[LRUG] ADVICE
Rob Beattie
RBeattie at recruit360.co.uk
Fri May 24 05:42:21 PDT 2013
Wow!
I wasn't expecting that! I think it's going to take me all weekend to get through all of your responses. If I had the time to reply to you all individually, I would!
There has been some positive feedback and thanks to those that have taken the time to give me some constructive advice.
I don't think you'll be surprised to hear there has been more bad than good. I'm genuinely shocked and surprised to hear the length that some agencies / consultants will go to try and get jobs on!
The purpose of joining this group was to gain a better understanding of the Ruby market and with this in mind, I hope to be in attendance of some of your meetings. Hopefully in doing so, I can prove that I'm not your average, stereotypical, wide-boy recruitment consultant. For those of you that think we are "scum bags, estate agents and representing an industry that should die", that's fair enough. I'll make sure I steer well clear if we are ever in the same room...I don't want to end up with a black eye!
Some of you think this was a tactic to try and get some jobs on, but I can assure you it wasn't. The purpose of this was purely to get some feedback, take that on board and try to work in a way that suits you guys!
Thanks again,
Rob
-----Original Message-----
From: chat-bounces at lists.lrug.org [mailto:chat-bounces at lists.lrug.org] On Behalf Of chat-request at lists.lrug.org
Sent: 24 May 2013 11:39
To: chat at lists.lrug.org
Subject: Chat Digest, Vol 88, Issue 32
Send Chat mailing list submissions to
chat at lists.lrug.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
chat-request at lists.lrug.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
chat-owner at lists.lrug.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Chat digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Fwd: ADVICE (Michael Pavling)
2. Re: ADVICE (Jonathan)
3. Re: ADVICE (Adam Carlile)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 11:32:15 +0100
From: Michael Pavling <pavling at gmail.com>
To: Steve Buckley <steve at hackerjobs.co>
Cc: RBeattie at recruit360.co.uk, London Ruby Users Group
<chat at lists.lrug.org>
Subject: Re: [LRUG] Fwd: ADVICE
Message-ID:
<CA+_7RLx8anboQAwF4mvJZ_r0BKPh07n1z6ffWs6TKK_zd7vo8Q at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
On 24 May 2013 11:11, Steve Buckley <steve at hackerjobs.co> wrote:
> There are two primary factors at play:
> 1. The extortionate costs in exchange for a poor service.
> 2. The deceptive and underhanded tactics practiced by the majority of
> recruiters in the agency industry.
>
That just about sums it up for me.
1. I've had recruiters try to beat down my day rate (my favourite question of theirs: "What's the least you'll work for?"!), but when I've asked them their margin, they refuse to move it.
I now won't work through an agency adding more than 15% to my day rate, and if they start pushing me on price, I lower than to 10%. Another agent will call me about the job if the client is having that much trouble recruiting.
2. This is the biggie.
Essentially, recruiters don't work in the best interest of either the client or the candidate. They get into the middle, and play one off against the other to increase their margin. Withholding candidates (to the detriment of both the client and candidate) because they either don't want to "confuse" the client with too many CVs, or the candidate has hinted they might be awaiting interview somewhere else (and the recruiter doesn't want to look "bad" by waving a good candidate at the client, who then gets snapped up somewhere else), and worst, if they have two clients after the same skills they'll only put a candidate to one of them, and won't raise the second unless the first says "no".
Now, I *know* that everyone has to make a living, and that not every recruiter is the same, or as bad as the worst of them, and there are some nice guys and girls out there trying to do an ethical job. But I could probably count them on the thumbs of one hand.
And yes, I'm sure in-demand candidates can be prima donnas too; I've heard tales of people exclaiming how they "won't get out of bed for less than ?70K".
But the issue is that in a market where the difficulty used to be connecting people-with-skills to people-with-needs-for-skills, a recruitment consultant was a necessary evil, and arguably did a "good job".
As social networking reduces the barriers in connection between clients and candidates, the *need* for recruitment consultants is shrinking, and most likely getting very specialised. Hopefully, in a more specialised market, the ethical, good ones will remain, and the louts will go off to work in boiler room scam call centres.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lrug.org/pipermail/chat-lrug.org/attachments/20130524/7e73cd37/attachment-0001.htm>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 11:34:24 +0100
From: Jonathan <j.fantham at gmail.com>
To: Rob Beattie <RBeattie at recruit360.co.uk>
Cc: London Ruby Users Group <chat at lists.lrug.org>
Subject: Re: [LRUG] ADVICE
Message-ID:
<CAFXqTFOEJTMSqr5yUzZ6HEFfSo0r7xgZg35d9ayLJpuj_E8M0w at mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Having worked with recruiters as a candidate, I can't stand the way recruiters like to keep everyone in the shadows and waste time. I've had recruiters alter my CV to remove contact details and do anything else they can to get in between me and information like claiming "what they're working on is just too secret to tell you anything".
Most seem to say vague unverifiable things in the job description like "a fantastic opportunity working with a world renowned team" without giving any real information about the job. If I see a vague job description I won't look twice because I assume the whole process will be convoluted and difficult.
Having said that, I understand that people might go directly to the source if you gave enough information for them to do that so you could lose a fee.
I guess it does come down to money, but that's the recruiter's doing really.
Cheers,
Jono
Morning all,****
** **
I hope you are well.****
** **
I appreciate this might be opening a can of worms but I?m keen to get your thoughts and ideally some advice.****
** **
I signed up to LRUG a month or so ago in order to try and gain a better understanding of the Ruby market in London. I?ve had a positive response from a few candidates but generally speaking I see antipathy towards recruitment consultants / agencies. ****
** **
I know there?s a stigma attached to our industry but I can assure you we aren?t all bad!****
** **
What I?m trying to understand is why employers, and to a certain extent candidates, are so against working with agencies? Is it because of fees?
Have you had bad experiences? If it?s company policy, why is it company policy? ****
** **
I appreciate there are a lot of companies who now operate a direct sourcing model and simply don?t need to use agencies. I get that and I understand your reasoning behind this, but for companies who are struggling to find good candidates, and don?t have the resources in place to spend the majority of their day sourcing candidates, why won?t you use agencies?****
** **
For those of you who are open to working with agencies, what do you feel is
the best way for me to approach your company? ****
** **
I?m open to suggestions, although things like die, rot in hell and get out of recruitment aren?t options I?m afraid :-)****
** **
I take pride in what I do and so it would be really helpful to get your
thoughts.****
** **
I don?t want to clog up the mailing list so if you have any thoughts / advice, I?d be extremely grateful if you drop me an email or alternatively,
feel free to give me a call. ****
** **
I look forward to hearing from you.****
** **
Regards,****
Rob****
** **
R*ob Beattie ? Recruit360 ***
*Tel - 08450 310 360*
*Direct line - +44 (0) 117 906 0146*
rbeattie at recruit360.co.uk ****
_______________________________________________
Chat mailing list
Chat at lists.lrug.org
http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lrug.org/pipermail/chat-lrug.org/attachments/20130524/c4ed2388/attachment-0001.htm>
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 10:38:57 +0000
From: Adam Carlile <adam at benchmedia.co.uk>
To: Adrian Sevitz <adrian at vzaar.com>
Cc: "<chat at lists.lrug.org>" <chat at lists.lrug.org>
Subject: Re: [LRUG] ADVICE
Message-ID: <3928FCD3-8B4C-446A-8A63-9C83577DEE39 at benchmedia.co.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
There's so much animosity out there between recruiters, clients and candidates, I agree wholeheartedly with everything that has been mentioned up to this point.
As a recruitment agent you're going to have a really tough time breaking into this community. Even if you come at it with the best intentions, everyone is so jaded from bad recruitment practices that you're going to have to work doubly hard create some traction. Which ultimately can lead you to become jaded with tech companies, and just treat it as a numbers game.
It's a vicious cycle, perpetuated by bad, incumbent agencies. In order to break this cycle, you need to understand the technology, the strengths and weaknesses of candidates, and the exact requirements of clients. It's not a difficult thing to do, but unfortunately it doesn't seem to be aligned with the cut throat, results based business model that recruitment agencies seem to have.
Ultimately you should be trying to build relationships with clients and candidates, understanding their requirements. Trust is a very hard won thing, but once you have it you will be immeasurably more successful than the numbers guys. It's finding the time to build those relationships, before getting fired!
Adam
On 24 May 2013, at 11:20, Adrian Sevitz <adrian at vzaar.com<mailto:adrian at vzaar.com>>
wrote:
Hi James,
I'll bite. Firstly have a read of the NTR, I've just posted on Girhub.
https://github.com/vzaar/note-to-recruiters/blob/master/README.md
But I'll add a few comments.
I don't mind using agencies, although would prefer not too, purely because 15% of fees is a big chunk for us to pay. But if thats the only way we have to do it, we'll do it. So leaving fees out of it, this is why we (not speaking for everyone here) don't like recruiters/agencies in general.
In general we find
* Agencies don't read. I get sent job specs for .net programers. Or php. Or anything.
* Agencies lie. I sit next to the people who answer the phone. So I hear what lies get told to get through to me. This might work getting through to people in 100 person companies, but I know what you're saying. Lies include
* Returning a call (you're not, never spoken to you)
* Expecting your call (I'm not, never spoken yo you)
* Calling about an event (there is no real event)
* Some bullshit about whitepapers you want to include us in (really I'm not that thick, I know this is a ploy)
* Blatant outright lies with heaps of bullshit to get put through to me
* Agencies don't research the role/firm properly
* Adding me to your newsletters
* Phoning. Incessantly. We don't have time to speak to recruiters on the phone. Read the site and email us.
* READ OUR JOBS PAGE. Everything is on there. No I'm not going to tell you first when we're posting a role. Follow our twitter. Read our site.
We have a wufoo form for recruiters to fill in. I have 70 recruiters on it. This is too many to effectively manage if you're going to phone me, lie to the people answer the phone, and make me listen to a pitch. Email me a candidate fine. Can't read the job spec? Really, what do you want for your fee.
And this is before I get to the two *instant blacklist* actives.
* Phoning my staff in the office trying to poach them. It makes my dev's feel uncomfortable. It makes everyone sitting around them uncomfortable. We all know what's going on. If you can't figure out how to contact them without phoning our main office line, outright lying to the person who answers the phone, and then trying to poach a dev sitting in a team then you're getting blacklisted. Look I know how it works and you need to find candidates sometimes. But if you're going to do it like this we will put you on a blacklist and share it with friends in other companies
* Trying to disrupt staff. Placing them in company A, waiting 4-6 months. Giving their details to Agent B and getting them to approach them. It's unethical. Unfortunately I can't think of any action behind blacklisting the agency. But if I could get you fired for this I would.
This is just some stuff off the top of my head. We work with agencies. But if you want your 15% you need to at least try work with us. If we feel all you're doing is a interchange and database for CVs, we can just as easily not work with you.
We now slow recruit. i.e. we take our time. I no longer *have* to hire anyone. I can wait. If you want to make a case for yourself, read our specs and send us quality candidates. And don't hassle us. We're busy. If we get a good candidate from you, repeatedly, we'll start letting you know about roles before we post them.
Prove yourself as a good recruiter and you'll get referred to other companies.
Hope this helps. Hope it's not to aggressive, but once you start typing about all the shit that goes on, it makes you angry.
Sev
On 24 May 2013, at 10:30, chat-request at lists.lrug.org<mailto:chat-request at lists.lrug.org> wrote:
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 24 May 2013 10:29:47 +0100
From: Rob Beattie <RBeattie at recruit360.co.uk<mailto:RBeattie at recruit360.co.uk>>
To: "chat at lists.lrug.org<mailto:chat at lists.lrug.org>" <chat at lists.lrug.org<mailto:chat at lists.lrug.org>>
Subject: [LRUG] ADVICE
Message-ID:
<9A31D8218BBCCC48BA9AF1B7F620B92F31FF6A12F3 at RS01.Recruit360.local>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Morning all,
I hope you are well.
I appreciate this might be opening a can of worms but I'm keen to get your thoughts and ideally some advice.
I signed up to LRUG a month or so ago in order to try and gain a better understanding of the Ruby market in London. I've had a positive response from a few candidates but generally speaking I see antipathy towards recruitment consultants / agencies.
I know there's a stigma attached to our industry but I can assure you we aren't all bad!
What I'm trying to understand is why employers, and to a certain extent candidates, are so against working with agencies? Is it because of fees? Have you had bad experiences? If it's company policy, why is it company policy?
I appreciate there are a lot of companies who now operate a direct sourcing model and simply don't need to use agencies. I get that and I understand your reasoning behind this, but for companies who are struggling to find good candidates, and don't have the resources in place to spend the majority of their day sourcing candidates, why won't you use agencies?
For those of you who are open to working with agencies, what do you feel is the best way for me to approach your company?
I'm open to suggestions, although things like die, rot in hell and get out of recruitment aren't options I'm afraid :-)
I take pride in what I do and so it would be really helpful to get your thoughts.
I don't want to clog up the mailing list so if you have any thoughts / advice, I'd be extremely grateful if you drop me an email or alternatively, feel free to give me a call.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Regards,
Rob
_____________
Adrian Sevitz
_______________________________________________
Chat mailing list
Chat at lists.lrug.org<mailto:Chat at lists.lrug.org>
http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.lrug.org/pipermail/chat-lrug.org/attachments/20130524/479008b8/attachment.htm>
------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Chat mailing list
Chat at lists.lrug.org
http://lists.lrug.org/listinfo.cgi/chat-lrug.org
End of Chat Digest, Vol 88, Issue 32
************************************
More information about the Chat
mailing list