my employee is vaping on video calls

by Alison Green on December 12, 2024

A reader writes:

I manage a team that has moved to remote work. We are now holding all of our meetings through virtual interfaces. Recently I have noticed one of our employees vaping during our meetings with me and during all-staff meetings. Do you think this is appropriate or should I say something?

I answer this question — and three others — over at Inc. today, where I’m revisiting letters that have been buried in the archives here from years ago (and sometimes updating/expanding my answers to them). You can read it here.

Other questions I’m answering there today include:

  • My employee uses distracting verbal fillers
  • Should I tell candidates to stop applying for jobs they don’t meet the requirements for?
  • Telling someone we’re reopening but not hiring them back
You may also like:
{ 96 comments }

{ 96 comments… read them below }

  1. Elle*

    The vaping thing is interesting; for me, it’s imperative that vapes not be left in my work area, because I will later mindlessly grab and use it when thinking very hard. This isn’t a huge problem because it’s rare for me to vape in my home office, but occasionally I’ll do some weekend reorganizing and have to be extra sure not to leave one in there lest I pick it up and start thoughtfully puffing during a meeting. It’s also not nicotine so it would realllly throw off my workday.

    1. Plate of Wings*

      This is me too LOL, I would have to take PTO the rest of the day and I’d be using that PTO to clean the house.

    2. WheresMyPen*

      I’ve noticed that a lot of vape users do it almost unconsciously every few minutes (or even seconds for some). It’s not like a cigarette where you have to leave the building to smoke one every X minutes, then come back and carry on. I guess it feels inappropriate because we’re not used to seeing someone smoking a cigarette in the office or on a video call, and we associate vaping with smoking, but vaping would bother me less in a call if it were very occasionally. If it were continuously for an hour I think it’d bother me more (I’m not keen on this new habit of being surgically attached to one’s vape but that’s another discussion for another time) but then I wouldn’t do something like eat sweets on a video call so maybe it’s just how I’m used to working.

  2. kanada*

    it’s one thing to say that an employee shouldn’t vape on calls with customers, but since they’re internal meetings, LW should really just get over it.

    1. Zombeyonce*

      I disagree. There’s a social stigma in play here that does affect the employee. People on the call will wonder what exactly is being vaped and make assumptions based on that. It’s equivalent to drinking an non-alcoholic beer at work—it may not be illegal, but it looks bad. Logically it may seem fine since you’re not drinking alcohol, but people will think you are so addicted to beer that you can’t get through a workday without it. Whether or not that’s true, it creates a certain impression that will impact how an employee is viewed by others. It can affect this person being promoted, even, because of the impression they’re giving.

      It also makes meetings feel more casual, which may not be the direction the LW wants for their team. If this employee were to vape on calls with higher-level people, I’m willing to bet it would be commented on in negative ways, which affects not just the employee but LW as well.

      1. Red Reader the Adulting Fairy*

        My general rule of thumb for myself is that if I wouldn’t do it in the office, I probably shouldn’t do it on camera either.

          1. Ellen N.*

            I assume that the reason for no vaping in the office is the smell and the second hand exposure to harmful chemicals.

            Neither of these is an issue on a video call.

              2. LoraC*

                That mist clings to eyeglasses and leave a sticky residue that’s very difficult to clean off. I worked in an office with a bunch of vapers and had to clean my glasses off every time I walked pass them outside.

              3. Rainy*

                Yes, there is. In fact, the carrier liquid in a lot of commercial vapes once aerosolized is an asthma trigger for many people.

                Also: popcorn lung.

      2. Dinwar*

        I disagree. Vaping is common enough that anyone assuming you’re vaping something you shouldn’t is making a pretty wild leap. Further, as you say, there’s nothing illegal about it. The reason people don’t like smoking or vaping is the involuntary risks associated with it–I don’t want to get cancer because of your poor choices. That’s simply not a risk for video calls.

        As for casualness, the employer needs to get over that. I’d wager good money at least some of the folks aren’t wearing business-appropriate apparel where the camera can’t see. I’ve been on calls–formal ones, ones where we were trying to figure out how to keep a client out of court–wearing nothing but a towel. It doesn’t matter; what matters is the person’s contributions to the meeting.

        For my part, this whole issue is one reason I advocate not having cameras on. The main reason is that there is ALWAYS something better to put on screen than my face, even if it’s just the meeting agenda. The secondary effect is that I don’t need to worry about someone disliking my home decor, or the fact that I drink water out of a lowball glass (inside joke between me and my dad), or that I’m wearing an Invader Zim t-shirt. The focus remains on the purpose of the meeting, not on pointless nitpicking of personal habits.

        1. Cloud Wrangler*

          This is the key part of your reply:
          “I’d wager good money at least some of the folks aren’t wearing business-appropriate apparel where the camera can’t see.”
          Where the camera can’t see.
          The person should only be vaping if it’s not seen.

          I drink Diet Pepsi during my work day. I put it in a lidded, Yeti type cup. Some people will judge if they see the can. (See the update regarding the LW and the Type2 diabetic co-worker drinking diet cola.) If they assume it’s water nothing is said.

          I was once at meeting in San Francisco and brought a bottle Diet Pepsi. I had to endure a lecture from another manager on setting a poor example for younger workers. That they only sell water in their vending machines for a reason.

          Lesson learned. Discretion is important.

          1. Juicebox Hero*

            That’s bonkers. I wonder how many younger workers were also bringing soda in Yeti cups so as to avoid the beverage police?

            1. Cafe au Lait*

              My daughter’s day camp teacher tried putting soda in a travel coffee mug. It had the unintended effort of being a topic of conversation when the soda exploded everywhere when the teacher tried to open the sip hole.

            2. JMC*

              Yup completely bonkers. I am going to drink what I want to drink in whatever I want to drink it in and others will have to mind their own business. I don’t do alcohol so it impedes nothing.

          2. I'm just here for the cats!!*

            I distinctly remember a professor when I was a freshman stating how she hated coffee but would drink a Pepsi instead and so many of her coworkers would berate her for having pepsi. So she started putting it in a coffee mug. If anyone saw a dark liquid in the mug they assumed it was coffee and it was ok.

            1. MeleMallory*

              Alexis Bledel on Gilmore Girls would drink soda in the coffee mugs when Rory Gilmore was supposed to be drinking coffee because Alexis hates coffee but Rory drank coffee all the time.

          2. Kara*

            That feels backwards. If cameras are off, people’s personal habits aren’t affecting anyone else. Cameras on, and now they’re affecting other people. Is their work product suffering with an Invader Zim t-shirt, an art deco living room, or by drinking water out of a lowball glass? No? Then why do these things need to be policed? They’re not affecting anything that you’re paying them for, and they’re not affecting anyone else.

        3. Caramel & Cheddar*

          I mean, it’s unprofessional to smoke in an office too, so if I saw someone smoking on a call I’d still think it was weird even if I wasn’t personally being impacted by second-hand smoke.

          1. SpaceySteph*

            This is a fairly new thing to consider unprofessional though. In the 1960s, everyone was smoking, the same way people are drinking coffee now. It fell out of favor because of secondhand smoke (and rightly so) and then BECAME considered unprofessional after that. Perceptions can change.

            1. Strive to Excel*

              As of this point in time it is still considered unprofessional to smoke or vape in the office. Perceptions can and do change – see Alison’s change on wearing pantyhose or tights ten years ago vs more recently! But this isn’t one that has changed yet.

              1. MigraineMonth*

                I think this is the most important point. At this point in time, at most white-collar companies, vaping on a call while on camera still reads as unprofessional/overly casual.

                This may well change in the future if vaping becomes more common, video call norms diverge from office norms, or vaping becomes less associated with marijuana. At the moment, though, it’s probably hurting the employee’s professional image–just as breaking any professional norm would, no matter how irrational or outdated–and needs to be addressed.

            2. Caramel & Cheddar*

              I think it’s fairly new only depending on where you live and what your local laws are like, to be honest. Where I live, smoking has been banned in offices for thirty years. I’m middle aged and mid-career and have never worked anywhere that you would have been allowed to smoke indoors, and it would have been considered unprofessional even twenty years ago to do so.

          1. Dahlia*

            Yeah, bubblegum is legal, but if I was on a work call, I wouldn’t pop a few pieces of hubba bubba and start blowing bubbles.

        6. atalanta0jess*

          But seeing your face is so key to communication! I feel like the vast majority of the things we screen share are much LESS important than your face. Communication is so hampered when cameras are off.

          1. Anon for this one*

            Can we accept that this is an area where people differ? If I need to have my camera on I’m spending a lot of mental energy paying attention to my own facial expression, making sure I’m staring at the camera to create the appearance of eye contact (rather than at what’s being shared or on jotting down things I need to remember), etc and end up retaining less from the meeting. I’ll go camera on in a meeting with just a few people, or if I’m presenting, but otherwise I find it distracting. (And turning off self view doesn’t help, because it’s about performing facial expressions for other people.)

          2. Kara*

            For SOME people, yes. For other people, like me, i get far less out of a conversation if cameras are on. It’s distracting. Listening is hard for me; i need to be able to focus on what’s being said. Having to pay attention to acting is a distraction. Having to try and interpret facial expressions is a distraction. (I can’t read people. Getting my diagnosis made SO MUCH SENSE when i got it!) Not being able to stim is a distraction. I’m very much a ’emails over meetings’ person, but if it has to be a meeting, please, cameras off! I’m going to get and give so much more that way!

      3. Amy Purralta*

        Someone started at my company a couple of weeks ago. We’re all remote. I met him on video call yesterday. He started vaping, I’m not sure if it was because it was an informal call. I got to say hi to his rescue dog. As soon as he started vaping I did think of this letter. Still deciding whether to say something to his Manager or see if he does it on other calls first.

      4. Roland*

        I am always taken aback by my coworker who vapes on zoom but I’ve never once thought it was marijuana. I do not believe that is a common reaction.

    2. Fluffy Fish*

      nah. like or not there’s standards for behavior at work. just because you are in your home office it doesn’t mean you are not at the workplace – you are it’s just virtual. just like you can’t show up to your meetings in a bathing suit or boxer shorts.

      1. Curious*

        I think it depends on what is on camera. I would never wear jeans to a meeting in the office; I almost always wear jeans while WFH. (I wouldn’t wear just underwear because if I accidentally showed my jeans on camera, I’d be mildly embarrassed, while if I showed my underwear, I’d be mortified.)

      2. JMC*

        And yet so many people work in those hoodie blankets, in pajamas, in sweats, wearing those sleep bonnets, because it does NOT matter. Work is what’s important not what people are wearing.

        1. Fluffy Fish*

          If that’s the culture of your workplace than that is fine. And yet it’s’ not every workplace and appearance does in fact matter in some workplaces.

          In very few workplaces are you going to find its totally ok to be wearing your pajamas in a work meeting.

          I swear people in the comments forget they are answering a LW and not applying their own standards.

    3. vape it up*

      I’ve been vaping on camera for years lol. I only do it with my immediate team though, not other stakeholders who I don’t normally work with or upper management, etc. Certainly wouldn’t do it on client-facing calls or the like. I think if you’re part of someone’s team and they want to vape in meetings you should not be a narc and just ignore it. It’s helpful for me to keep focused during meetings (I also have a small e-cig that doesn’t blow huge clouds, it’s barely noticeable most of the time). It’s hard enough being on video calls for many hours a day, anything that makes it a little more tolerable for your coworkers should be embraced.

      If you have an issue with that because it’s “not workplace behavior” well, neither was fully remote work a few years ago so, maybe try adapting with the times instead of nitpicking behavior that affects you in absolutely no way.

      1. Frank*

        “hard enough being on video calls for many hours a day” ????!?!?!?!?!??! So, you never went to an in-person job then?

        1. Zombeyonce*

          Having worked in-person in an office and also remotely the last 5 years, it’s very different to be on a camera all day than to work in an office where other people are around you. You have to be “on” the whole time you’re on camera, which can be exhausting. You can’t tell if people are staring at your face on camera the entire time, so you often have to school your reactions to things. In an office, you’re likely working at a desk without people staring at you all the time. Even if you’re in a lot of in-person meetings, you can see when people are paying attention to you and relax a little when they’re not. You can also read body language a lot better in person, so you have to pay attention very hard in remote meetings to get the same impressions from others, making it even more taxing.

          1. Dasein9 (he/him)*

            Yep. It’s much more tiring and stressful to go from remote meeting to remote meeting all day, especially with cameras on, than to be in an office with people.

            I hope I never have to go to an office again, but it’s a mistake to think that remote work somehow less work.

          2. Strive to Excel*

            +1,

            Given the option of full-time in-person and remote with several hours/day of video call, I would (and did) pick in-person without a second thought. It’s much less stressful.

          1. Frank*

            No, it isn’t. You all that are bad at it? That’s fine. We’ll promote people that follow the norms and you’ll be left behind.

        3. Someone Online*

          I am in video meetings 6-7 hours per day. It is exhausting. In person probably would be less stressful and would certainly be more stimulating.

      2. Radioactive Cyborg Llama*

        I am very much a “stupid rules are stupid” kind of person and focus on what’s getting done, not how it’s getting done, and I still think using the word “narc” makes you sound like a troublesome teenager.

        1. MigraineMonth*

          Lol, me too. Especially without the context of the police, narcotics, any illegal drugs whatsoever (I assume), or even being an informant.

          “Jerry, please turn down your music after 11pm.”
          “God, Dad, don’t be such a narc!”

    4. Soul Sister*

      Perhaps you could try something else to keep your mind busy. I knit during our team meetings because otherwise the urge to vape is just so overwhelming. Ever since I quit smoking cigs, I just need my vapes you know?

    5. Bunch Harmon*

      Pre-pandemic, I had a coworker who vaped in meetings. He was asked to stop by the folks who smoked cigarettes because they said it made their cravings worse and they couldn’t light up at the meeting.

      1. Cloud Wrangler*

        That’s an important point I never thought of. We are often sensitive to people with other issues. I can imagine it would be difficult if someone were trying to quite smoking/vaping to see someone do it in a meeting.

      2. Dasein9 (he/him)*

        That would happen to me and I haven’t had a cigarette since 2007. The addiction’s still there, though, and springs up when I get stressed.

    6. L-squared*

      I agree.

      I’m not a smoker, but I honestly wouldn’t care if someone was vaping. I had a boss who used to do it, and it didn’t bother me at all.

      I think its oddly puritanical to care about that.

      1. Rainy*

        The resulting vapor is an asthma trigger for me.

        I don’t care because I’m “puritanical” (lol forever), but because I find it extremely difficult to give up breathing.

    7. Jamoche*

      Last place I worked had a team in France. Right in the middle of a zoom meeting, one of them just lit up a cigarette. Vive la France!

      1. MigraineMonth*

        I wouldn’t be 100% surprised if someone in France just lit up a cigarette in the middle of an in-person meeting. There is a lot more smoking in continental Europe than the US.

    8. Anon Attorney*

      for what’s it’s worth, that is an insane position to take in my industry! if i started vaping during a call, it would shock people. and i would be shocked if i saw it.

      1. Emma*

        I work at a children’s hospital and if I called into any meeting and vaped I would be soundly reprimanded. Not only because it looks unprofessional but it’s antithetical to the work we do. I understand it’s a different industry but it seems more akin to drinking alcohol while at work.

      1. Ask a Manager* Post author

        It doesn’t matter in terms of (most) work outcomes, but in many offices it will affect how you’re perceived, and it’s irresponsible to tell people that it won’t. If it doesn’t in your office, great (truly, and I look forward to the day nothing non-work-related matters with any of this stuff). But there are still many offices where vaping or wearing shorts or having a big marijuana leaf sewn on your backpack will indeed affect you professionally.

  3. Yes And*

    Re #3: I used to work for a company that provided outsourced financial management to nonprofits. Whenever we posted a job on LinkedIn, we would invariably get a flurry of applications from dudes (it was always dudes) in their second or third year of investment banking. They met literally zero of the qualifications for the role; they just saw “finance” in the title and clicked apply. (And they never came with a cover letter that might have explained that they were looking for a career pivot or something. Just the naked resume.)

    It was annoying – especially since, due to equity considerations, we had strict rules about fully scoring every application we received. But there was nothing we could do about it, except stop posting on LinkedIn. Which we talked about doing. Truthfully, I can’t remember if we finally took that step or not.

    1. Zombeyonce*

      I wonder if AI is making this even more common, leading to even more unqualified applicants applying for jobs and slowing down the entire process. People complain about companies using software to filter out candidates before reviewing applications, which can be really frustrating for applicants who don’t use the “right” words in their resume and application, but it’s hard to imagine any other efficient way to do it when the problem is increasing.

      1. bamcheeks*

        This is definitely happening in the UK graduate recruitment market— there was a report about it a few weeks ago from the Institute of Student Employers, whcih represents about 100 of the largest graduate recruiters. They say it’s a vicious circle of applicants seeing “100 people have applied for this” on LinkedIn or similar, assuming that means there are 100 people for every job and it’s really competitive, so they use AI to increase the number of applications they do, which bumps up the number of applications which makes applicants feel like it’s more competitive so they need to do more applications… There are massive discussions in the early talent field about how to handle a massive increase in applications and a significant decrease in quality.

    2. MigraineMonth*

      When I was last job searching, at least one of the big sites had a “screening” where you answered a couple of questions before submitting a resume. Adding one or two screening questions for absolutely core job functions might cut down on applications, if the applicants answer honestly.

      Note that I said one or two . Some jobs I applied to had 30 questions, and if you answered no to any of them you couldn’t even submit your resume. (I do sometimes wonder about the “impossible” job posting that required 10 years of experience in a technology that’s existed for 8 years. Did they get zero applicants? Screen out every literalist or scrupulously honest person?)

      Alternately, for those who don’t have rules about scoring every submission, state prominently in the application instructions that you require a cover letter. That should filter out 95%+ of applicants.

      1. Clisby*

        Impossible job postings: My husband (computer programmer) once saw an ad requiring at least 10 years of C++ experience. The only people who could possibly have qualified had worked with Bjarne Stroustrup at Bell Labs.

  4. Slow Gin Lizz*

    I am curious how OP2’s employee turned out. I have (successfully, I think?) (haha, no pun intended with that ?) trained myself out of my habit of upspeak, which I noticed when I would record practice presentations. I wonder how the new employee took the feedback and if she was able to stop using so many filler words.

  5. learnedthehardway*

    OP#3 – consider it job security. If recruitment could be totally automated and if only qualified people applied, you’d be out of a job. There’s a certain amount of amusement I take (as a recruiter) in the fact that technology has created new problems that AI can’t deal with.

    You can’t stop unqualified people from applying to roles. What you can do is to use qualifying questions – such as “Are you entitled to work in Canada? – Y/N” or “How many years of experience do you have with ‘insert technical requirement here’.”

    Sure, some people are going to lie on those questions, but it does help eliminate some of the extremely unqualified people, and I suspect gets people to think about whether it is a good use of their time to apply when they are completely unqualified – probably because it’s impossible to simply automate their application by just downloading their resume. At least, it has been my experience that these types of questions help.

    You have to balance asking candidates to put effort into their application with the fact that really well qualified candidates won’t go to the trouble, if they have other good opportunities. So, keep to a limited number of easily answered questions – ie. don’t ask for essay responses.

    If you’re using LinkedIn, I have found that looking at the profile before looking at the resume helps a lot with speeding things up. A. I don’t have to download every resume. B. often the profile is a lot more informative about what industry the person is in, the size of their employer, where they are located, etc. etc. than the resume is, and C. it’s all on one “page”.

  6. Name (Required)*

    Re: LW2: This is my obligatory comment that, as a person who stutters (PWS), filler is often how I sidestep disfluencies. While I’m generally fine talking about my stutter and acknowledging its role in my life, disclosing can be exhausting and distracting and not everyone is in a place where they wanna hear about it. There are times I’d much rather fly under the radar masquerading as someone with a more commonly accepted verbal tic than “out” myself as a PWS and put my speech impediment in the spotlight.

    1. I'm just here for the cats!!*

      This! I have a speech impediment myself, and sometimes I stumble around words. Basically my brain is too fast for my tongue and I fumble over words. I can see how using filler words or something would help someone

  8. Rick Tq*

    Is LinkedIn the right venue to post your job ad if you are getting such an overwhelming response of unqualified applicants?

    1. Soul Sister*

      Honestly, we only find linked in useful for advertising conferences and diffusion of professional info (ie reg updates). Hiring — not at all!

    2. dulcinea47*

      I get the impression that most jobs get a flood (or at least several) of unqualified applications, no matter the industry, no matter the level of the job, no matter where it’s posted.

    3. bamcheeks*

      I don’t know whether or not all jobs visible on LinkedIn have actually been posted there, or whether it scrapes jobs from other sites? I’ve tried to find this out before and the answers are really contradictory.

  9. Orora*

    It’s also worth it to note that LW #2’s employee is female. Women are conditioned to soften their speech so as not to be perceived as “aggressive” or “demanding”. Unfortunately it’s still a world where women have to walk the fine line of being seen as professional and competent, but not a b!tch.

    1. Elena*

      While I am sensitive to that too, in this case I think it’s truly rather a case of filler words. This wasn’t softening language but rather delaying language. As a male account, executive had been promoted to lead the whole office in this sales organization, he gave his welcome speech. It was so bad that I split a page into three sections and started making tally marks for each like, ummm and youknow.

      I’m afraid the folks around me were laughing by the end of his welcome speech, which wasn’t very kind of me. I never did that in public again, but kept it up on all of the webinars just to stay engaged enough despite the constant delaying speach. Over time he improved and now is an interesting person to listen to.

  10. Apex Mountain*

    I wouldn’t care if an employee was vaping in a 1-1, or a small internal call but I would draw the line at a meeting with customers or others outside the team

    1. Frosty*

      I’m curious if this is a generational thing. My mom was a boomer and she would tell me stories about people smoking cigarettes in meetings (which blew my mind). I’m elder millennial and I’d be absolutely shocked if someone was vaping in a work meeting. It feels like maybe Gen Z feels this is more normal?

      1. Good Enough For Government Work*

        I’m a millennial and I absolutely could not give less of a damn if someone vapes or smokes on internal work calls. My line manager does so regularly and it bothers me not one bit: I know how packed their calendar is and how it can be tricky to nip away for a smoke break. So long as I don’t have to smell it, I don’t care!

        I think it should be avoided on calls with external participants, just because we’re all on our best behaviour for those (likewise, I put away the fidget toy I use to help with my ADHD, or at least make sure it’s safely offscreen). But in internal calls? Nahhh, go for your life.

  11. Dahlia*

    I had a classmate once who would vape in class. It was distracting, especially when she would start falling asleep and eventually pass out before class was done. Mildly amusing to watch during boring lectures, but distracting.

  12. Elsa*

    We hired a remote employee last year who smoked constantly in internal zoom meetings. Like she logged on to her very first training meeting with me with a cigarette in hand. My thought process was that since the main objection to smoking in person is secondhand smoke, for a remote employee it should be fine. So I didn’t say anything.

    But in fact, the smoking in the meetings was just the first of many red flags. She turned out to be a bad employee who did not last very long.

  13. In My Underdark Era*

    ugh, I was ready to roll my eyes at once again policing harmless language quirks (I thought we mostly agreed filler words are ok now!) but the example in the letter is so egregious I had difficulty even parsing the point of the sentence. I would be interested to see what kind of adjustments they made!

    (as a personal bias, I am still recovering from a pet peeve about the overuse of “you know,” specifically. no I don’t know, that’s why you’re telling me! holding a conversation with her could be the exercise I need to get over it lol.)

  14. Frosty*

    LW#3 – If I got a rejection letter scolding me to only apply for jobs they thought I was qualified for, I’d be likely to set up dummy accounts and send in random/fake applications for any job they posted.

    It’s hard enough being a job seeker and trying to tailor your applications as best you can, without someone trying to make you feel bad that they have to do their own job and reject you.

  15. Lemons*

    #3 I think you should also harden your phrasing around non-negotiables. ‘Essential’ is a bit too soft because people often colloquially use ‘essential/essentially’ to mean ‘more or less’, i.e. “He said something about X and Y, I can’t remember exactly but he essentially said Z.” So someone on the fence might think there’s more leeway on that point than there is. Use ‘required’ instead.

    1. Disappointed Australien*

      I thought context of “they see finance in the job title and send a resume” would mean that the rest of the ad is irrelevant. You could write “finance bro to clean toilets” and they’d apply.

  16. coffee*

    Vaping during a meeting seems too much like the vaper has gone on an early smoke break and is mentally checked out. Or maybe paying more attention to their cravings than to their work.

    I know people can vape and pay attention, but I think the optics are bad and wouldn’t recommend it.

  17. TheBunny*

    My take away from this comment thread…

    I can drink vodka on work calls as long as its hidden in a coffee mug or opaque cup with a straw.

  18. Definitely not me*

    #3 too many unqualified applicants: I’d bet that a large majority of those applications are submitted automatically via online job-seeking sites. We’ve had applications come in from Indeed.com where the person wasn’t even aware they had applied and knew nothing about the position.

Comments are closed.