171–180 of 210 posts
Calls. Everyone wants to talk or even video chat. It’s the most annoying thing, not only by recruiters; everything is a voice/video meeting nowadays instead of mail or text.
You're not going to take a call from someone you couldn't imagine working for.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They're not saying the company name because they don't want you going there directly and applying without them getting their hefty bonus Of course, but I'm not sure why that is my problem. Does the company want good people, or just the best they can afford after recruiter fees? If the recruiter can talk the talk, I'll hang with them vs going direct, and they will get the commission. If not, they won't get the place…
For legal reasons, if a company receives a resume for a given person from 2 sources, it tosses them all and marks you as a no hire. When 2 recruiters sends in your info, the company does not know whom to compensate. They have been sued for this. 15 years ago, the common practice, because lawsuits and fraud are expensive, it was safer to pass on the candidate.
Getting your application thrown away because you happened to postulate a the company the recruiter didn't disclose you is just horrible.
There’s a lot of people in here complaining about various things recruiters do. Let me give a different perspective. For the first couple of years of my career, recruiters just ignored me. It was like I simply didn’t exist. I hadn’t studied computer science and didn’t work at a well known company. Meanwhile, my coworkers with CS degrees constantly complained about having to bat away recruiters offering them crazy mon…
Not all recruiters of course. I’ve had some who are super helpful, keep in touch with friendly and useful checkins, etc.
>> If I'm even remotely interested, that'll be a 30mins call to setup Not showing up for the call they insisted on :P
There’s a lot of people in here complaining about various things recruiters do. Let me give a different perspective. For the first couple of years of my career, recruiters just ignored me. It was like I simply didn’t exist. I hadn’t studied computer science and didn’t work at a well known company. Meanwhile, my coworkers with CS degrees constantly complained about having to bat away recruiters offering them crazy mon…
A lot of what I hear about recruiters on the internet is foreign to me. I’ve never once in my life had a FAANG recruiter reach out to me. Most recruiters I’ve had reach out to me either clearly never looked at my resume, can’t figure out what they’re hiring for, or can barely speak English. Most of them hire for underpaid enterprise or body shop roles. Meanwhile I hear people talk about how Facebook or Amazon recruit…
There’s a whole cohort of English recruiters who hire for the EU roles. They wouldn’t name a company or provide any relevant details unless you agree to have a call with them. And when you do, they’ll ask incredibly annoying questions that show how incredibly non-technical these people are. Moreover, they can’t provide you any relevant company details even if you call them, since their only goal is to push you to the…
Yes, this. "I have a SECRET client" is the most annoying thing ever. Especially since the client (in my domain) is either immediately recognizable or just irrelevant.
I don't mind tech recruiters as a class. I despise the rare ones who dangle a job they do not actually have in order to get my information in their database. These always seem to be the same ones who gaslight and neg: e.g. "We're looking for people who know what they're doing" and such. Not sure what they accomplish with that, but conversation is over. That's comparatively rare, though. Most are just decent people, m…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think we might be talking past each other. Sure, I'll talk, but you need to send me enough information for me to decide whether the job is interesting (salary range and job description at minimum) and whether you're trustworthy first. > if you're really interested in the job, then be accommodating Right, that's the point - I don't know if I'm interested until I have a fair amount of detail about the posting. If it…
> I don't know if I'm interested until I have a fair amount of detail about the posting. Typically recruiters are responsible for multiple roles, and will be dealing with an absolute hail of email. One learns by experience that a quick call is often a more efficient way of imparting information and dealing with follow-up questions than email. Look, some recruiters are... quite unsavoury... and nobody's denying that,…
If someone gets three messages a day, five days a week, and 80% of those messages say "there is a job somewhere, I won't say which country, or what kind of job, but it's a leading-edge company that won awards for excellence in 2015, would you like to jump on a call?", that's not enough information to decide whether to jump on a call.
Let's focus on just that 80%, because that's what's being complained about.
The potential candidate has no idea if the call is worthwhile yet.
But from experience, the potential candidate should estimate: It's probably in a city, state or sometimes even a country, that they aren't going to relocate to. It's probably offering less than half their current salary, or if they are not currently working, it's probably offering at the low end for what they could get. It's probably in an area of technology that has almost no overlap with what they have done before. It's probably not an interesting job even if everything else were great. The recruiter has probably not read your profile at all. Their message is probably somewhat automated, and you might not even get a reply if you say yes to a call.
Given that it's a recruiter who has already shown how little they value your time (by sending a message devoid of useful information, when they could easily say useful things up front), and in some cases they have lied ("I'm a headhunter and my client specifically asked me to write to you" in their mailmerge template...), but they have whetted your appetite enough to reply - it seems only fair to reply with a few easy questions first before a call:
- Which country? Would I have to relocate? Is the salary less than half my current salary? Is it a tech job? Is it a management job? Is it a retail job? Have you looked at my CV/profile at all? Am I writing to a human being?
You're right that a quick call is an efficient way of imparting information. But who's going to agree to a quick call about something extremely vague when the other party has shown so little consideration towards the potential candidate so far, and there's almost certainly nothing in it for the candidate?
It's analogous to agreeing to a sales call which was proposed by an opening message like "I have a household product you will definitely want to buy - tell me your number so I can call you!!" with no clue about what the product is. Of course you're going to be curious enough sometimes ("whetted") to reply with "tell me something useful about the product before I agree to a call?" It's amazing how many of these get a second message that's just as vague as the first one.
Perhaps this strategy works out for those recruiters, as it will filter out candidates who feel comfortable declining low quality approaches, and appeal to the more desparate candidates who will take anything. Recruiters are often looking for candidates that would accept below-average salaries to work for less attractive jobs, after all.
It's still reasonable for a potential candidate to get answers to a few basic questions before proceeding with a call.
Sadly I think the biggest pain I've suffered is from recruiters calling and making every conversation a rambly/chatty/friendly call that doesn't actually give any details. I've been called by recruiters who won't name the company they're recruiting for, the salary range, and are incapable of actually describing the daily-expections beyond buzzwords. I've found the best approach for me is to google "sysadmin helsinki"…
They're not saying the company name because they don't want you going there directly and applying without them getting their hefty bonus
State that you want to conduct your own research into the company first, and that by hiding the name they are coming off as unprofessional. To avoid the questions on conflict and timing, add this note: "You can use the this message and its timestamp as a proof of first contact."
Some come back with actual details. Always be kind and courteous with them.
Nonetheless, what I wrote back in 2014 still holds true: https://bostik.iki.fi/aivoituksia/pages/recruiter-anxiety.ht...