Receive daily articles & headlines each day in your inbox with your free ERE Daily Subscription.

Not logged in. [log in or register]

TheLadders Sued in Consumer Class Action That Calls Site a “Scam”

by
John Zappe
Mar 12, 2013, 3:34 pm ET

The LaddersTheLadders is being sued in New York federal court in a class-action consumer lawsuit alleging that for years it falsely claimed it offered only high-paying jobs.

Brought by an Arkansas woman representing perhaps as many as a million customers of the job board, the suit says:

From its inception until September, 2011, TheLadders scammed its customers into paying for its job board service by misrepresenting itself to be ‘a premium job site for only $100k+ jobs, and only $100k+ talent.’ In fact, TheLadders sold access to purported ‘$100k+’ job listings that (1) did not exist, (2) did not pay $100k+, and/or (3) were not authorized to be posted on TheLadders by the employers.

According to the suit, many of the jobs offered on TheLadders were scraped from other sites with no attempt at verifying how much they paid or even if they were current.

The suit, filed yesterday by the New York class action firm of Bursor & Fisher, was reported by recruiting consultant and blogger Nick Corcodilos. He’s posted a copy of the lawsuit here.

TheLadders issued this statement in response to news of the suite:

We just learned about this yesterday afternoon, and have put it in the hands of our counsel to resolve. We remain steadfast in our commitment to providing the best job-matching service, while serving as the fastest-growing source for professional jobs. In fact, we’re focused on migrating our members to our new online experience, featuring Scout, by April 1, as well as launching our free native iOS app. We continue to be a free resource for recruiters and employers to help them find the right person for the right job.

Five specific counts are alleged in the class action suit:

  1. Violation of Arkansas’ Deceptive Trade Practices Act — Based on the residency of the class representative and the claim that TheLadders falsely promoted its jobs as bona fide $100k paying positions.
  2. Breach of Good Faith and Fair Dealing — Based on the claim TheLadders “intentionally, purposefully and/or negligently” offered unauthorized jobs posts for positions which no longer existed and did not pay $100,000 a year.
  3. Money Had and Received — Based on the claim TheLadders collected money from job seekers for services it did not provide and “has no right to.”
  4. Breach of Contract — Based on the claim TheLadders violated its contract with its subscribers who were promised “a premium job site for only $100k jobs and only $100K+ talent,” but didn’t get that.
  5. Unjust Enrichment/Restitution — Based on the claim that TheLadders received benefits from the subscription-paying job seekers that it didn’t deserve.

Founded in 2003 by Douzet, Andrew Koch, and Marc Cenedella,who is now executive chairman, TheLadders for years positioned itself as a site to find jobs paying at least $100,000. At a time when most job boards were free to job seekers, TheLadders charged to see the jobs. Recruiters initially could post high-paying jobs for free.

The site’s advertising said all jobs were “hand-screened.” Subscription fees, which could cost $30 a month — discounts for longer terms — were estimated to bring in millions annually. One estimate of the private company’s finances put the annual revenue at about $80 million.

Over time, TheLadders revised its business model. Several years ago it began charging recruiters to post jobs and search its database. For a fee, recruiters could also use a concierge-style service to source and do an initial vetting of candidates for them. In September 2011, TheLadders announced it would now accept jobs paying as little as $40,000.

In addition to the subscription income, TheLadders also offered resume reviews and rewriting services, with additional fees charged for the resume writing help.

The lawsuit says the resume service amounted to little more than a generic, form letter review, whose “sole purpose” was to “upsell members into useless paid resume rewriting services for applying to the non-existent $100+ positions on TheLadders’ job board.”

Throughout the suit are references and examples of the company’s own advertising and statements by Cenedella, as well as blog posts critical of The Ladders. Among them is a strongly worded article by ERE Media’s founder and chairman, David Manaster.

The suit doesn’t specify the amount of money being sought, but it does ask the court that TheLadders return all the money it collected for its premium subscriptions, profits it made, and punitive damages.

This article is provided for informational purposes only and is not intended to offer specific legal advice. You should consult your legal counsel regarding any threatened or pending litigation.

  1. Allen Stephens

    Glad to see the Ladders getting some heat for their unethical and illegal business practices. Our team here has fielded many inquires in the past from candidates asking why our ‘Job Posting’ on The Ladders was closed or no longer posted on our main Career Site. We had to tell them The Ladders was scraping our jobs without our permission, and in many cases advertising our jobs as ‘$100K’ jobs when in reality they paid less. I feel for the candidates that were deceived by The Ladders.

  2. Maureen Sharib

    Glen Cathey made an interesting comment on that link to David’s article:

    “If one of the reasons people are offended by The Ladders is that fact that they charge the job seeker, why is no one talking about the fact that LinkedIn has premium job seeker accounts, from $19.95 to $49.95? http://linkd.in/eZZvkr

    Wait ’til that shoe falls!

  3. Jonathan Duarte

    Maureen,
    I’ve never heard of anyone complain about the LinkedIn paid accounts. Have you? I’d be curious to hear what they are complaining about.

    LinkedIn tells it pretty much straight up… here is what you get, and that is what they deliver. They never use the word Exclusive, or $100,000 jobs, etc. They sell access.

    LinkedIn was selling copied and old content.

    It was a sham from Day 1, but a lucrative one… at least for Marc and team. I’m sure the money is long gone, and the only payment anyone will get is pennies on the $ when they bankrupt TheLadders.

    Just my $.02.

  4. Todd Raphael

    Jonathan – in your comment, did you mean “LinkedIn was selling copied and old content,” or is that a mistake?

  5. Jeff DickeyChasins

    It will be interesting to see how this plays out. It’s also an object lesson in the dangers of charging candidates – and then failing to deliver.

  6. Jonathan Duarte

    Hi Todd.
    Thanks for catching my typo. Yes, TheLadders, was the subject of my line “… was selling copied and old content.” NOT LinkedIn.

    Thanks for the catch.
    Jonathan

  7. Todd Rogers

    This is what is commonly referred to as a “cash grab.” 1) The Ladders offer a settlement. 2) The attorneys tally their expenses. 3) The judge signs off on the settlement. 4) Attorneys get $$$paid$$$, and 5) members of the class get settlement coupons worth $1.37 (or thereabout).

  8. Claudia Samuelson

    One of the constant pieces of advice I give candidates is to NOT subscribe to the Ladders. Nick, Ask The Headhunter, has been talking about this for years. I am so glad to see criminal behavior be unveiled!

Post a comment

Please log in to post a comment.

Note: You need to sign up for an account on our new commenting system if you haven't already done so — even if you have an existing ERE account. Find out why »

Login Information