
Ghostworking: 92% Of Employees Job Search On Company Time
A new study reveals ghostworking is killing productivity and that a whopping 92% of employees say ... More they job hunt when they're on the clock.
The trend of ghostworking—pretending to work while doing little to no meaningful work--isn't a new phenomenon. It has been a tactic for employees to react to demands imposed on them from management or the result of their desperation to prove they're working for fear of losing their jobs. It used to be called productivity theater or quiet quitting. Now, ghostworking has taken on a whole new dimension--not just fake working but job hunting when on the clock.
Ghostworking is a sign of the growing mistrust and tug-of-war between employers and employees, as both sides display under-the-radar tactics. Since the pandemic, employers have been engaging in certain types of quiet maneuvering like 'quiet cutting' and employee surveillance to assuage the needs of business and stabilize their workforce.
Employees, under pressure to perform and 'prove' they're working, have retaliated with quiet workaround tactics of their own such as mouse shuffling, 'coffee badging' and 'quiet vacationing.' A new study reveals that ghostworkers are adding insult to injury, not only pretending to work but job hunting on company time.
Resume Now's latest Ghostworking Report indicates a growing productivity crisis of employees faking productivity and even job searching instead of working. The survey was conducted with 1,127 American workers on February 25, 2025. Participants were asked about their time-wasting habits, workplace distractions and the frequency of procrastination at work.
As companies explore ways to prevent killers of productivity, researchers insist that data from this study suggests time-wasting is about the pressure to appear busy. Employees have developed creative strategies to maintain the illusion of productivity, even as many report wasting more time while working remotely than in the office.
The findings reveal that 58% of workers admit they regularly pretend to work and 34% do so occasionally—often due to pressure to appear busy rather than actually being productive. The survey listed the common strategies employees use to create the illusion of productivity at work:
The researchers explain that these behaviors are the result of a widespread disconnect between expectations and engagement. The study reveals that, when you think the divide couldn't get any worse, shocking numbers of employees confess that they job search when they're supposed to be working.
Perhaps the most shocking survey findings are what ghostworkers are doing to kill time. A whopping 92% admit that they have job-searched during work hours, 55% have regularly searched for a new job while on the clock and 37% have occasionally searched for a new job during work hours.
The most common bold job-hunting move is the 24% of ghostworkers who use company time to edit resumes. Another 23% confess to applying for jobs using work computers, 20% admit to taking recruiter calls from the office and 19% say they have sneaked out for an interview.
Keith Spencer, career expert at Resume Now, sees ghostworking as a symptom of poor communication and burnout. 'Many employees feel pressure to appear busy rather than actually being productive,' he says. 'Rather than focusing on monitoring, companies should explore why employees feel the need to fake productivity and consider addressing underlying issues like unproductive meetings and communication gaps.'
On the surface, the profile of all ghostworking looks the same. But it's important that employers exercise caution in judging employee motives without knowing the whole story. A deeper look unearths a variety of factors that can lead workers to check out and not measure up to their potential.
Don't judge a book by its cover. The first step employers can take is to distinguish between ghostworkers who are dragging their feet and doing the bare minimum for the wrong reasons and an A-team worker who is engaged, doing the best but burning out. Or a disheartened employee, overlooked for a promotion, but has been committed to the company. It's important to heck in with employees on a regular basis in a non- threatening way and engage employees in a two-way conversation about their emotional state and individual goals that indicate you care and appreciate them.
Give employees a seat at the table. Let them know you see and hear them. Connect with individual workers on a regular basis so they feel valued and appreciated. Open and honest conversations with staff about expectations can make employees feel like they have a vested interest in the company.
Celebrate and acknowledge workers. Most surveys show that the number one quality employees want above all others is feeling valued and appreciated by their company. Create employee appreciation initiatives so team members feel celebrated and acknowledged for their hard work.
Offering growth opportunities for advancement is the ticket to company loyalty. Workers want to know that their company values their development, wants to see them meet their full potential and is willing to support their training, mentoring and coaching.
The Resume Now survey asked employees whether monitoring employee activity would increase productivity, and 69% answer they would be more productive if their employer monitored their screen time, 19% say monitoring would not change their work habits, 10% say they would just find other ways to take breaks and three percent say it wouldn't matter because they already stay focused.
The larger, more significant view, however, is building employer-employee trust. It's a vicious dance. When employers micro-manage employees, ghostworking is a natural consequence, and when management is aware of ghostworkers, supervision is the result. Both reactions are productivity killers that fuel the cycle. Both sides can end the ghostworking cycle when they place value on productivity over mere visibility and grow a healthier, more productive and engaged workforce.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Times
10 minutes ago
- New York Times
On a Search for an Old E.V., Jay Leno's Car Obsession Came Up Clutch
Times Insider explains who we are and what we do and delivers behind-the-scenes insights into how our journalism comes together. As an energy reporter on the Business desk of The New York Times, I often cover the transition to electrify the world around us, including automobiles and heating and cooling systems. But until I spoke with the historian at the Petersen Automotive Museum in Los Angeles, I did not know that electric cars rattled down city streets as far back as the mid-1890s. A century ago, roughly a third of taxi drivers in New York City shuttled passengers around in electric cars. I set out to write an article about these cars, and a time before lawmakers gave deference to the oil industry by offering numerous tax breaks, paving the way for gasoline-powered vehicles. But finding an original E.V. that I could ride in proved difficult. Most of them sit in museums and personal collections. Enter the comedian — and car collector — Jay Leno. My editor suggested I reach out to Mr. Leno after learning about his 1909 Baker Electric, housed in his famous garage. Mr. Leno's team gave an enthusiastic 'Yes' in reply. When I arrived at his warehouse garage in Burbank, Calif., in April, Mr. Leno had his Baker Electric charged and ready to hit the streets. The 116-year-old car, which had been refurbished, looked like it had just rolled off the showroom floor. Still, the wooden high-top body, 36-inch rubber wheels and Victorian-style upholstery whispered the car's age. It was basically a carriage with batteries, enabling drivers to free horses from their bits and harnesses. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.


Forbes
10 minutes ago
- Forbes
Artificial Intelligence Collaboration and Indirect Regulatory Lag
WASHINGTON, DC - MAY 16: Samuel Altman, CEO of OpenAI, testifies before the Senate Judiciary ... More Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law May 16, 2023 in Washington, DC. The committee held an oversight hearing to examine A.I., focusing on rules for artificial intelligence. (Photo by) Steve Jobs often downplayed his accomplishments by saying that 'creativity is just connecting things.' Regardless of whether this affects the way you understand his legacy, it is beyond the range of doubt that most innovation comes from interdisciplinary efforts. Everyone agrees that if AI is to exponentially increase collaboration across disciplines, the laws must not lag too far behind technology. The following explores how a less obvious interpretation of this phrase will help us do what Jobs explained was the logic behind his genius The Regulatory Lag What most people mean when they say that legislation and regulation have difficulty keeping pace with the rate of innovation because the innovation and its consequences are not well known until well after the product hits the market. While that is true, it only tells half of the story. Technological innovations also put more attenuated branches of the law under pressure to adjust. These are second-order, more indirect legal effects, where whole sets of laws—originally unrelated to the new technology—have to adapt to enable society to maximize the full potential of the innovation. One classic example comes from the time right after the Internet became mainstream. After digital communication and connectivity became widespread and expedited international communication and commercial relations, nations discovered that barriers to cross-border trade and investment were getting in the way. Barriers such as tariffs and outdated investment FDI partnership requirements—had to be lowered or eliminated if the Internet was to be an effective catalyst to global economic growth. Neoliberal Reforms When the internet emerged in the 1990s, much attention went to laws that directly regulated it—such as data privacy, digital speech, and cybersecurity. But some of the most important legal changes were not about the internet itself. They were about removing indirect legal barriers that stood in the way of its broader economic and social potential. Cross-border trade and investment rules, for instance, had to evolve. Tariffs on goods, restrictions on foreign ownership, and outdated service regulations had little to do with the internet as a technology, but everything to do with whether global e-commerce, remote work, and digital entrepreneurship could flourish. These indirect legal constraints were largely overlooked in early internet governance debates, yet their reform was essential to unleashing the internet's full power. Artificial Intelligence and Indirect Barriers A comparable story is starting to unfold with artificial intelligence. While much of the focus when talking about law and AI has been given to algorithmic accountability and data privacy, there is also an opportunity for a larger societal return from AI in its ability to reduce barriers between disciplines. AI is increasing the viability of interdisciplinary work because it can synthesize, translate, and apply knowledge across domains in ways that make cross-field collaboration more essential. Already we are seeing marriages of law and computer science, medicine and machine learning, environmental modeling, and language processing. AI is a general-purpose technology that rewards those who are capable of marrying insights across disciplines. In that sense, the AI era is also the era of interdisciplinary boundary-blurring opportunities triggered by AI are up against legal barriers to entry across disciplines and professions. In many professions, it requires learning a patchwork of licensure regimes and intractable definitions of domain knowledge to gain the right to practice or contribute constructively. While some of these regulations are generally intended to protect public interests, they can also hinder innovation and prevent new interdisciplinary practices from gaining traction. To achieve the full potential of AI-enabled collaboration, many of these legal barriers need to be eliminated—or at least reimagined. We are starting to see some positive movements. For example, a few states are starting to grant nurse practitioners and physician assistants greater autonomy in clinical decision-making, and that's a step toward cross-disciplinary collaboration of healthcare and AI diagnostics. For now, this is a move in the right direction. However, In some other fields, the professional rules of engagement support silos. This must change if we're going to be serious about enabling AI to help us crack complex, interdependent problems. Legislators and regulators cannot focus exclusively on the bark that protects the tree of change, they must also focus on the hidden network of roots that that quietly nourish and sustain it.


Bloomberg
11 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Why the ‘TACO' Trade Is Tempting Investors Amid US-China Talks
On May 30, US President Donald Trump accused his Chinese counterpart, President Xi Jinping, of breaking a trade truce that brought down tariffs from extreme highs in early May. Investors saw the writing on the wall: tariffs would spike again, hurting the economy. Stocks fell more than 1%. But later the same day, Trump said he'd have a conversation with Xi, and optimism – and stock prices – were restored. When the call finally happened on June 5, the S&P 500 Index again briefly surged. The early months of Trump's second term have been marked by this pattern: The president threatens to impose sky-high tariffs and stocks tumble, then he relents and markets recover. Wall Street has learned to capitalize on this by buying into the S&P 500 when it first drops, anticipating the president will backtrack on tariffs and send markets higher.