\n
<\/p>\n
An in-person remote position sounds like an oxymoron, but that\u2019s exactly what fitness and athletics supplement company Inno Supps advertised in a LinkedIn job posting that\u2019s gone viral for all the wrong reasons.<\/p>\n
Though its listing for a senior copywriter was labeled as remote, job seekers were quick to call out the fine print at the top of the job description: \u201cPlease apply only if you are willing to eventually work on-site in Henderson, Nevada,\u201d it read. \u201cWhile this role is listed as \u2018remote\u2019 for visibility, it is an on-site position and requires in-office presence.\u201d<\/p>\n
Inno Supps was apparently looking to capitalize on the gap between the demand and supply for remote work. A 2025 LinkedIn report<\/a> showed that while the level of job seekers looking exclusively for remote work has stayed close to its mid-pandemic peak, the supply of those roles has dwindled as more and more employers insist on a return to the office.<\/p>\n But advertising a role as remote when it\u2019s actually in-person is a recipe for angry applicants, as the response to Inno Supps\u2019 listing makes crystal clear.<\/p>\n When a screenshot of Inno Supps\u2019 post made its way to X, it quickly went viral<\/a>, amassing 2.3 million views. <\/p>\n Several users said that lying in a job listing destroys a company\u2019s credibility. \u201cWe lied to you in this job posting but trust us, it\u2019ll never happen again,\u201d quipped one user<\/a> in response to the post.<\/p>\n It also encourages applicants to match the company\u2019s behavior, other users said. \u201cIf HR isn’t going to be honest about the job posting(s), why should I be honest on my r\u00e9sum\u00e9?\u201d one poster asked<\/a>.<\/p>\n \u201cThis is the employment version of clickbait,\u201d wrote another user<\/a>.<\/p>\n Several posters also used comparisons to highlight the unfairness of falsely advertising any aspect of a role. \u201cWhile this role listed the salary as \u2018$1,000,000\u2019 for visibility, it is actually $10,000,\u201d imagined one user<\/a>.<\/p>\n Inno Supps has not responded to Fast Company<\/em>\u2019s request for comment.<\/p>\n Is a job posting like Inno Supp\u2019s actually allowed on LinkedIn? At first glance, it seems in violation of LinkedIn\u2019s Jobs Policies<\/a>, which state that \u201cthe primary location of the role, along with any relocation and travel requirements and\/or conditions, should be plainly visible within the post.\u201d Any job post violating those policies will be taken down after review.<\/p>\n But Inno Supps\u2019 post may fall into a gray area. The fact that the role is actually in person is<\/em> plainly visible within the post\u2014just not in its heading.<\/p>\n Still, the listing contradicts itself, meaning it may also violate LinkedIn\u2019s policy that \u201cjob posts must contain truthful, accurate, and complete information about the jobs they promote.\u201d<\/p>\n Fast Company<\/em> has reached out to LinkedIn for clarification on whether Inno Supp’s job posting violates its policies.<\/p>\n The posting has stopped accepting applications, but that hasn\u2019t stopped disgruntled social media users from coming for Inno Supps\u2019 other available positions, including its listing for a new CEO<\/a>, which is also listed as “remote” despite requiring on-site work in its description.<\/p>\n \u201cInno Supps, I will be your downfall!!!!!!\u201d one user wrote<\/a>, adding screenshots of them reporting the job as fraudulent.<\/p>\n“The employment version of clickbait”: Social media comes for Inno Supps<\/h2>\n
Loopholes in LinkedIn\u2019s policies<\/h2>\n