62

I was recently researching about a company I found on the Careers site. The company seems to be not legit.

My assumption is based on the following links:

  • Company owes thousands of dollars
  • They are saving US government taxes
  • They've changed their name many times

I'm openly asking this because Stack Exchange team does not seems to be responding because it is their "client". I'm sorry team :( but I see tons of people especially Indians are getting lured by this. The offers are looking like Nigerian scams. There are ads on LinkedIn also. I'll request them also to stop doing it.

Yes - there are positive feedbacks also, however those feedback can be written with fake accounts.
My main point is not about original or fake profiles. It's about how they get their work done and don't pay.

This company may be a scam.

Is it possible to stop advertising them until they've proven they are a real company?

  • 1
    I am not using Careers, and I can guess how voting on companies might be bad for the Careers business model... But: isn't there any voting on Careers? – Arjan Aug 23 '15 at 12:04
  • 3
    @Arjan no voting, and no "flag" or "report" option for companies actually. – Shadow The Princess Wizard Aug 23 '15 at 12:11
  • 2
    However the characteristics of that company are also same. This is very much a fake company. – yasmin Aug 24 '15 at 8:36
  • 2
    Relevant list of "is this company legit?" criteria from a recent question on Workplace - workplace.stackexchange.com/a/52248/2322 – enderland Aug 24 '15 at 18:12
  • 1
    I'm not going to go editing a mod's edit, but I think removing the name of the company in a question does a disservice to people viewing this post in the future. The company in question seems to be an egregiously bad actor; not just a run-of-the-mill "bad place to work". – Conspicuous Compiler Apr 20 '16 at 20:47
  • 1
    On two questions on Quora, both got the same two answers from the same two people, I don't think this company is real.. Question 1 - Question 2 – Jacques Marais Jun 14 '16 at 18:48
27

There are MANY reasons why we can't simply ban a customer from our services because of a flag, meta post, or hearsay on the Internet.

  1. There are LOTS of companies that are terrible, terrible places to work at. Glassdoor any popular company and you'll find bad reviews (even Stack Overflow). It doesn't matter how the company acts, you'll ALWAYS find someone who hated it.

  2. We cannot be the arbiter of who is a good employer or not. That's not our business model. There's a plethora of information out there to research a potential employer. Blocking clients based on anything other than publicly protected rights leaves us open to legal retaliation. (We regularly take down listings due to discrimination).

  3. The onus is on the applicant to decide whether or not they want to apply to a particular company. If the company is as bad as you say they are, there must have been red flags along the way before a contract was signed. (The mandatory spying software would have scared me from ever agreeing to work for them.)

  4. On the flip side, we take the same stance with employers. Several times a year we have clients that want us to ban a user because "they were a terrible employee". That doesn't seem right to us. If we start banning "bad" employers, we'll also have to start banning "bad" employees.

  5. However, we can ban them for not using Careers properly. So if devs are applying through Careers and having a bad experience, or if they're abusing Candidate Search, we could block them. We just don't want to do it based on general internet hearsay.

  • 2
    @Juice - how are we going to handle this situation? You must have got the essence of this scenario. – yasmin Aug 24 '15 at 14:44
  • 1
    @yasmin We appreciate you telling us about this. We'll continue to keep out eyes and might change our position if more complaints come forward, but for now we're not going to take any action. – Juice Aug 24 '15 at 21:32
  • I don't see why a rep system wouldn't work here, both for employees and employers. – Petah Nov 6 '15 at 12:57
  • 16
    The premise is they are not an employer, they are an agency. They do not have a job, they try and sell you to one of their clients. Yet they advertise themselves as an employer. – Petah Nov 6 '15 at 13:03
  • 18
    "Blocking clients based on anything other than publicly protected rights leaves us open to legal retaliation." - Are you sure that's what you meant to write? You already have conditions under which you will reject a client that go beyond "publicly protected rights". And as you say later, "we can ban them for not using Careers properly" - another example of something that goes beyond "publicly protected rights". The rest of the arguments are understandable and entirely reasonable, but that one sentence seems unconvincing or poorly worded. – D.W. Nov 25 '15 at 17:55
  • clearly a fake company. I interviewed and did a complete project for them as evaluation and they rejected me because my classes took "too many constructor arguments" ! as I did my research, they are just doing this to avoid paying taxes in US, by pretending that they have workers abroad. – Ashkan Kzme Apr 14 '16 at 6:08
  • 21
    I've lost a lot of respect for Careers.SO since seeing Crossover ads every day. If we start banning "bad" employers, we'll also have to start banning "bad" employees. I don't see how that is true. Careers.SO comes with the explicit promise of offering great jobs with great employers. The reverse promise was not made concerning the user base of Stack Overflow. I get that a job at this place may indeed be the golden ticket for someone in a 3rd world country, but is a sweatshop with webcam surveillance really in line with Joel et al.'s vision of making the world better for developers? – Pekka supports GoFundMonica Apr 20 '16 at 21:03
  • 10
    "Blocking clients based on anything other than publicly protected rights leaves us open to legal retaliation" is 100% backwards. In the US, there are certain categories for which it is illegal to discriminate against people. Any other reason is legal. "Your logo is ugly" or "our users hate you" would be perfectly valid reasons to reject a company from Jobs. You choose not to because you only care about the money, not the users. – Andrew Medico May 20 '16 at 11:59
6

This is not our place to judge, and unlike what you think, in the real world one is innocent until proven guilty.

You raised your suspicions - good, now let the Careers team check and handle this.

No need to panic and demand instant shutdown of something that can be legit. Based on your concepts, Amazon would have been shut down long long ago.

  • 3
    I do agree, my motive is to just let people know about this issue. – yasmin Aug 23 '15 at 11:52
  • 6
    +1 for 'Amazon would have been shut down long long ago' – HackerKarma Aug 23 '15 at 12:09
  • In some places, it works that your guilty until proven innocent (in a lot of certification testing and stuff like that, especially in Europe) – Zizouz212 Aug 24 '15 at 18:15
  • 1
    @Zizouz212 well, not in USA where Stack Overflow is located. – Shadow The Princess Wizard Aug 24 '15 at 18:49
  • 4
    This is all wrong. SE is a US company, not a government or court of law, and there is no due process involved. They are free to choose not to do business with any company for any reason that isn't specifically illegal. Furthermore, SE has specifically chosen to make it their place to judge to make Careers/Jobs "better than the other sites" by rejecting e.g. recruiters. – Andrew Medico May 20 '16 at 12:27
2

This company may be a scam. Can you please stop advertising for them until it is proved that it is genuine?

How would SE determine if the company is 'genuine' or not? Why would you think it's SE's responsibility to check for scam? IMHO it should be the candidate considering a career change do the background check / investigation on the company. Just like you did by visiting 'Quora', 'Glassdoor', 'Mouthshut', etc. I would also cross-check the company officials ('About us' if available) against their Linkedin profiles.

Also if the candidate is getting some bad (scam, suspicious or offensive) response after replying to their job post then they can always report to SO Careers team by using the support page info.

After reading 'FAQ for Employers' page, I don't see any pre-qualifications are required to buy job listings or search subscriptions on the Stack Overflow Careers site.

I'm openly asking this because Stack Exchange team does not seems to be responding because it is their "client".

That's strange. You have not shared when/how did you contacted SE team. Also, it's weekend here and you won't get any reply until they are back in the office Monday. I would recommend to have some patience.

Please note, OP (and others) have made over 20+ edits to the original post. Some of the original content has been removed. I hope OP (and user 'xameeramir') have contacted (using the support page info.) SE Careers team in addition to this post. Lets wait for Careers team response.

  • @yasmin yes you can post ads, see here under "Ad Sales and Sponsorships". – Shadow The Princess Wizard Aug 23 '15 at 11:52
  • 2
    I'm sorry, I meant ads in my posts. Updated question. – yasmin Aug 23 '15 at 11:57
  • Hmm. Those profiles look very strange. Just one example "Connecting companies with global talent." - previous job 5 years as a medivac pilot ... – DavidPostill Aug 23 '15 at 14:10
  • And looking at some of the other profiles all they contain is job ads. The whole thing smells of MLM. – DavidPostill Aug 23 '15 at 14:13
  • 1
    @DavidPostill I did looked that but then I looked their previous work experience, degrees, etc. e.g. this profile where his past experience says 'Army National Guard' – HackerKarma Aug 23 '15 at 14:24
  • @yasmin Please read animuson's comment under you post and correct the post. Also, just to let you know that I have Up-Voted your post as you do have few valid points that I agree with. Let's wait for SE's Careers team response. – HackerKarma Aug 24 '15 at 2:23
  • 2
    @HackerKarma - I did that!! – user287137 Aug 24 '15 at 8:40
  • 1
    The point here is that the company do not pay devs for their work – user287137 Aug 24 '15 at 10:26
  • 3
    @HackerKarma - He is my brother. We are from the same family and we have sent request to SE team. – yasmin Aug 24 '15 at 11:53
  • 2
    @xameeramir Thank you for the update. – HackerKarma Aug 24 '15 at 12:03
  • I worked with Crossover for 16 months. A few of my friends worked there, a large number of people in my country who work there formed a community, and of-course dozens of people I met on the job, who also work remotely. Crossover DOES pay for all the work done. And they dont hold back a single penny. It is not a scam company! – Waqas Shah May 11 '17 at 6:56
  • Wow, I am seeing a lot of copout answers on here. Basically saying, the company is paying, you are not. So you spend volunteer hours as moderators shutting down sockpuppets, that is fake accounts and penalizes those that may have been associated in some way with the abuse, but you refuse to vet companies? Where is the "putting the developer first" in that scenario? – Daniel Feb 8 at 3:20

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .