Each year, the CGT national committee of unemployed and precarious workers (CNTPEP-CGT) leads a campaign to denounce “false offers” from Pôle emploi. This year, around twenty of its activists studied “more than 1,900 offers in 13 cities (…) They went through each offer, not hesitating to call the temp agencies to see the effectiveness of the allegations posted on the offer and more particularly its existence, its nature and its duration”, affirms the committee in its press release.
According to the CGT, it would be the construction sector that would post the most “bogus” job offers (offers from Pôle Emploi partner platforms already filled, unspecified working hours, etc.), followed by the service sector the person.
But Pôle emploi disputes the reliability of this study with a “very limited and not representative” scope. In addition, the CGT makes “an amalgam between quality and legality” according to Pôle emploi. “For example, the absence of information on a work schedule is not a criterion of illegality. Thereby, Renewable CDD is not illegal because we cannot know if it will really be illegal, for example in the case of replacing sick leave, ”explains the operator.
More than 20,000 fraudulent offers removed in 2021
Pôle emploi conducts its own study, with a methodology audited by an independent firm. “In 2021, the study of 4,973 offers showed that 94.8% of the offers complied with the legal framework”, indicates the operator.
To avoid the publication of non-compliant offers, the control of Pôle emploi “is carried out by relying on artificial intelligence (…) coupled with a control by a dedicated business adviser, followed by contact with the company “. “Our partners are subject to the same compliance criteria to see their offers published. Thus, between September 4 and 11, 2022, more than 48% of offers were rejected (mainly for duplicates, but also for non-compliance, etc.) and therefore not published”, according to the operator.
Pôle emploi indicates that it has removed “more than 20,000 fraudulent offers in 2021” which were identified “by verifying the identity of the recruiter before submitting the offer, reports by users, and internal checks”. Job seekers who responded to the offer “are systematically contacted again to inform them of the fraud and the possible remedies”, specifies the operator.