Want to know how we deliver Google for Jobs for your recruitment website?

Google for Jobs delivered without myths, exaggerations and lies


The trouble with technology is there is a breed of salespeople (we call them “bandwagon marketers”) who are ready to seize upon any opportunity to ‘confuse sell’ their customers into buying features and services without knowing if the benefit will ever be proven.


Google for Jobs created quite a few “bandwagon marketers” with our industry competitors, so we have created this guide to give you some insight into what you really need to know about Google for Jobs.




What we can tell you is that we use the Google for Jobs API to deliver your jobs to Google, we optimise every job in the way requested by Google, and we will teach your staff what to do to provide the content in the way Google wants it.

What is Google For jobs?

Before we start, let us get the Google for Jobs, GDPR, anti-competition, and other laws and myths right. Let’s start with the basics.




Google needs some of your personal data to make its Google for Jobs service work. If you read articles like the one the link below takes you to, you know there is going to be some bright spark who finds a way to sue and/or make a lot of noise about what Google has done with some of their personal data. Therefore, as a service, it still has some hurdles to jump over. They may be distant for now, but there is a small risk.


The reality probably is that it’s not going to matter, because as with Facebook and Cambridge Analytica, users, by and large, don’t care if they are hooked on the medium/channel. Only those with a natural flair for being data aficionados will mind, and they have so much work from GDPR it is scary.


Competition laws


Google is not out of the woods with this one — it has to prove that it is not manipulating results unduly. Just because the service is free, that does not mean Google is not benefiting over others in this process or favouring others. Testing will prove this one way or another.


Why are its partners so dominant? We have clients that have more jobs than one of their primary business rivals but are ranking lower. Why? What benefit was the preferred job board vendor given that we were not? Give it three more weeks, and we may bring the first anti-competition case if, having matched the required spec, our clients’ rankings do not improve.


All said and done, Google for Jobs is unlike other areas where Google has got its fingers burnt with billions of pounds worth of fines. This service does not promote something a user has to buy; it finds them work that may prove to be their saviour. Being that work is essential to life and our survival, it will be a brave person or corporation to take this one on if it will disrupt getting people job data.




#Myth 1: It is free. Erm, directly it is free, yes — but indirectly, it will cost you money. We have seen prices from £280–£40,000 being asked by recruitment web and career site widget vendors to make sites compliant.


#Myth 2: You need a new website. No, you do not — so do not fall for that one. You only need a new site if your present supplier cannot add structured data to your site’s job pages, which is highly unlikely. Buy a new site because you want one, not because of Google for Jobs.


#Myth 3: Google shares your data with employers to screen you. No, it does not share data from your other accounts via this service with employers. It is a job aggregation service that points you to take your data to other websites and suppliers. In reality, Google For jobs needs to know very little about you other than to make some filters work; for example, “jobs near me” needs to know your location (see GDPR and EPR rules for IPs). As we find others, this section will grow…


So back to what is Google for Jobs?


Google for Jobs is a job aggregation service. It takes other websites’ job content and collates it into a browser-based job search tool in the same way as other job aggregation services. The Google for Jobs search panel is triggered by search. Google thinks you are job-seeker-related, and the graphic above appears in the search results. Its knowledge of a job seeker’s pattern grows over time due to its AL software. Users in the US have confirmed that their version has become more accurate over time. At the time of its launch and for many months, it was inaccurate in many instances, which is what we see daily with GFJ in the UK.


The graphic is what the Google for Jobs panel will look like in the search results. This panel will appear among the other search results. It can be the first thing you see or it can be moved down the page by other links (paid ads or organic and natural links). In the three weeks of testing the UK site, this positioning has changed randomly and by the hour for the test we made.


In SEO terms, the area the Google for Jobs panel takes up on the page would be considered highly prized, but this should not be misconstrued as SEO, as some have suggested. SEO is about your site’s ranking for natural results, and Google is now competing for those results. In time, SEOs may come up with ways to get above the Google for Jobs panel. Alternatively, you may wish to invest in Google AdWords (SEM) to get above the GFJ panel, although that could prove to be mission impossible. In reality, if you know anything about Recruitment SEO/SEM, there is plenty for all.

Will it cost you money?

The answer is yes and no.


No: Let us deal with the easy one first.

You will hear Google is free of charge, by which pundits mean Google charges you no fee to be there. That may change, but for now, it is a free service.

Yes: The reality is that you will need to pay for one or more of the following:

1. Unless you build your site and know how to add structured data in the required way, or you are with a website vendor where all future technical updates of your website for any technical event are free of charge, you will need to pay your developer to add the code.

2. If you do not track what visitors you get now, you can lose rankings traffic you did not know you had. Yes, there are penalties to other forms of advertising, not least the SEO/SERPs results you have now.

3. If your developer does not do the job correctly, you may get a penalty, and that will mean you lose out until you fix what gave you the penalty. So far, after three weeks of looking at what our competitors have done, we have yet to find an error-free integration.

4. You may have to change how your job data is sent to your website.

5. You may have to change how your job data is tracked.

6. You may have to retrain your staff on how to write job ads.

7. You may create accidental competition for yourself.

8. In theory, if you tick the boxes Google asks, you have every chance of being ranked. So far, testing is giving inconsistent results.

9. You may end up putting your jobs on job boards just to get better placement on the platform.

10. You may need to do more with traditional SEO to rank your site.

11. You may eventually have to pay a fee to get to sponsored rankings, such as with Indeed. This is a coin toss, but Maps, which was meant to be free, is paid, paid, paid.

12. It’s meant to be a “one size fits all”, but so far in our testing, Total Jobs is dominating lots of the rankings. More on that to follow.

SEO side note: There are vast differences between SEO and Google for Jobs. For example, Google for Jobs is seeking to find job seekers who are in job seeker mode. That is akin to the sign spinner standing on the street corner of Lakeside, the Trafford Centre, and The Gyle, etc.

The SEO is seeking to find you active candidates, passive candidates (in some niches/measurements, these are the best kind), and clients, and to develop relationships to return people to your site over time. Google for Jobs ’could not care less about your brand, client generation, and bringing people back to you individually.

Having been in SEO since 2004 for recruiters, we can also tell you that SEO works best for recruiters when candidates use three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine-word searches (the ever-elusive ‘‘long tail’’ as SEOs call it). Google for Jobs may well learn these long tails over time, but our testing shows that they are not there yet.


One way or another, you will pay.

Do you need jobs on your website?

Simple answer:


If you wish to have a direct relationship with Google for Jobs via your website, then yes, you need job posts on your site made in such a way that they conform to the rules that Google has published for the service.


The ‘technically speaking’ answer:


No, because you can use other channels to get your jobs on Google for Jobs, such as LinkedIn and job boards, etc.


The more useful answer:


At Companies House (source: www.creditsafe.com), there are just over 34,000 companies registered as having their core business as recruitment. According to UK House of Commons research, there were 5.7 million UK companies in December 2017.


If all of the companies that had jobs put jobs on Google for Jobs, there would be a bit of a problem, no? Google for Jobs would be a mess, right? It would need more rules and more optimisation that may be worthwhile in time. It went with some key partners to get data on the system, and it has made the entry level pretty straightforward, but like all other job aggregation services, it will have to scale its screening or promotion options.


Therefore, you will need to test your niche, and you find it best to use a job board still, or LinkedIn, and/or your site’s job posts. The answer lies deep in analytics that many do not keep, or even track. Get Google Analytics tracking on your website and the Google Search Console hooked up.


Numpty alert: If you do not have an SSL security certificate or HTTPS working, expect your site to have ranking issues. It is a GDPR and Google security fail not to have one. We have only been telling the industry this for three years, but the first 10,000 times we were only joking, so it is OK that 30,000 of you did not act. Now we are serious. *Does Liam Neeson accent*: “Google has a unique set of skills. It will find, and it will kill your rankings if you have no SSL”.




Of course, all you are going to hear just now is that you have to be on there. In many cases that is because of ‘bandwagon marketing’, which is designed either to sell a vendor’s product or to align a person’s profile with an ‘in the now topic’ for their gain, not yours. It is one step down from ‘fake news’ in that they don’t tell blatant lies, but they do NOT investigate the subject without sensational claims and/or a lack of evidence for UK habits.


The best advice is to be sure you are tracking your inbound job applications. If you use products like Broadbean, Idibu, Logic Mellon, and Jobmate, etc., then make sure you use the source tracking tools that they have to tell you where the talent comes from. Make sure you set up your website’s analytics. If you use other publishing channels, like the job posting sites that take your ads under the pay-per-click channels (https://recruitics.com/ & ClickIQ, etc.), then make sure you track and test the metrics. These tools will give you the metrics that sort out the ‘bandwagon facts’ from reality.


Google for Jobs is good for the UK recruitment industry as a whole, and we hope to share why, based upon sales logic and 25 years of recruitment know-how, in the rest of the answers that follow.


Don’t forget: Get your site connected to Google Analytics and Google Search Console, and it will track your job application sources for you. You will also get any warnings about your site here and be able to test other items of use to you.

Why is Google for Jobs stepping on the recruiters’, job boards', and Indeed’s turf?

Google is not here to help job seekers, as they claim. That is not why they are in your backyard. They are here because they need user data, permission to interact with that user data over a lifetime, and ways to keep the human behind that data on/requiring Google as the platform of choice.


SEOs report they have seen up to a 40% drop-off in search results where the search result now uses one of the Google-provided panels to answer questions, without needing to visit the site. If Google were an organised crime mob, it would be the Godfather skimming off your website’s earnings. Don’t pay “the vig” and you get a hefty Google penalty, which, despite what SEOs say, is educated guesswork to unpick.


If anyone tells you Google wants to help job seekers, they are the kind of people who think fairies live at the end of their garden. Nice to meet in Cornwall at the summer solstice but not to bank your investment plans upon.


Google is looking for ways to be of use to people; being a place that people just push past is not a sustainable model. So they want to be in the high people movement market: jobs, shopping, and travel, etc.

Will job seekers use it?

According to a podcast by UK recruiter Chad Sowash, 30% of search activity on Google is employment-related. 50% of searches contain just two words. The growth in searches longer than two words has been attributed to voice search requests via tools such as Siri and Alexa. If you watch the podcasts, you will find the advice is pretty similar to our own.


Then we hear numbers like ‘70% to 83% of job seekers search for jobs on Google’. Erm, how do they know that? Have they asked all of the billions of job seekers in person? No — the stats are made from samples.


Some have seen a 40% decline in their traffic, but traffic is not always a job seeker — or a job seeker you can use. So ’let’s see how this plays out niche by niche over the next 12–18–24 months.

Does this mean the end of recruiters?

If you think fairies live at the end of the garden, or have a passion for walking around with a board that says ‘The End of the World is Nigh’, then yes.




Give or take 6000-8000 recruitment company registrations at Companies House a year, to add to the 340000 that are already there, by and large, Google for Jobs is a bonus. The move toward the micro recruiter is massive, with one-person companies and two-three people companies that have zero ambition to be the next Adecco or Michael Page. They are in the ‘niche niche’. They are also being joined by the larger firms that give their best recruiters subsidiary setups, aka the masterstroke of the S3 Group model or Branson model.


Recruiters will come and go for the same reasons as before, and so will job boards. There may be some recruiters that merge or scale back their riskier desks. You know, the ones where the ad says you can bill £1m, and when you get there, the territory split means you get the clients beginning with the letter X, Y and Z on every second Tuesday of the month.


At RecruiterWEB, we see it as welcome. A welcome service to reduce recruiters’ needs to take on the “dog of a job” jobs, where the job spec is as dull as dishwater, the pay as poor as Big Issue seller wages, the employer brand is a whistleblower call away from a public outcry, and you have to compete with 100 PSL members on that oh-so-exclusive deal HR set up for you.


Back to reality


It is a job advertising service. If it harms any recruiters, it harms permanent recruiters of the variety that can only post jobs to job boards, such as Adecco, Hays, and Manpower, etc. Then you could be up merger creek with a “let’s merge” paddle.


If you are a niche market recruiter, you will still have a niche where the majority of your candidates are in full employment and do not jump on to Google every five minutes looking for work, despite the claims. If you are a ‘NicheNiche’ recruiter, you know it is all about getting the candidate proactively.


Plus, if candidates did go to Google for daily job changes, are they not the ones who you pay out rebates to when they rely once too often on their “cat ate my bus pass” excuse, which is why they were late 30 times in their first 23 days? Yes, they even took the Mickey on some lunch breaks and were late back, so finally, mild-mannered Mary flips into firing their sorry backside.


Some people call us crazy on this one:


Consider this: if Google is the place 70-88% of people go to look for a job (a fake fact that Trump would be proud of), then when the employers screw it up, or the advert did not generate a Brad Pitt lookalike with the humanity of the Pope who is prepared to take their job on as a holy-grail-like crusade from cradle to grave…


That is post-filling out a 17-page application process that is not designed for mobile and crashes on page 3, 7, and 11 — a few times…


If the world’s biggest job seeker provider could not find your talent, then that is why you need us. Your recruitment SAS person is in the war for niche market talent, or SBS if you work the ‘NicheNiche’. Only, unlike our real special forces, you will not work for £24,000 a year and a chance to die wearing fake tan every second day in a faraway land.


No, you will ask for a RETAINER, as the late great Tony Byrne once predicted, or follow Mitch Sullivan.

My bad, it is the end of the world for recruiters, read why here...

Oh, my days, what are you recruiters like? IT IS NOT THE END; IT IS THE START OF YOUR GOLDEN ERA…


OK, if you can’t beat them, then you can join them on Google for Jobs. We will cover how, technically, in the following sections, but first, you need to know if you should bother asking your site supplier for help, so here are our top tips.


  1. What kind of recruiters are a no-brainer sign-up for Google for Jobs?

You are a one-person recruitment company with no budget for SEO. You have a limited budget for job ads. You have a website that you send all your jobs to, even the shite ones. Shite like you’d have to be mad as a hatter to work there, not shite quality, as Google is going to critique the job ad’s copy (yes, they plan to rate your writing skills).

Volume is key to Google for Jobs. Their stated aim is that all the job posts are there, for all the people, remember, so add the job volume to your site to provide, erm… well, job content VOLUME, but keep an eye on the quality standards of the copy. There will be more on compliance later.


  1. What about the rest?

You are any other kind of recruitment company that is not getting the traffic you want from your website and/or other marketing efforts. You want a mostly-trusted method to try. You have nothing to lose, so go for it.


  1. Your marketing is going well, but you do not track all the results of where your traffic comes from.

You are, for want of a better term, part of the “if it isn’t broke, don’t question it” brigade. You are the recruiters most at risk, because other marketing methods can be harmed by Google for Jobs compliance. We have this confirmed from genuine sources, and so you are the recruiters most at risk if you just fly in blind.


It is why we waited longer than any other vendor did in our space to offer Google for Jobs compliance, as we wanted to know the full impact of the service.


What did we say about keeping the faith…

How will it specifically affect permanent recruitment?

Most of you should have worked out that Google for Jobs threatens the permanent recruiters more easily than it does temp recruiters. This is because, in the UK, 83% of what recruiters actually do is provide temps. The recruiter needs to be in the middle of that transaction by law and to make up the cash flow to pay people weekly and monthly.


Therefore, at best you might say that 17% of what UK recruiters do may be affected by Google for Jobs, if 17% of the 34,000 recruiters with active companies jump on the Google for Jobs wagon at the same time as 5.7 million employers. Does that sound likely? Sounds even less likely with employers being asked to spend £8000 to £40,000 by some career site widget vendors.


Let’s look at the direct employer threats. Google for Jobs makes it possible for employers to compete for free with you.


Yes, it does, but of the 5.7 million UK employers, there are 5.5 million of them that have nine employees or less. It is doubtful they have the technology in place or desire to create it for Google for Jobs qualification. The 5.5 million will not spend £8000 to £40,000 to get compliant, and they will not have a huge hiring need either. Google for Jobs is paying attention to those with volume jobs, so how will the ma and pa shop get into retail jobs alongside, say, Tesco or Virgin, etc.? It’s not going to happen easily.


Of the 200,000 left, 41,000 have less than 50 employees, and just 7000 have 250 or more (you can read more here: http://snip.ly/osscqj). We are not saying Google for Jobs will not present some challenges. Let’s say those that have 50+ employees or vendors are asking for between £8000 to £80,000 to set them up with career sites that are Google for Jobs compliant, and then fees of £500 per month to £30,000 per month to optimise their channels. That is for no guarantee of the ranking slot that will get the job seeker, just a guarantee they will be on the Google for Jobs platform. It is a threat, but it is not as large as some would have you believe.


17% of what recruiters do is permanent recruitment. Take out the ‘dog of a job’ jobs from that 17% pool and then do your maths — that frees recruiters up to do the good stuff. More on that later.


Google for Jobs may favour larger agencies.


The UK service is young, and in the US, we have seen some preferences. There seems to be a correlation between volume and full compliance. Over time, we think a combination of compliance and what else your site does to make it attractive will be key. However, you will have to invest in your site with content outside of just jobs. Sites will need to produce ‘how to, why to, when to, and what to’ type data to up their game on the overall value of their website to a visitor.


Others may execute Google for Jobs better than you may technically.


This only applies to those of you who have relationships with your website suppliers that are not working. The task itself is from two to ten hours’ work for most developers. The API is the best route to go rather than scraping of your jobs by the Googlebot.

Do not fall into some of the blatant bullshit out there by some recruitment website vendors. Like the biggest in our industry, which claimed to have been ready for Google for Jobs 18 months ago. In August 2018, just a few weeks after Google For jobs landed in the UK, their servers fell over, and 800+ sites were down due to the visits of the Googlebot (PMSL at that one).


Others may write better copy for Google for Jobs than you.


This is not insurmountable; you can learn how to write better copy, and you need to make sure you make the time for it or are allowed to make the time for it.


Google for Jobs may lower your margins and fees.


Yes, employers might see that Google for Jobs is doing a lot of your work for you and ask for discounts. Since most employers ask for discounts anyhow, there is nothing much new to fear here.


Google for Jobs may create more of the wrong job seekers than the right ones.

Yes, this can and will happen; you get more job seekers who are not qualified for your jobs because the platform is open to everyone, and that is EVERYONE. Being knee-deep in I-can-do-that, ‘Yosser Hughes’ giss-a-job types could be all Google for Jobs amounts to.


Google for Jobs may create more complaints, as you cannot keep up with the talent it produces.


The more Google for Jobs can deliver to your candidates, the more it can deliver you candidates you cannot find work for. We live in the age of the online complaint, and so your brand can, as a result, pick up more heat from unhappy job seekers. Google for Jobs makes that complaint easier. SEO and web marketers generally agree that bad reviews hurt your online presence, especially those complaints that go unanswered.


Google for Jobs has hidden costs.


The service is presently free at the point of use. To exploit this free service, you need to make changes to your website, changes to the way jobs get onto your website, changes to the way staff are writing job ads, and ultimately there will be some other forms of promotional costs, be they direct from Google or indirect costs. So free does not really mean free, does it? 🙂


Your vendor does not understand what to do with your website.


There are plenty of vendors like us who do and who will form an orderly line for your business.


There is so much noise you don’t know what to do.


Hopefully, if you read this, not anymore.


Competition from other recruitment agencies


The technical challenge: 34,000 recruiters have websites in the UK. Take out the ones supplied by ourselves and/or other specialist recruitment website vendors, and that leaves about 30,000. The sites our competitors and we have made will meet the needs of Google for Jobs; the remaining 30,000, unless they have a qualified SEO plan in place, will not have what is needed. There will be a time lag of many years before these sites are compliant.


“Dog of a job” jobs are where the job spec is as dull as dishwater, the pay is as poor as Big Issue sellers’ wages, the employer brand is a whistleblower call away from a public outcry, and you have to compete with 100 PSL members on that oh-so-exclusive deal HR set up for you.

How specifically will it affect temp recruitment?

Until our employment laws change, the only threat that can come from Google for Jobs is from the direct employers who use a third-party agent to deliver the legal/payroll services required by our laws. Which is to say they publish their temp jobs and look to use the service company to provide the legal compliance part.


Some vendors provide that service now, but low-margin, high-human-touch points are rarely profitable enough for the long-term risk and need to be propped up by more cost-effective services. In addition, there is the human factor here; contractors like to have choice, and recruiters offer more options.


However, the laws are not the primary reason the temporary recruitment activity is protected. The primary reason is the financial integrity of the 83% of Britain’s 34,000 recruitment companies whose own books are used to underwrite the debts employers generate when they use temporary workers. The recruitment agencies’ own books and trading history are what banks use to decide if the cash for the payroll will be handed over.


Which means ACME factoring or ACME bank looks at Billy & Betty’s Recruitment Company Ltd. ACME decides, based upon those books, if it wants to lend Billy & Betty’s Recruitment Company Ltd X, Y, Z % of their invoice so they can pay Tina and Timmy Temp their wages that week. All while waiting for Goldman Schmucks to pay them in 90, 120, 180, and 360 days.


This is a hard model for any one, two, three, ten or one hundred and ten replacement companies to offer; indeed, Billy & Betty’s Recruitment Company Ltd’s books may not be good enough, and Billy & Betty may need to put their assets up as collateral. Bankers want you to give personal guarantees; they don’t want to provide personal guarantees!


Keep in mind that it’s Google’s world, and you are just a bit player in it. Google does nowt for nowt.

How will Google for Jobs affect how you write your job ads?

You will need to write better job adverts. Google has not given much away about how its system decides what job to put at the top of the tree in its results (unlike Indeed). It has said the quality of the body of text in the job advert is one way it will measure job advert quality.


You will need to track your job ad response better to know which the best site is to get top ranking of your job post content.


Be ready to make your job ads personal.


Be ready to add new data to your job ads, like salary survey data, review data, POSTCODES.


Be ready to run branded ads for your clients to get them on Google for Jobs.


Expect from 2019 to start producing adverts in new formats like video (Google owns YouTube); the spoken advert will play well for mobile viewers of Google for Jobs.


Expect from 2019/2020 to be pushed by Google to use their ATS (a paid-for product). Leaving some ATS vendors up the creek.


Expect from 2020/21 to be pushed by Google to use its job engine in place of your vendor’s job engine. Leaving your website people to make your brand pop and do other SEO work.


Expect from 2020/21 to be ready to pay for Google for Jobs optimisation budget either directly or indirectly.


Expect from 2020/21 to need to switch off Google for Jobs when the global economy tanks as it did in 2008/09/10/11, because you will be overrun with job seekers.


Expect from 2020/25 a ‘Googleforyou’ type service for job seekers active and passive to interact with other Google services.


Expect a zillion conspiracy theories about Google products and the recruitment industry.


Expect one huge recruitment website vendor to tell you they have a special way to manipulate Google for Jobs structured data, and expect us to start pointing out their clients who were banned as they spammed Google for Jobs. If you are unlucky enough to be one of their clients, their ideas for landing pages are also doorway pages ‘bannable by Google’. But hey, they are seven years old in business terms, so you would expect them to make more mistakes than your 14-year-olds.

Can you spend less on job boards?

Can you spend less on job boards and services such as Indeed? Yes, no, and maybe…


Let’s hear it for the yes folks


If you optimise your website for Google for Jobs and then restrict the job boards you send your jobs to at the same time, you have a theoretical chance of gaining jobseeker traction without job board expense.


Google has a prime slot in the search results for a wide range of obvious search terms (and some which are not so obvious), and people will naturally enter the platform to see those jobs. Questions remain, in our view, about how slick and accurate the service is almost a month after its launch in the UK. Nonetheless, the service will get job seeker traffic, and as a result, so will you.


Let’s hear it for the no/naysayer folks


People are lazy. Even the most industrious of people are lazy at some things; usually, those things that save us time or cause us work we had not planned for make for the laziest choices.


We know that to be a fact, which is why clients of, say, Volcanic or JXT continue to pay those suppliers a monthly fee for websites. That, over three years to five years, means they will pay Volcanic or JXT £9500 to £59,500 more than they would need to pay us for a like-for-like service (our service has lower risks associated with GDPR).


So, what do people’s website buying habits have to do with Google for Jobs? Just a few months after Google for Jobs launched, it offered four updates, and one of those was buttons that give you a choice of where to apply for the job. It is the best indication that Google knows we are lazy, and while we could keep our LinkedIn profile more up to date than our CV we have stored at Reed, Monster, Total Jobs, Jobserve, etc. this is where we are happy to apply for jobs. Meaning you will still need jobs on sites where people have formed lazy habits.


Job boards have not gone away, and nor has Indeed. In fact, early traffic suggestion from those who track Indeed has seen a rise in activity and matching accuracy. Pay-per-click campaigns put you above the Google for Jobs panel, and if you would only but invest in some pay-per-click for job-seeker-related searches, you will find that this is not that hard to achieve and not as costly as you think.


Job boards and Indeed (plus other job aggregators) have built a following from short-term job seekers (making job searches now/having job alerts active) and longer-term (past positive user experience). That client base can only be disrupted if the other mediums start to fail. The other mediums can only begin to fail if the jobs they need stop being sent by you.


Finally, and most obviously of all, most job boards have a CV database search service. Let’s be honest, the majority of your sales come from searching those databases, and the job ad is a necessary evil to get cheap access to data another user supposedly keeps up to date for you.


Let’s hear it for the maybe folks


70%, 83%, 90%… All the numbers you will hear if you listen to or read about how many people search for jobs using Google. Aside from this being one of those moments when you find out you can’t recycle your Costa Coffee takeaway cup, some trading standards geek should investigate those numbers. It seems that Google only knows what Google users do, not what the people of the world do if they don’t use Google. For accuracy, we need real evidence-based testing.


Until we have testing and concrete evidence, I suggest the 12-month marker and the three-year marker; we do not know what Google can do. Sure, there will be some podcasts from our US cousins who have had it longer than we have in the UK, but the truth is their labour market is different from ours in so many ways. It is a poor choice to make detailed comparisons from, although too many do; overviews — yes, US habits as gospel for the UK — no.


The big question for me on the maybe is our current user habits. I (Darren) joined recruitment in 1993 when there were no job boards, and I learned to recruit without job boards. Roll forward ten years, and I did not meet many recruiters who did not feel reliant upon a job board to do their job. Which means you are going to have to pull people kicking, screaming, and ultimately resigning from your organisation to go to a competitor who maintains a ‘send jobs everywhere’ mentality.


‘Who blinks first’ rarely works in recruitment, and seldom works if you are at the end where you are recruiting perm candidates on a contingent fee where the client has the choices of 5, 50, or 500 other recruiters willing to step into your shoes.




It is a fun time to be in candidate sourcing. If you do not fall into the panic of Google for Jobs, you should also be able to dictate better terms to job boards and services like Indeed. If I were running a recruitment company today, I would insist all my suppliers drop their fees, as they need me and my job content to survive the Google for Jobs wave that might wash out their need, in a sea of so many sources having duplicate content.


Reed, Monster, CV Library, and Jobserve are all playing suck it and see with Google for Jobs.

Does it cover all sectors/niche markets?

The short answer: Yes, it is set to take all job content.


The reality answer you need:  You need to test your niche, and see if your site, and your chosen job platform partners (job boards/LinkedIn, etc.), rank when job seekers are in Google for Jobs mode. Only this testing can give you the real answer for you. Pundits can predict it or tell you how others have done, but because others have done it, that does not mean it is automatic for you.


The other reality is the job snobbery of the recruitment sector. Snobbery that will keep people ‘off’, not ‘on’ the Google for Jobs platform. Plus, the apparent issue is that not all jobs are filled from those who are the classic search for job ads candidates (passive candidates). Google for Jobs is not yet the solution for passive job seekers, but your website can be, and it is quite easy to do.


Side note:  a job alert is not a passive job seeker generation.


Yeah, they have a job alert, but if you test the user experience, then it ain’t all that. The cancel rate of the job alerts will be an interesting one to see in a year.


Subject to recruitment snobbery, location, niche, salary, etc., then, in theory, it can cover all jobs. In practice, it never will.

Do you have to invest in SEO? (Part One)

Part 1:


What Google giveth with one hand, it taketh with the other…


OK, here is what we can give you as fact.


  1. We have spoken to five globally respected SEOs who have commentated on Google for Jobs and some lesser-known SEOs at your typical SEO firm in the UK who have looked at Google for Jobs. We picked those who had worked with Google for Jobs or commented on it in some capacity to ensure they were quoting fact not theory. Largely, the majority confirmed that your organic rankings could be damaged by changes to your job pages to make them fit the Google for Jobs data structure.


How big a deal that is remains to be seen. In 14 years of studying 100 websites a day, my team and I know for sure that a typical recruitment company has no idea where its site visitors come from. So how can you credibly change something you have no data on and be sure of your outcome? SEO is the worst-measured metric of anything a recruiter does, so you could be throwing out the baby with your bathwater.


  1. Recruitment is based upon a class system and well-established snobbery. In the same way, Lidl has not managed to close down all other supermarkets; some shoppers will not give up Tesco, Sainsbury’s, Waitrose, or Marks and Spencer. Indeed, seeing Michael Page on Google for Jobs maybe be enough for some to say they have gone downmarket. The UK thrives on snobbery.


Google for Jobs is a Lidl or an Aldi, so do not be surprised if not all the talent from all the niches of both the active and passive variety do not show up on the platform.


  1. Google is a capitalist company with a communist idea. They say they want all jobs in the world to be on Google for Jobs for all, but really, they want to keep the human data you will drive and give to them, and there will be some oligarchs who do very well from having all that data behind the scenes.


  1. Google for Jobs makes jobs more accessible to everyone, and that is everyone. OK, let’s say that again: EVERYONE.


In practice, this will mean if your job is for a property tech JavaScript guru, your applications could come from countries where people have no right to work in the UK. Unless Brexit is going to have a Bobby Ewing coming out of the shower moment, then our list of countries we can bring people from is getting smaller, not larger.  So if it is as good as some ‘bandwagon marketers’ say it is, you will be inundated with job applications from EVERYONE. (For those too young, he was a character on a soap who was killed off and then suddenly reappeared stepping out of the shower. His death was explained as his wife’s dream.)


Google tells nobody how to manipulate its search engine. You are no different. If your supplier says they have hidden or special methods, run to the nearest exit if you don’t want your bank account raided.

Do you have to invest in SEO? (Part Two)

Part 2:


If you wanted an answer in the more traditional sense of SEO, then yes, you will need to run a formal SEO plan for your website at some point in the future, if not at the start, to stay ranked well on Google for Jobs.


We define SEO in four parts (and it is why we comment elsewhere that SEO is not one thing. Use this example if you are told your site has SEO: it is like a rugby player saying they have sports!). The four parts are technical SEO, on-page SEO, off-page SEO, and social media influencers for SEO. They are explained as follows:


Technical SEO: How well your site is made and to what standard it is compatible with devices, speed issues, and security settings (get an SSL and work in HTTPS mode).


On-page SEO: The content you put on your site to get visitors and, if you are smart, to retain visitors.


Off-page SEO: Other sites that are counted by Google as promoting your site’s content and presence.


Social media influencers for SEO: Be it causation or correlation, we know active social activity lends itself to better rankings.


One way or another, you will pay.

OK, so how do you get on to Google for Jobs?

This is where it gets a bit messy. Imagine you have taken your three-year-old to one of those indoor play parks, and your child is nice, well mannered, polite, and shares his or her toys. Then you meet the other kids: one has a passion for biting your child, one has blocked your child from every toy/slide/rope, and one has come and had their hand in your wallet/purse.


If vendors were your kids, then we are your good child and have taken the time to investigate the ups and (yes) downs of being on Google for Jobs, and we are sharing our toys. First off, Google owns the playpen, and while it sets the rules, its staff are not on hand or ever around when your child is bitten. For example, here is a link that tells your website developer how to set up your jobs pages — show this page to any website developer and they will be able to fix your website.


What this page does not make clear, to those who find this kind of thing a tough read or a bore, is that to be compliant with Google for Jobs is not a ‘one size fits all’ task. It has some must-have data (the job title), and it has some “would like to have data” (the postcode), and some “it would be just dandy if you gave us this data” (salary survey advice/employer reviews).


The vendor that does not explain all of this to you is the kid at the play park who, when asked to share the slide by his mum with your child, has a hissy fit and tells you the slide is theirs. Alternatively, they tell you things like they did structured data 18 months ago. Those 18 months of knowledge came undone in August 2018 a few weeks after the Google for Jobs UK launch. Google for Jobs’ servers were overrun by the Google bot, as they had not planned enough for the frequent crawls of Google (foot shot in).


One did it five years ago, before Google even thought of it. Strangely, when the Google testing tool for Google for Jobs looks at their site, both have between two and six non-compliances with the must-have or like-to-have data. We will be creating a shitstorm with that on LinkedIn sometime soon.


Time for another toy share: https://search.google.com/structured-data/testing-tool/u/0/. This is the tool Google provides to test your compliance.  Go to one of your jobs, copy its page URL, and paste the URL into this tool. You will then get a report that tells you if your job page is compliant.


Simple: you put some code on your website in a set way that Google can understand better.

Still confused about the tech bit?

OK, fear ye not if you are a recruiter who does not understand all the jargon with Google for Jobs. With all that jargon of “structured data this”, and “schema markup that”, you can quickly get in a muddle. So think of Google for Jobs as a recruitment consultant, and they are asking you your must have, like to have, and would be great to have job spec questions. Google for Jobs wants that written down in a specific format, and your web developers need to help with that. Because if you stop and think: Google for Jobs really does speak directly into the recruiter’s core skill sets, so there is nothing to fear.


As Google for Jobs is American, it comes with some of our cousins from over the pond’s quirks. It wants us to use American job titles in some cases and the US date format in others. Mainly, it is a skill matching service. We need to give Google our jobs with all the skills (structured data) it wants.


If ours is not quite right, we need to re-write it as we do with some candidates’ CVs, or have the candidate write a CV if they have none: job pages with no structured data, or about 30,000 UK recruitment websites made using WordPress/Joomla/Umbraco and your local web developer Dave from the BNI meetings you attend.


Does it still present some contradictions? Yes — take the job example in the previous advice point above. The page has a critical error, and yet it ranks. It has five nice-to-haves missing, and it ranks well.


Other pages on this career site (yes, it is an employer career site made ready for Google for Jobs) have job posts that have the location added to the job title.


Those of you who read the page from Google would have read that its job title field should be used for just the job title.  Here we see a job that broke those rules and can confuse or be rejected. As well as some base technical advice, your vendor should be able to work out the human changes for you also.


The example shows they used the following as a job title: “Calling all women”, Residential Field Technician, South Herts. If anyone at the Virgin talent team is a bit peeved at being our example, then talk to your vendor. I happen to be your client for TV/broadband/mobile, so expect to be able to rate my suppliers in all areas.


Some information is optional, but Google needs the following:


  1. The date of the job posting and when the listing expires.
  2. Job title (Google suggests to not squeeze in search keywords or calls to action here — keep it simply as the title of the job).
  3. The name of your company (this can also include your website). Recruiters can use their own — they do not need to give the client’s unless they want to.
  4. The location of the job (Google asks that you should use addresses at street level, but some advertisers have just stated the town).
  5. A full description of the job formatted correctly in HTML (line breaks, headings, etc.) Here is where some job posting tools that populate your website and your cut and paste policies may come unstuck.


Not required, but recommended, items:


  1. Employment type (full time/part time/contractor/temporary, etc.) Not full-time, where your site may say perm/permanent.
  2. Salary (the actual salary as hourly/weekly/monthly/yearly, or as a minimum and maximum value).


If you need more help, give us a shout.

Who will be the biggest winner? Google, the job seeker, the recruiter or the employer?

The answer is Google.


Google gets your data to keep its service relevant in a new way. Here is the best bit: it will not catch a cold from a recruitment process that is not great at the end of the process.


Second place: The recruiter. The bun fight that will go on between vendors will be to your advantage. You can be on the platform yourself, and as candidates will find, 45% of job seekers never hear anything at all from direct employer ads.


Third place: The job seekers. They have fewer places they need to potentially look for jobs.


Fourth place: The employers. Sure, some will claim victories, and there will be lots of gloating from in-house recruitment types. Yet by numbers, Google cannot serve millions of them, for the reasons we have covered. Google cannot react at speed as the recruiters can for the basic tech that gets you on to Google for Jobs in the first place.


Google is like a Las Vegas casino — the Casino always wins.


Recruitment Marketing Expert TMJ…

“Darren and his team at RecruiterWEB have proven themselves as a great service provider that I am happy to recommend to my clients and the industry. Having worked with all the major vendors, I can impartially say RecruiterWEB is the best in the business”.



Robert Woodford