Recruiters are drowning in resumes and a lot of them end up screening the wrong ones manually (👀 7 seconds per resume, on average!).
So we built AI interviewers S(ai)na to do the first round of interviews for Recruiters. It’s saving teams 20+ hours and shaving off 10+ days in time-to-hire.
We’re already seeing love from early users, now we just want to share it with the PH Community.
This is the 3rd launch from HireHunch. View more
JusRecruit
Launching today
Cut time-to-hire by 10 to 15 days with AI that handles your first hiring bottleneck. JusRecruit phone-screens every inbound applicant, runs structured AI interviews, and surfaces only qualified candidates. Teams skip low-signal first rounds, free up ~20 recruiter hours per role, and move faster without sacrificing fairness or quality.
Free Options
Launch Team / Built With
this is actually a pretty real problem tbh. when the number of applicants gets high, just reaching the actually good candidates takes so much time and energy. i like that this is focused on that part and not trying to do 20 random things.
HireHunch
@nayan_surya98 Exactly. When applicant volume increases, a lot of recruiter time gets spent just trying to identify the few candidates who are actually worth moving forward.
That’s the specific problem we wanted to focus on. Instead of trying to solve every part of hiring, JusRecruit is designed to handle the initial screening layer, so recruiters can reach the most relevant candidates much faster.
Keeping the scope tight was a deliberate decision.
HireHunch
Interesting approach to cutting hiring bottlenecks — phone screens are one of the most time-consuming parts of the process. How does the AI handle edge cases where candidates give unexpected or creative answers?
HireHunch
@fairpay Great question. In early screening, most questions are designed to capture structured signals like experience, skills, availability, compensation expectations, or problem-solving approach.
When candidates give unexpected or creative answers, the system doesn’t try to force a rigid interpretation. The responses are transcribed and analyzed for key signals, but recruiters can always review the full response and context.
In many cases those “unexpected” answers are actually useful, because they reveal how a candidate thinks or communicates. The AI helps surface those responses efficiently, while the final judgment still stays with the recruiter.
So the goal is not to over-automate decision making, but to make it much faster for recruiters to review and identify promising candidates.
Automating phone screens and first-round interviews with AI targets the exact stage of the hiring funnel where the most recruiter time gets burned on candidates who won't advance — handling that initial qualification layer frees up human recruiters to focus on the nuanced later-stage conversations where judgment actually matters. The key question for any AI-driven interview tool is candidate experience; how do candidates typically react to the AI interviewer compared to a human phone screen — do you see differences in completion rates or candidate satisfaction scores between the two formats?
HireHunch
@svyat_dvoretski That’s exactly the problem we’re trying to solve. A large portion of recruiter time gets spent on early screening that often doesn’t move candidates forward.
On the candidate side, what we’re seeing so far is that most candidates appreciate the speed and flexibility. Instead of waiting days for a recruiter to schedule a call, they can complete the screening when it’s convenient for them and move ahead in the process faster.
Completion rates have been quite strong, especially when the expectations are clearly communicated upfront. Candidates generally respond well when they understand that this step helps accelerate their application rather than delay it.
We also see this as a complement to human interaction rather than a replacement. The goal is to automate the initial qualification layer so recruiters can spend more time on meaningful conversations with shortlisted candidates.
Candidate experience is definitely something we’re closely tracking and continuously improving as we scale.
Phone screening was always the fastest way to filter candidates, but also where the first connection happened. Some people simply prefer talking to a human — it is how trust starts. Have you seen any pushback from candidates on the AI-led screening, or does the speed trade-off make up for it?
HireHunch
@klara_minarikova That’s a great point. Phone screening has always been both a filtering step and a way to start that first human connection.
What we’ve seen so far is that most candidates actually appreciate the speed and flexibility. Instead of waiting days for a recruiter call, they can complete the screening immediately and move forward faster in the process.
We’re also careful about positioning it clearly to candidates. It’s not meant to replace human interaction in the entire hiring journey. It simply handles the initial screening so recruiters can spend more time having meaningful conversations with the most relevant candidates later in the process.
That balance between efficiency and human connection is something we’re paying close attention to as we continue improving the product.
Really interesting, especially focus on removing the bottleneck at the screening stage.
Curious how you're thinking about false positives early on.
HireHunch
@edgeghost False positives are definitely something we think about carefully, especially at the screening stage.
Our approach is to use AI mainly to structure and surface signals, not to make irreversible decisions. Recruiters can still review the full responses, transcripts, and evaluation signals before deciding whether a candidate should move forward.
The goal is to significantly reduce the manual screening workload while keeping the recruiter in control of the final judgment. That helps minimise the risk of strong candidates getting filtered out too early.
HireHunch
👋 Hey Product Hunt!
I'm Nawal, and I've been obsessed with one problem for the past year: why does hiring still feel like it's stuck in 2005?
Watching recruiters drown in spreadsheets, manually dialing candidates, and copy-pasting the same screening questions over and over - it felt like a solvable problem. So we built JusRecruit.
JusRecruit is an AI-powered recruiting ATS platform for high-volume hiring teams. It runs AI phone screenings, conducts structured interviews, and surfaces your best candidates - automatically. The outcome we're laser-focused on: cutting 10–15 days off time-to-hire and saving recruiters ~20 hours of manual work per role.
We've been deep in the weeds on this - talking to recruiting agencies, in-house TA teams, and high-growth companies hiring hundreds of people at once. Every conversation reinforced the same pain: screening is broken at scale.
This is our answer to that.
If you're in recruiting, talent acquisition, or just someone who's been on the receiving end of a chaotic hiring process - I'd genuinely love your take.
👉 What's the most painful, soul-crushing part of your hiring process right now?
Every response shapes what we build next. Thanks for being here 🙌