Job ad posted on LinkedIn accidentally reveals pre-selected candidate. Internet says 'that's how corporate hiring works'

A LinkedIn job posting for a Senior Lead Finance Analyst position at a US-based technology company has sparked discussion online after the listing appeared to identify an employee who had already been recommended for the role.

The job advertisement, which was shared publicly on LinkedIn, went viral after a job seeker noticed a line in the description that seemingly revealed the identity of a preferred internal candidate. The discovery led to criticism from some social media users, who questioned the purpose of advertising a role that appeared to have already been earmarked for someone else.

Job Applicant Spots Unusual Detail In Listing

The controversy began when a job applicant shared a screenshot of the listing on social media, highlighting a section that referenced an employee named Richard Evans.

Frustrated by what they perceived as a predetermined hiring process, the applicant criticised the company's recruitment team and sarcastically congratulated the employee mentioned in the advertisement.

“Congrats Richard Evans, on landing the Sr Lead Fin Analyst at Lumen! In the future, after they are finished f***ing around with external candidates who won't for a second be considered!”

The user also added: "F**k these incompetent HR idiots."

The post quickly gained traction on Reddit and other social media platforms, where users debated whether the listing represented a hiring mistake or a routine internal process that had been inadvertently exposed.

What The Job Posting Said

The role was advertised as a remote position based in the United States with Lumen Technologies.

The company described the opportunity as one focused on innovation, accountability and supporting future connectivity solutions.

The listing stated:

"At Lumen, you'll work on infrastructure customers rely on today and build for what's next, where performance, security, and resilience matter.

This is a high accountability environment where bold ideas drive real innovation for our customers, partners, and industry. The work is challenging, expectations are clear, and trust is built into how we operate. If you're ready to take ownership, deliver meaningful impact. and help shape the future of Al-ready connectivity, join us today."

However, further down in the description, users noticed a line that appeared to identify a preferred candidate.

"The Role: Notice of Job Opportunity - Richard Evans is being recommended for the role of Sr Lead Finance Analyst 342273."

The remainder of the advertisement outlined the responsibilities associated with the role.

“The Senior Lead Finance Analyst will play a critical role in managing and optimising Operating Expenses (OPEX) across the enterprise. This position combines strong financial acumen with advanced technical skills, including Al-driven analytics, to deliver actionable.”

Internet Divided Over Hiring Practices

As screenshots of the listing spread online, many job seekers criticised what they viewed as a lack of transparency in recruitment.

However, others argued that the situation may not be as unusual as it first appeared.

One user wrote, “The alternative is that they could have pretended that it was open to anyone, conducted interviews, and then hired the person they had already intended to hire.”

Another commenter said, “I actually wish that companies wouldn't bother posting jobs and interviewing people if they already know they are going to hire someone internally. Just promote them without all this rigamarole.”

Some Users Cite Legal And Regulatory Requirements

Several commenters claimed that public job postings are often required under company policies, government regulations or contracting obligations, even when an internal employee is expected to move into the position.

One user explained, “I have to post EVERY job even if it’s an internal move, yay government contracting. The government says we have to give qualified candidates a chance to apply. 5 days or 3 applicants that meet the requirements and I close it. I don’t like it, the managers don’t like it, the government doesn’t care.”

Another commenter echoed the point, writing, “Except it’s law the have to have the position open to everyone. They’re saying they’re meeting the law requirement without saying it.”

A third user shared a similar experience.

“Tbh, a lot of companies are legally required to have a job posting under the right circumstances. A lot of government and para-govt require this.

At my current place, I'm seeing someone's role posted because they're an immigrant and the law requires the company to post an interview for the position. The boss himself personally said he has no intention of replacing the person, but law is law in this case.

Ill admit it sucks for people like you because it creates noise.”