Indeed, Glassdoor To Cut 1,300 Jobs in AI-Focused Consolidation (bloomberg.com)
- Reference: 0178328032
- News link: https://slashdot.org/story/25/07/10/1756200/indeed-glassdoor-to-cut-1300-jobs-in-ai-focused-consolidation
- Source link: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-07-10/indeed-glassdoor-to-cut-1-300-jobs-in-ai-focused-consolidation
> The cuts will mostly affect people in the US, especially within teams including research and development and people and sustainability, Recruit Holdings Chief Executive Officer Hisayuki "Deko" Idekoba said in a memo to employees. The company didn't give a specific reason for the cuts, but Idekoba said in his email that "AI is changing the world, and we must adapt by ensuring our product delivers truly great experiences."
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-07-10/indeed-glassdoor-to-cut-1-300-jobs-in-ai-focused-consolidation
Eh, they just needed some new customers (Score:3)
One way to get more people to look for a job is to fire them.
Re: (Score:2)
> One way to get more people to look for a job is to fire them.
People looking for jobs are not their customers.
Companies trying to hire are their customers.
Firing people and increasing the number of unemployed makes it easier for hiring companies, so they will spend less money advertising openings on Indeed/Glassdoor.
Re: (Score:2)
> [...] requires that everybody working in recruiting have a valid I-9.
Would you care to explain the leap in logic that you made when you decided that "everybody" included AI? Typically, everybody is defined as "every person". Are we already at the point where AI are persons? That would be news to me. And if they are "persons" and therefore require an I-9, could you explain why suddenly it's a non-human that can't have a valid I-9, rather than a non-person?
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think you get it.
You're assigning agency to the AI. Parent is wondering why you're assigning agency to a non-human.
A human operates the AI.
Re: (Score:2)
Your computer, email app, pdf viewer, printer, scanner, and mobile phone, are all non-human and naturually can't have a valid I-9 ...therefore under federal law also cannot 'be used' to work in hiring or staffing? Is that your position here?
AI probably cannot legally make hiring decisions, but as a tool to process, summarize, grade,rank, or perform social media correlation or other pre-background-check type stuff ... it probably can be used by a human just like any other tool.
That said, It probably shouldn'
Re: (Score:2)
You're an idiot.
The AI bears no responsibility. The AI isn't doing the hiring. It's the tool of a person who is employed by a corporation. The responsibility is theirs.
AI isn't replacing people... (Score:1)
...they'll keep repeating.
Could be AI-related, could be routine cuts (Score:2)
Which sounds better: We anticipate reduced earnings this quarter as well as some severe economic headwinds between the market conditions and the current US administration's policies. Also, have overhired in the past in anticipation of greater growth than we achieved, so we need to lay off 3% of our workforce (1300 people) to keep our business financially viable and please Wall Street...or...
We're cutting 1300 jobs because we're so awesome with these futuristic AI tools, they're no longer needed....we're
Re: (Score:2)
> and please Wall Street
Glassdoor is privately owned.
What sounds more likely?
1) Literally every single announcement that jobs are being cut because work can be done by machines now is a falsehood to hide reduced profitability, or
2) That an advancement in technology has reduced the amount of labor required to do a job?
Here's the thing, how you use AI isn't representative of how businesses do.
We're not throwing shit into ChatGPT and hoping the output of a human comes out.
We have complex agentic systems with very high output
Re: (Score:2)
If you job could be replaced by a shell script, then I guess the job had a limited run length anyway.
This stinks more of tariff retaliation as the lost jobs were mainly in the US... any reason for that? The US has made doing business with them harder in a global economy.
Seems like this was always the way it was going to play out, US business move out of foreign nations and foreign nations move out of the US. I don't see it going any other way when there's added tax on trade, the simple thing is to not trade
will they be using indeed.com to look for new jobs (Score:2)
Will they be using indeed.com to look for new jobs?
tremendous economic growth (Score:2)
We off shore all our manufacturing jobs. We turn over all our service jobs to automated computer systems (AI or simple phone trees). Luckily we chased all the immigrants out, so there is plenty of agricultural work for people to do.
6 am to 4 pm in the fields and under the sun for $7.25 an hour. Seasonal full-time agricultural work doesn't get healthcare or dental benefits, so you're on your own there.
I wonder at what point people stop making excuses for the bourgeoisie. We saw Occupy Wall Street fizzle out
Re: (Score:2)
> in the fields and under the sun for $7.25 an hour.
The median wage in America for agricultural labor is $17 per hour.
$22 per hour in California.
The lowest is Georgia, at $11 per hour.
Indeed? (Score:2)
Indeed, Glassdoor to show them the door.
Re: (Score:2)
I chuckled at the headline too. I came here to ask "indeed?" indeed