Not only does this disincentivize HR from running fake vacancies or stringing multiple candidates on just to keep their options open, but it also solves the problem of unemployed people job-searching effectively working full-time for free. The fact that companies would have to pay to hire workers would mean they try to make the selection as short and effective as possible.

Edit: From the business POV:

  • Businesses would have a limited budget for hiring so would limit process to 10 applicants and would have to pick those randomly. Less time spent on interviewing but also might miss the ideal candidate. Although the difference would fall sharply with larger pools.
  • And 000s of people now stuck wo any appls at all (although better than writing fake, futile appls), and no money. Not enough jobs on the market would translate into not enough paying applications for them to be able to substitute unemployment benefits.
  • renegadespork@lemmy.jelliefrontier.netEnglish
    111·
    2 days ago

    There’s no way that would be a viable career.

    1. You’d have to reliably get interviews, which is hard enough as it is.
    2. It’s a lot of work to do sustainably—more work than many jobs imo.
    3. You get none of the other benefits of accepting the job.
    4. Eventually you would run out of companies for which you were qualified, and you’d probably stop getting interviews.

    Your argument sounds similar to anti-welfare arguments. Sure, some people may abuse the system, but it wouldn’t pay that well, and the positives to society would greatly outweigh any abuse.

    • bizarroland@lemmy.worldEnglish
      43·
      2 days ago

      Exactly, for every one person who abuses the rule to get 10 hours of labor paid to them in exchange for doing no work, you’ll have 999 people that are actually using the system as intended.

      Are you really the kind of person that’ll fuck over 999 people just to make sure that one person doesn’t get ahead in a sneaky way?

      • KoboldCoterie@pawb.socialEnglish
        22·
        2 days ago

        Not to mention, some companies right now are abusing interview candidates to get free work with “trial project” type assignments, or “How would you fix this problem, if you were hired?” type of free consultations. If some candidates abused the companies in return, I’d call that fair play.

      • prole@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        4·
        2 days ago

        Are you really the kind of person that’ll fuck over 999 people just to make sure that one person doesn’t get ahead in a sneaky way?

        Are you sure you want to see people’s actual answers to this?

    • davidgro@lemmy.world
      101·
      2 days ago

      I agree with all of that actually. I’m just used to trying to find the failure mode of anything that sounds good lately.

      Yeah if it could be enforced I think it might be viable.