H1B visa holder to post jobs they have no intention of filling. So it is, there's some hypocrisy going on here.

Peter Porebski 3:10

Well, do you so I think, and from what I understand, the way that they're getting around that is that they, yes, they're posting jobs that they already have candidates for, but they intend to fill it just not from that posting. So I feel like that's gonna be a really interesting gray area where these companies are gonna claim, hey, we we intend to fill this, even if it's with an internal employee who we already have. We're we're posting it online. So while it may be a ghost job to a brand new LinkedIn employee, it is a real opening that that somebody will fill somewhere in that.

Pete Newsome 3:42

Someone's gonna fill it, but but as you just said, it's for all intents and purposes already been filled. So let's stick with the government for a second, then we'll talk about private companies that you just alluded to. If you're not familiar with uh how the H1B visa process works, it's very convoluted. We won't get into all the details, but one of the requirements is that you have to post your job. And it's so silly, it's so antiquated. Go figure with with the federal government. You have to post it in the newspaper, right? Like, is that is that even a thing anymore? Who is looking at one of the things that you're doing? Yeah, that's that's crazy, but that's one of the requirements. You have to post it in a number of different areas. And in almost every case, and the reason that that's why, I mean, the the the basis for it is solid. It's to see if there's a qualified American worker. That's that's what it's in it's intended to be, but it's not being used that way. We know the H1B visa program is being abused, has been for a long time, and they're trying to crack down on that too. But when these jobs are posted, in almost every case, the employer already has their H1B candidate lined up, and they are just going through the motions here with no intention of taking it seriously. Now, that is also a blanket statement that is not fair to everyone doing it and certainly doesn't apply in every case, but in the vast majority of time, that's exactly what's happening.

Peter Porebski 5:14

Yeah, yeah. The these the positions, like you said, they've they've already got a candidate, and so they're posting this just to check a box. And if you don't know that, if you're a an American job you know applicant, you're not and you don't know how the H1B process works. And as you've you've talked about, this is even some private companies do this when it's not necessarily H1B because they have internal processes. If you don't know that, they then this is the same as any other ghost job that's out there. That's just there's you apply to it, you go to a black hole, you never hear back.

Pete Newsome 5:45

Yeah, so that that's happening, right? So that's one thing, and they're not targeting those, of course, because they'll argue though those are legitimate. And again, it's a it's mandated by the federal government based on the way the program works today. But when private employers do it, they're they're just as guilty in a different way. They have an internal candidate, and for whatever reason, reasons that I do not understand,

H1B Postings And Internal Fills

Pete Newsome 6:10

if there's not a union situation involved, companies consciously decide, fully on their own accord, to have a requirement where they have to post a job publicly before they can hire someone for it. And like, what is that about? I mean, what that that serves that benefits no one. No one. It's just a waste of time uh for everyone involved, quite frankly.

Peter Porebski 6:35

Yeah, I mean, it's we've seen it with many clients many times, and I gotta think it starts from a from a good intention where they say, okay, we'll post a job so that it's fair and clear, and there nobody can accuse you know people of nepotism or or whatever that we're only going to find the most qualified. So I think that's maybe where it started, and then these it's snowballed through processes and HR and all these different departments to where, yeah, we've seen we have we have large Fortune 500 companies that they have every job has to be posted. And we know because we're recruiting, we're working with managers, they've got somebody in mind that they want to hire already. So why are they posting the job? I don't know.

Pete Newsome 7:13

It to me, it's it's it's akin to virtue signaling, right? Well, look, well, look how yeah, what a good job we're doing of trying to give everyone an opportunity when you're it's this isn't even a neutral thing, you're doing harm to people because they're spending time applying for a job that's already been filled, right? It's just a formality, it's a facade. And job seekers don't have that kind of time, they shouldn't be spending that kind of time, and it just contributes to the snowball effect of candidates feeling like they have to apply to every job because they assume many are fake. And so now the incidentally, those aren't even really what we're talking about with ghost jobs as far as what's being targeted. But what we've talked about so far is absolutely contributing to it.

Peter Porebski 7:59

Then there's positions open and close within you know a couple hours, and we've had kind times where we've talked to a manager directly, hey, sorry, HR has a process, we have to open it, so it's gonna open and we have the candidate, they're gonna get you know applied or submitted to the job, and it's gonna close out. And it's seems like it's just extra work, even for the internal team. So I don't I really I've never understood that.

Pete Newsome 8:23

The whole thing's disingenuous, right? We have to keep it open for three days just because some HR department put that in place, no one's thought to question it or change it, and they just continue to do it.

Data Harvesting And Hiring Fraud

Pete Newsome 8:35

Now, those wouldn't be considered the bad actors in this. There's a lot of nefarious actions going on with this too. And data mining is a big piece of this where companies are well, not data mining, but data gathering, yeah, gathering market intelligence, gathering candidate information. And that's before we even get into fraud.

unknown 8:56

Right?

Pete Newsome 8:56

There's a lot of fraud that's happening too as relate uh as it relates to ghost jobs. But the estimates we're seeing are what one out of three jobs are fake. That seems to be the generally accepted number right now.

Peter Porebski 9:08

Yeah, it's uh 20, 20 to 33 percent. So, I mean, best case scenario one in five, worst case one in three. So, yeah, the these candidates are, you know, if you're on, and this is LinkedIn, you know, we're talking about LinkedIn right now, um, because that's what they're going after, but it's it's all over the place. And it kind of catch 22, you know, it's it's a feedback loop where these candidates are realizing that oh, more and more of these jobs are fake, I have to apply to more and more, and then the recruiters complain, hey, everybody's just nobody's uh paying attention, they're one click applying, and it just keeps getting worse and worse because the candidates have to assume that one out of the three jobs they're applying to maybe aren't even real.

Pete Newsome 9:45

Yeah. And now that the government's involved, this is who else is gonna stop it? LinkedIn's not going to stop it. They're generate revenue traffic for them based on job postings. The employers, the bad actors, those who are doing this for nefarious reasons, they're certainly not going to stop it unless they're supposed to. And that's the problem, that's what bothers me the most from it is there's just hasn't been any accountability with this. And it makes the good actors suffer as a result because candidates have to spend time trying to figure out who they can trust. And there's no great way to know other than what I always recommend do some research. Don't blindly apply to a company uh who you've never heard of before. I mean, you can, but you probably should do some research first. See if they're legitimate, see how long their LinkedIn page has been active, see if they're active on LinkedIn. Is does it appear to be a shell of an organization? Look at their website, look at their online reviews, see if they have history. That that is a great way to protect yourself as a candidate. Because what happens in the case of these bad actors, they start asking for additional details. That's where the the fraud comes in. With you think you're getting hired for a job, you'll send over your social security number, you'll fill out your I-9 for pre-employment that's required, and you probably won't think about it. And there's a lot of there's a lot of money being lost by um innocent people here who are just trying to get a job. So it's it's a really ugly mess right now.

Peter Porebski 11:30

Well, you also alluded to it, you know, with the data brokering, like even companies that aren't necessarily committing fraud are taking your taking resumes, creating just large data sets and selling them to different job boards or mailing letters or whatnot. Um, and so best case scenario in that, you're just wasting time. And it's creating cynicism on the job seekers part where they then treat all employers as being bad. And the employers like, why, well, why is all why are all these candidates, you know, why do they have such a bad attitude about the job market nowadays? And it's it's just getting worse. And I've talked, I've talked to lots of candidates where they have felt like they're they're not getting their, you know, they're putting their resume in, they're not getting any feedback at all, and that they assume that all jobs are black holes, because while some of them legitimately are, candidates are now applying to everyone. Um, recruiters are getting overwhelmed. There, it's hard for them to, it's just all around bad, and there's so many different facets of it. Hopefully, this will at least start to chip away at it. But I think, I mean, it's gonna require a lot more than than than just targeting these kinds of ghost jobs because there's there's a lot of issues with the uh with the labor market and how jobs are posted right now.

Pete Newsome 12:47

It's it's a mess. So we're we're gonna be tracking this really closely uh in the months to come. And this is this is one instance where I'm behind the government on this. I hope the the Texas AG goes full force at this and can create real change as a result. I'm skeptical of that happening. I I won't hold my breath, but uh it's the right thing to do, and hopefully they can be successful with it. We're gonna see.

Peter Porebski 13:13

I'm hoping it's at least a deterrent. You know, well, maybe even if it's taking care of the low-hanging fruit, it's doing something. And so I'll I applaud them for at least trying.

Pete Newsome 13:22

Absolutely. So more to come on that for sure. This is gonna be interesting to see what happens.

AI Tools That Track Employees

Pete Newsome 13:27

Now, in we're picking on the employers today, and and and rightfully so in some cases. Anyone who's posting fake jobs deserves to get some heat uh and be exposed for it. But now there's a story in the Wall Street Journal a couple days ago that uh says that employers are now actively using AI to find out what their employees are doing online, you know, hiring companies to do research, seeing if they have different social media accounts. Now, it's one thing to do a screening for a job seeker, a candidate. You're thinking about hiring someone. We know there's a lot of fraud on the candidate side too. We've talked about that a lot recently. But what's your take on companies doing that for their current employees? I find this kind of bizarre.

Peter Porebski 14:17

Well, I mean, I'll say even for candidates, it's it is a little bit of a slippery slope. Like you have background checks, check for illegal things. Okay, I've got that. Um, and then you go take a step further. I'm I'm going to start looking for public-facing profiles and make sure that they're not, you know, putting their face out there saying things that are completely the opposite of the company's values, whatnot. But now we've got AI that's doing, that's effectively can scrape online and snoop into your past history as an employee or a potential employee. And I believe it's it's said that it can um this one tool can map up to 70% accuracy for uh anonymous online profiles, which that's a whole other scary thing. Like, why is uh why are they looking into anonymous online profiles as long as you're not doing anything legal, is really the employer's business. And we go down, you know, we go down this whole road. And I know that even outside of the labor market, that the big thing right now is uh you know flock cameras and the government spying on you. And so it's a big topic, and it seems like it's just tearing over now into the labor market.

Pete Newsome 15:24

Yeah, I mean, we we have Alexa listening to us, we have microphones everywhere, cameras everywhere, the flock cameras. I'm loving seeing the pushback on that. We don't want that to become too prevalent here for sure. But this is going into people's personal lives as an employer, and that's it's an really interesting and dangerous path to some degree, where how do you really draw that line and decide what's fair game and what isn't? And of course, I I have to laugh about this article because it specifically references OnlyFans profiles, right? So what do you do with that? Your employee has an OnlyFans profile? I I don't want to be the one having that conversation.

Peter Porebski 16:13

Exactly. It's yeah, it's funny because they they mention that, but then you know, they're talking about just in general online anonymous activity. And I can think of any number of websites or even just someone who plays video games, they might have anonymous profiles. So how how does it benefit an employer to have someone's uh Discord history and just and the things that they like their account that they've talked about? Maybe they're they're on Reddit talking about some random niche niche hobby, niche, not niche. Um it's it's interesting, um, and and frankly, it's scary because I know how I know you we've talked about this in the past about an employer, it's a it's a it's a transactional relationship. They pay you money to come do the job. So why is it any business of theirs what you do in your free time? As long as you're not hurting anyone, you're not doing anything illegal, they get there, it's all under the guise of like matching company uh you know values. I don't think it's any of it's it's any of the employer's business any more than you know it's any of the government's business, what you're you're walking around and you're having cameras watching you.

Pete Newsome 17:17

So yeah, I think you know where I land with this is if you and by the way, Peter, I love you. It's niche. It was always niche until TikTok and now everyone under 40 says niche. I can't, I can't, I can't buy into that. I can't call Twitter X, and I certainly am not going to say that. I agree, I agree.

Peter Porebski 17:36

Yeah, Twitter's Twitter forever. Sorry.

Pete Newsome 17:38

Sorry, you're the same thing, it's the same, it's the same thing. But uh we we had three new employees start this week internally, and during training, I spent some time with them, and I told them, look, I want to be really clear. I don't need you to agree with my politics, I don't need to agree with your politics. We are not in the political business, we're a staffing company. We talk about the job market, we work with candidates, we work with employers. No one needs our opinion on politics. That is not the role we play in the world, and so we are not going to take political stances as a staffing company. It's just not that's not our job. And so I see all I just don't understand why employers insist on that, because the one thing we know for sure is you are going to alienate half your audience if you do that. And why why businesses choose to do that is beyond me. I just don't get it.

Peter Porebski 18:39

Well, it seems like, at least in this case, I I haven't talked to anybody who's pro-surveillance.

Pete Newsome 18:45

So um no, but just in no in in in you know, it's this is where the slippery slope come comes in. And that's that's that's why I I went there, is because if you're gonna be digging into someone's personal life and personal profiles, you will see things that you wish you hadn't. And once you see those things, you can't ignore them. Um, and you will, whether you should or not, you'll form opinions on those employees. And if you are an organization who chooses to act on those things, I just I think you're creating a mess that that you otherwise don't need to.

Peter Porebski 19:17

Yeah, exactly. I I think it is it's none of their it's none of their business. Like I said, as long as it's not something that's illegal or harmful. So it's really just an area that is going to create biases and it's gonna invite. I mean, uh we'll see if it this going down the road invites uh, you know, lawsuits and and whatnot, because I can see a place where an employment decision is based on this, something that's not illegal, perfectly fine for somebody to do, and an employer gets in trouble because they're making, you know, they're making decisions, or there's, you know, oh, did you see so-and-so's online profile that's not even necessarily directly tied to them? And I think it's gonna get it's gonna get messy. And I'm glad that I mean, from what I'm seeing online, that there's some pushback to this type of thing. So uh hopefully.

Pete Newsome 20:04

I will say that the caveat to to what I just said was I don't think employers should be doing that with their current employees, but if you are a job seeker, it's incumbent upon you to not portray yourself as someone who's really outlandish.

Peter Porebski 20:21

I'm not even talking about online profiles because obviously that's been sometimes like don't put anything that's directly online that you wouldn't you feel like people shouldn't know. I'm I'm just saying, like if you've got uh your video game handle or whatever, like that's none none of the employer's business. You're you know, it's not even directly tied to you. It's you're not doing anything wrong, but it's it's still people say, Oh, well, you have nothing to hide. I while that's uh you know correct, it's still I don't I still just don't it it's none of their business. So the the the the OnlyFans one though just makes it makes me laugh because I'm in no way involved in having to I have no opinion on that, but yeah, it's it's but if you but it's legal, it's there's it's not hurting anybody, so I you know Well, you could you could argue it it it it there there's some damage that's done from that, right? But yeah, but it is a that that's that's that gets into the moral uh you know thing, and that's not it does, but there's there are moral clauses in in employment agreements that that that have to be upheld.

Pete Newsome 21:24

And um, I I I could probably argue either side of this, depending on the position the person was in. If you're representing your organization, you know, take a sales job for for example, right? You're representing your your organization publicly, you're not operating behind the scenes, you're customer facing. Um, and if you have this double life that's out there publicly, I don't know. It's it it it's it's I'm knocking on my desk here. I don't want to have to deal with that. Um, and so as an employer, I'm not going to to I don't think it's a good idea to start. Start looking for problems that don't otherwise exist. If it's presented to you and you're faced with having to deal with it, that's different. But just hiring companies to go and dig up dirt on your employees. I I think that's wild. Uh I don't like that. It is.

Peter Porebski 22:15

And uh it's funny because so I'll uh I have a friend who he's got a just an amateur YouTube channel and he um he reviews like antique firearms, so just World War II guns and stuff, and he gets them, he he refinishes and shoots himself. So assume that that's not it's not tied to his name, it's his it's just a YouTube channel, he's not doing anything illegal, it's not even anything really that would you know come up for me. It's it's just an interesting conversation point. If he was to apply for a job and say the company is uh vehemently against firearms or something, that's coming up, that he's not doing anything wrong, he's not doing anything that most people would consider to be even an uh be a non-issue. That's something that I can see like that's a slippery slope. Things like that well where people can say, okay, you know, OnlyFans is is a little bit more of a hot button issue, but I can see it going into like a lot more grayscale, a lot more nuanced areas.

Pete Newsome 23:09

Yeah, that that's a great example to use, right? Quite literally, in every sense, protected, you know. Um, and yet we know that there are a lot of people who are absolutely opposed to that, and they would have issue. And the problem is, even though that is not something legally you have any basis for acting on, a lot of hiring decisions aren't made based on legal requirements or based on uh the soft skills, right?

Peter Porebski 23:39

Coming back to a hiring manager who has a maybe they have a specific opinion about that and like it one way or another, that's going to color their perception of a person, just knowing a single hobby that they have.

Pete Newsome 23:50

Yeah, this is we could talk about this for hours, and the this is uh one of those things where I don't think there's one right answer or one size fits all answer. But again, I I I can clearly say don't go digging for things that aren't relevant to your business. That that just to me seems like a lose-lose situation all around. Because you're gonna find stuff whether you want to or not. Uh what happens what people do behind closed doors and keep privately. I don't necessarily want to know. Um, but there we are. AI is now being used to dig into employees and what they're doing privately online or what's not private. I guess if it's online, it's not private at all, right? That's I guess that's what, yeah.

Peter Porebski 24:36

So we're we're it's we're in the arms race of now, now like you know, browsers are having like built-in VPNs and all these things. So, but yeah, as AI becomes more and more um uh stronger for for lack of a better word, in its in its abilities to do these things, things that were completely hidden from humans that they're just going to infiltrate at different areas of the job market. And background checks and and you know, personality checks and whatnot are no different.

AI As A Labor Shortage Fix

Pete Newsome 25:04

Now, let's let's continue to talk about AI uh from the next story. We'll move on from this one, also from the Wall Street Journal. They they wrote an article this week about AI being able to help with the labor crisis. And this is really interesting to me because we think about labor and the job market, we we look for the the monthly jobs numbers that come out. And if we've added a lot of jobs, that's that's good. We celebrate that. And if we don't, we feel that that is indicative of the economy being weak. That's how it's historically worked. But the labor market is changing because it's shrinking. We are going to see in the next four years more people exiting, more people exiting the labor market than there are entering. And in certain professions, that's already been happening. And that creates an equally big challenge and problem for the labor market. So AI, we talk about job displacement constantly, the concern over that, but in a way, we are going to have less people. So it's necessary for AI to pick up the slack, for lack of a better way to put it.

Peter Porebski 26:17

It's it is, and it's, you know, if you say that there's going to be a certain number of less people, and well, we can use AI to supplement those people so we could do the same amount with the you know the lesser job market, it is definitely going to help employers. Um they're going to be able to hire for less positions. Something that I do wonder in this is is it is it going to be just something neutral to job seekers, or is it going to be, I mean, you could make the argument that, well, if without AI, job seekers would have more power and they would be able to demand higher wages. Whereas now you're saying, okay, AI is going to help lift that burden, help lift some of that burden, and employers are not going to necessarily have to, and are not going to have to pay their workers quite so much, maybe more because there is still going to be less people, but it's going to equalize that a little bit more. Do you think that's that's good, or do you think it's something that uh job seekers should worry about?

Pete Newsome 27:15

I I I always want to see balance in the job market. And even though a lot of people feel otherwise right now, if they're having trouble getting a job, uh, and as many are, long-term employment has increased significantly. That's not good to see. Um, and there's so many factors that go into this right now, but but we do have balance right now. It is almost an exact one-to-one ratio between the number of open jobs and the number of people who are unemployed and looking, right? So that that to me is healthy. We of course like unemployment to be as low as possible, but equal number of jobs, equal number of unemployed, that's good. What we're seeing uh in the in the not too distant future is going to be fewer workers, and that's going to create strain on employers, as you're saying. Employees will have more leverage, but that creates an unhealthy job market in a different way. Constant turnover, um, lots of up and downs. That that we saw that happen post-COVID, all that hiring that was done. And then we've seen a lot of big layoffs as a result of overhiring that that happened then. So I I think it's gonna be really interesting, and it does make me feel better about job displacement as it relates to AI, because the our workforce is shrinking. That's just a mathematical fact, and we are not going to need to create jobs in the same way we historically have, or we needed to see about over the past 20, 30 years, needed about 250,000 jobs to be added each month. We're soon going to need zero for that balance to remain. So it it could end up being a case where AI balances that out or may even swing things in the employees' favor, which is um which is gonna be really, really interesting to see how that plays out.

Peter Porebski 29:07

Yeah, I I can agree. Like I it shouldn't be too far because then you get you know, employees are a lot more mercurial where they're just jumping from job to job. There's because it's effectively whoever is going to be, it's strictly money, whoever's the highest, you know, highest bidder. Um I would like to see it maybe the the perfect job market to me is maybe a little bit more in the employee side, just because I I would like for any job seeker who wants employ employment and is capable of getting employment to be able to find a job. And you know, I know right now it's with we've talked about busy fake jobs and all these other issues, it doesn't seem like that's necessarily the case with a lot of candidates where they're they seem to not be able to find work, and we can make the argument that that's just because of how the job market is set up right now. It's just a confusing you know labyrinth for these people. But um, I I hope that in the future the employees are able or have a little bit more power than they do right now.

Pete Newsome 30:06

Yeah,

Return To Office And Worker Leverage

Pete Newsome 30:07

I saw a meme uh earlier this week that was basically saying post-COVID, or during COVID, everyone work at home. It's great. Then the next year, employees are just as productive at home. This is working phenomenally well, then it was hey, we we need to have more team collaboration. Come in the office one day a week. Let's have a hybrid environment. Now come in three days a week, and then inevitably come in. You know, we're full, fully back to the office, return to office.

Peter Porebski 30:39

Yep.

Pete Newsome 30:40

That's happened, and and it is continuing to happen. There's a story almost every week about a another company, a large company enforcing that and making their their team come back in. Employees really don't like that. That's what I've noticed online. And so when we talk about people having a difficult time finding jobs, I can't help but wonder and want to hear your take on this. It's how many are just ruling out going into the office, and that is a and as a result of that, limiting their chances, limiting their opportunities.

Peter Porebski 31:14

I'm sure that there's some there is some of that. Um we know there's a lot of people who you know who've dispersed outside of maybe city centers, um, and that during COVID and they had to, you know, the company cart calls an RTO and they have to either quit or move back within the area. Um, I think that's definitely the case. I think it's generally a hybrid type work environment is the best, and allowing people to you know spread out, particularly in the US, we have lots of land. Having everybody condensed into one little area you know increases traffic, all that stuff. That's uh that's that's bad. But I think that um employees right now, job seekers, they feel like that maybe they don't have as much power. Um, so that they're I don't know that they're necessarily ruling it out as much as they just feel like their choices are not great and not something that they would, you know, you know, want. So that flexibility, I think that uh we want to we would like to get back to that level. I do uh do you think that from what you're seeing, do you think that these people are strictly ruling out every single RTO? I mean, if a person's desperate enough, they're going to take you know a full-time in the office job.

Pete Newsome 32:29

I just think that's but that's a bad scenario too, right? You just the way you described it. If you're desperate, if you take something because you're desperate, that's not a good thing. We we never want to see candidates settling, taking a job because they don't have anything else, knowing that they're going to keep looking, you you don't want to start a new job with one foot out the door already. And so I I I know that that's happening, and and and rightfully so. You can't blame anyone for doing that, but um I it it all comes down to supply and demand. And and if the the demand for what you want to do, being fully virtual, the way you want to do it, isn't there, you're gonna have to figure it out as a worker. So um it all depends on what you do, how marketable your skill set is, uh also something that is certainly not a one size fits all offer. Um, but what what I find most interesting about this story is in when you combine AI with the labor market trajectory, which is declining, it you can almost conclude that AI is coming at the at the best possible time for American workers.

Peter Porebski 33:41

Yeah, it should make that transition to whatever the next step is, the next stage is uh smoother, hopefully. Um that's the those are the the optimistic outviews, uh the viewpoints. Um people do say that, well, if if AI continues at the rate it's going, it's going to just keep displacing. I know we've talked about that ad nauseum. Um I want to I want to take the view that this this article is that it's going to stabilize things and it's going to help workers be a little bit more flexible and it's going to help employers not have to be quite so you know strenuous in their requirements and they'll be able to be a little bit more flexibility in terms of training and in terms of job job capabilities. Um, but I guess we'll see.

Pete Newsome 34:24

Yeah, again, if it if if there's balance, if if the pendulum swings too far one way or the other, it it's bad. And and I say that because I'm not only in the workforce, but as an employer, you you deal with a lot of problems. And and I would always prefer for there to be uh more hiring than less, because we're in the staffing industry. But the it's it's not the ideal situation either. Um, because if employers have to start paying a lot more uh just to operate at the same level, inflation is going to increase. So yeah, when the pendulum swings one way, there's there's always something happening on the other side. And um for me, I'm a fan of balance.

Why AI Adoption Is Slower

Pete Newsome 35:08

I think AI is going to create that, and also adoption uh of AI has not been as fast as this time a year ago I would have expected, or even a few months ago. Is I'm not what seems to be happening right now, and you may have a different perspective, and and also your perspective is probably isn't too dissimilar to mine because we're such heavy users of it. We've are integrating AI into every aspect of our business that we can to make to create efficiencies, to allow our employees to do more, you know, to produce better, to make their jobs and lives easier as a result. We're seeing huge benefits from it, but the adoption is not happening at the scale I thought it would uh by now.

Peter Porebski 35:56

Yeah, it's um I I think it'll actually because it's died, it's you know, it's gone to it's died down a little bit. Um, I think that it's going to where we'll end up is people will start to view AI as more of a tool. Like right at the beginning, you had the scare that it was going to replace everybody. And I think that it's gonna augment. It's gonna we're gonna get to a place where it's gonna augment everybody. I mean, we internally use it in all of our different processes. I mean, it has yet to replace anybody, and it is, if anything, made everybody happier because the the stuff that they hated doing they they could automate, and it lets you spend time on the stuff that you're that people are good at that they like doing, that's the you know, the part of their job that is the the most important. Um, with recruiters, it's you know, talking to candidates as opposed to doing you know administrative type stuff.

Pete Newsome 36:43

Yeah, you you just said it, right? It makes people happier. I mean, that it would because it removes the things that you don't like to do from your job. If you can automate painful administrative tasks, you're gonna enjoy your day a whole lot more. And we're we're seeing that. Not not to give too much of a commercial for AI. Listen, I I'm I'm glad adoption hasn't been what uh what I thought it would, because we're benefiting as a result. We're getting farther ahead um each day of those who aren't using it. So selfishly, it's a win for us as a business. But I'm just scratching my head over why so many people, individuals, right? Not, I mean, companies have to make their own decisions, they have to decide what the risk tolerance is, how much time and effort they want to put into it, because it's not just throwing it into the mix. You have to be very thoughtful. And it does take a lot of time, as we've also discovered, right? We get the savings on the other end, but it's a lot of effort to get there. Um, and sometimes you you you spend time that you have to to redo and and and rework. And so it's it's not easy, but it is worth it. What what what I'm surprised by is how many individuals are just all but ignoring it at this point and try without trying to integrate it into their workflow and to elevate how effectively they could work. So um, are you surprised by that? Or I mean you're not as surprised as me because you you're on record saying you didn't expect it to be as fast.

Peter Porebski 38:17

Yeah, I mean, I I I people are are in general, in my opinion, of what I see is people are uh more hesitant to change than and so it's it's actually more unusual, I think, from what I see. You know, I talk to different people to see them completely embracing things. It's one thing for people to talk about it, it's another for them to actually do it. And people get stuck in their routines and they don't want to change stuff. And I know how to do X, Y, and Z. I know how to, we were just talking about uh yesterday about people taking notes by hand because they're used to it and they like doing it and whatnot, as opposed to having an an AI screener that can just record you know a conversation. Why are they doing it by hand? Because that's the way they they're comfortable doing it. So that I think that expand that out over all the different industries, and that's the the simplest reason why there's less adoptions. People are used to doing things a certain way.

Pete Newsome 39:07

Yeah, it's a big, big change in your habit.

Peter Porebski 39:10

Say broke, don't fix it. I feel like that's how a lot of people are kind of treating things.

Pete Newsome 39:14

Yeah, I think I think I think that's fair. I think you're right. Um, so interesting week, some some some unique stories for sure. Um

Verizon Store Closures And Layoffs

Pete Newsome 39:24

we did see, yeah, of course, a couple layoffs, right? Verizon is closing retail stores, laying people off as a result of that. That was that was really the big one this week. Um Volkswagen, I think, confirmed that that they're they're just having massive, massive layoffs. That was already reported. We already talked about that.

Peter Porebski 39:44

The biggest one ever.

Pete Newsome 39:46

Yeah, yeah, biggest ever in the in the auto industry. Um, so that that's happening. The Verizon one, what do you what do you think about that? 274 stores that they're cutting nationwide. Probably not a surprise, right? Why do you want to go into a retail store?

Peter Porebski 40:00

I that's what I was gonna say. Like they you can do everything. Uh, I mean, I I have ATT, not Verizon, sorry. Uh, but uh I uh I I hate going into the phone. So it's literally to get a physical phone, is I think the last time I went into a store, and you got to wait around. So I'm not surprised. People, I mean, it's with things going online, online shopping. Uh a lot of these you know, companies, like even Targets and whatnot for retail shopping, they've changed a lot of their back storerooms to simply fill online orders. So having retail stores, whether it be phone, whether it be, you know, there's always going to be some people who want to do that, but I can having that be cut back is not surprising in the least. Yeah.

Pete Newsome 40:42

I mean, if you're in a metropolitan area and you want an iPhone, the Apple store will deliver it to you the same day. So why would you go into the Verizon store if you didn't have to? I mean, I think it's the Amazonation of everything. We we're so used to having things come to us now. To go in, it's not like you're trying on shoes or or a shirt to decide if it's a good fit. You know what you want. Just order it, it'll be there quickly.

Peter Porebski 41:11

Yeah. And you go into the store. Do you want to be, you know, most people that I've talked to don't want to be sold things. You go into the store, they're going to try and up to sell you to different phones, you end up paying more than you wanted. It why wouldn't you just do it online, buy exactly what you want, have it shipped to your door?

Pete Newsome 41:25

Yeah. So sorry, it's sad for Verizon. I mean, I I'm still a fan of retail. I like going and browsing and shopping in uh public as long as I dislike crowds.

Peter Porebski 41:35

So I I I do go there, but it's usually my my wife wants to walk around and like you know, shop at things at Target. I mean, I say this as a person who worked at Target. So I'm yeah, I I I'm I'm perfectly fine not going to to retail stores.

Pete Newsome 41:50

If it makes her happy, it's a good good thing to do. I I I do the same, although it lasts a little longer than I would like usually.

Peter Porebski 41:58

But uh I get I get bored after, yeah. I'll go uh but uh yeah, after about 15 minutes, I'm like, okay, are we done?

Pete Newsome 42:04

Exactly, exactly.

Unemployment Claims And What They Signal

Pete Newsome 42:06

So now the before we close though, quick um note on the unemployment claims 208,000 this week or from from the prior week. It's about normal from what we've been seeing, but these are historically low numbers too. And that's that even though, as we often say, a lot of people don't feel like the market is good, we we see a lot of uncertainty in the news. And I think we could see a lot more hiring is uh if we can get past the uh geopolitical issues, even though that doesn't seem like we're getting passos. But if we can get that settled, I think the market's really gonna take off and it's gonna be a really good employee market in the near future, especially um uh with with the decline in the overall labor market. So there that's that's positive, even though a lot of people don't feel it based on their own experiences. Overall, it it is. I mean, you can't really deny those numbers for the for the labor market.

Peter Porebski 43:02

I mean, that is the the sentiment might not be there, but I I look at that and I say, okay, well, hopefully this is a sign that the the next over the next year thing, you know, maybe that will when we're talking about this next summer, the the the sentiment should be a lot different, hope hopefully, based on you know where these numbers are going.

unknown 43:22

All right.

Pete Newsome 43:22

Now with

Survey Update And Sign Off

Pete Newsome 43:23

Peter, we did say we were gonna talk about our survey data this week. We have it, the analysis is underway on that, but uh we're we're gonna need another week on that. There's a lot, there's a lot to it. Um we'll we'll get to that next week.

Peter Porebski 43:37

We'll do a show just of that.

Pete Newsome 43:38

So yes, yeah, we'll do that. But thank you um for listening. And it's been a it's been a fun week. So we'll um hopefully some some good news stories next week. Um, we'll keep it rolling.

Peter Porebski 43:51

Sounds good.

Pete Newsome 43:52

All right, talk soon.