I don't think the parent comment was complaining about the nomenclature. I interpreted it as pointing out that in any hiring activity, the candidate/applicant/whatever is the product. A company pays a recruiting service in exchange for hiring a candidate.

(Of course, the candidate also receives value because presumably they are looking for a job and get one in this transaction. But the whole "you are the product" trope always ignores the fact that the "product" person is receiving value in the transaction).