A chilling trend is sweeping through the Canadian job market: “ghost jobs.” These aren’t positions waiting to be filled, but phantom postings designed to collect resumes and references, ultimately leading applicants down a frustrating, silent path.
Recent data reveals the pervasiveness of this practice. A staggering 56% of Canadian workers believe they’ve applied for a job that never truly existed, and the emotional toll is significant – 70% of those job seekers report that this “employer ghosting” has negatively impacted their mental health.
What appears to employers as a harmless tactic can be deeply damaging to those seeking work. These postings often attract hundreds of hopeful applicants, all investing time and energy into a process with no genuine endpoint.
The motivations behind these phantom jobs are varied. Some companies are simply building a database of potential candidates for future needs, essentially talent hoarding. Others use the postings to gauge market rates for salaries and skills, conducting research disguised as opportunity.
Still others employ ghost jobs for appearances, signaling growth to investors or creating the illusion of activity when a candidate has already been internally selected. These may seem like strategic business decisions, but they carry a substantial risk: damage to reputation.
For job seekers, these postings are far from neutral. They represent wasted time, dashed hopes, and a growing sense of distrust. Negative experiences quickly spread, with candidates sharing their stories online, potentially deterring other qualified individuals from applying.
In Ontario, the practice is now facing legal scrutiny. New regulations under the Employment Standards Act, 2000 demand greater transparency in hiring. Employers with 25 or more employees must now disclose salary expectations, confirm whether a position is currently vacant, and inform candidates of AI usage in the process.
Crucially, employers are now required to follow up with candidates within 45 days of a final interview, communicating hiring decisions. This means ghosting is no longer simply a reputational risk, but a potential legal violation.
To avoid liability, employers must prioritize compliance and transparency. Consulting with legal counsel to ensure postings adhere to the Employment Standards Act is paramount. Open communication about timelines and vacancies builds trust, a valuable asset in a competitive market.
When hiring is delayed or funding is uncertain, postings should be paused or removed. If a position isn’t immediately available, clearly labeling it as a “future opportunity” or “talent pool” role is essential.
Repurposing expired job postings or soliciting applications without hiring approval should be avoided. And, perhaps most importantly, silence after interviews is no longer acceptable. Prompt follow-up protects both legal compliance and the employer’s standing in the job market.
