tl;dr Recruiters suck and only care about arbitrary bullshit. This statement acurately describes 95% of my colleagues. I will happily accept the challenge of changing your perception of our industry. I'm a technical recruiter that covers the London market. Feel free to send me your CV. My details are in my profile. Also, feel free to have a look through my comment history. I'm not on this site to pick up leads or pus…
I think recruiters would do a better job if they spent more time reading HN. You probably understand your "product" better than most of your competition ever will.
Tell HN: Tech Recruiters have no clue
91–100 of 114 posts
Re: Tell HN: Tech Recruiters have no clue
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
Now that's a generous and tempting offer, but how would it actually work? First, they usually want to know about the work relation you had with the reference. Just inventing something is dangerous and ethically questionable, recruiters or not. Then, what if the hiring company actually contacted you?
but how would it actually work? Exactly as I propose in grandparent. Reread it if necessary. they usually want to know about the work relation you had with the reference. I will tell them that we are colleagues on-line. Although we have never met in real life, we participate in Hacker News together. Believe me, I know much more about lots of people here than many I know in real life. For example, I would heartily rec…
Re: Tell HN: Tech Recruiters have no clue
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
Most of the time, recruiters end up being recruiters just because they failed at everything else. Ouch. You cut me deep koevet. In reference to point 6, allow me to dispell a myth here. Let's say I am approached by a client who is looking for someone to do XYZ for three months and they want to pay the candidate £500 per day (nice round number). If you are the candidate, I don't then offer you £400 a day and take 20%.…
I accidentally upvoted instead of downvoted. It it of course nonsense that you are adding to the salary. If the employer is willing to pay £600, then you are taking X% of £600 and giving the employee (100-X)% of £600. The £500 figure that you are "adding" to is just an imaginary number that has no real significance. Do recruiters really take as much as 20%? This seems ridiculously high to me. How much of their time a…
As for recruiters taking 20%, that's a comparitively low figure for such a high daily rate. If one of my clients was requesting a £500 a day calibre candidate I wouldn't touch it for anything less than 30% in reality.
We are providing a service, plain and simple. The service fee is calculated in relation to the calibre of candidate as the more senior the candidate, the more difficult they are to find.
Re: Tell HN: Tech Recruiters have no clue
#94Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's so hard to quantify but I'll do my best. Assume that my example is based on a recruiter working for a specialist agency in London. I'll base my estimate on that: Salary of £60k would probably give you a fee of about £15k meaning the total charge to the client would be about £75k, probably a bit more but you get the drift. From that £15k fee, the recruiters cut would vary based on his companies bonus structure…
Interesting, why not start your own firm then? Is it that hard to get the actual vacancies? If you know what you're talking about in comparison to 90% of the other people, wouldn't it be a lot easier to place one candidate and get £15k from him rather than the £1k you're getting now. You say that the general aim is to earn your salary in bonusses, so that means that an average recruiter has to place around 60 candida…
Re: Tell HN: Tech Recruiters have no clue
#95tl;dr Recruiters suck and only care about arbitrary bullshit. This statement acurately describes 95% of my colleagues. I will happily accept the challenge of changing your perception of our industry. I'm a technical recruiter that covers the London market. Feel free to send me your CV. My details are in my profile. Also, feel free to have a look through my comment history. I'm not on this site to pick up leads or pus…
All in all I have found my contact with recruiters to be helpful in a few ways. The short semi-technical phone interview is a low pressure way to practice one's spiel. It is a good exercise to explain the tech to someone who doesn't know much about it. Also good practice for the soft questions: "Tell me a little about yourself" "Strengths and Weaknesses...blah, blah" "So why are you looking to leave your current position?"
I have interviewed about 8 times in the last year and have gotten one offer. All but one came through recruiters. In my experience the recruiters put me in a position to get the job. My failures I associate with not quite selling myself - or lack of knowledge in a key area and also with the level of the competition.
It has been a learning process and recruiters have been helpful at points.
I wish sometimes I could get brutal honesty from recruiters/HR. After you have gone through 3 interviews and have the indication that they are considering you - you wonder what went wrong?
It would be great to get such input from the other side. How do recruiters see tech candidates? What are common pitfalls, etc?
Re: Tell HN: Tech Recruiters have no clue
#96I have been freelancing in Europe for the last 10 years and I have learned to avoid recruiters as much as I can. In the last 4 years I have managed to get contracts through connections and skip middlemen all-together. It takes more time but it's rewarding. Few rules I use when I deal with recruiters (in Europe): 1) There are really an handful of recruitment companies with a good reputation and history. By default, I…
Most of the time, recruiters end up being recruiters just because they failed at everything else. Ouch. You cut me deep koevet. In reference to point 6, allow me to dispell a myth here. Let's say I am approached by a client who is looking for someone to do XYZ for three months and they want to pay the candidate £500 per day (nice round number). If you are the candidate, I don't then offer you £400 a day and take 20%.…
KoZeN, I also hate sounding harsh because I think I've read comments of yours in other places that sound very clueful -- but this very comment of yours is a perfect example of the rampant, rank slipperiness which seems to exude from every corner of your profession.
The bottom line is that recruiters make the transaction significantly more expensive for both parties -- without adding a heck of a lot value (other than an endless appetite for trolling job boards and screening emails) to either side.
For example, if the client says to you, a recruiter, that they're willing to pay £500, that already means that their real, true, internal budget real budget is £600. As in, they'd be happy to pay that £600 for someone they found for someone they found through their own channels.
Or if you look at it the other way: even I, as a developer, decide that it's fine (if not great) to take £500 per day, I still pay (through the nose) for it, in that I know I'm being billed at a significantly higher rate, and corresponding I have to walk an eggshells in every meeting with management knowing that they're paying through the nose more for each day of my time then they should have to, and with fellow developers also (resentful of the fact that their company is paying significantly more for a unit of my time than for theirs, also). Plus the additional, very substantial risk that I will get laid off sooner than I otherwise might, precisely because of the higher rate (and the fact that they have to walk on eggshells, or otherwise deal indirectly with me because I'm branded as coming from an agency).
All of this, aside from the fact that the 20% overhead you're quoting is a very low outlier, in my experience. In fact, in all cases when I've had direct knowledge of a recruiter's overhead, it's been 30% or higher - with 50% being not uncommon.
I know I'm fudging a bit: recruiters do provide some value (much of it psychological, in that they serve as proxies, or foils more like it, in various parts of the negotiation process); it does take time to sift through those job boards (and many employers just don't know where to post, or how to post effectively); and a very small portion (less than 10%) of recruiters -- it seems you may be one of them -- do seem to have natural talents, and are capable of adding substantial value to the negotiation process (in terms of knowing the market, sizing up candidates, etc).
But the vast majority do not (again, other than serving as a psychological buffer for a highly nerve-wracking process both ways). Many seem to add substantial negatives (either through obfuscations, outright cluelessness, general slipperiness and stuffiness, etc).
And either way, it's simply intellectually dishonest for you to claim that we, as contractors, don't pay for your hefty fees. Of course we do (and so do clients) -- we both pay through the nose. And we just don't seem to get all that much in return.
Re: Tell HN: Tech Recruiters have no clue
#97Is it normal for freelancers to pay recruiters a referal fee? I figure normally they have a set of contracts they're trying to fill and they're not going to submit me for anything else since they wouldn't get paid. But what if I paid a 10 percent fee? Would they then be out there finding contracts for me? Is that something that's ever done?
Re: Tell HN: Tech Recruiters have no clue
#98Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hundreds of thousands of elementary schoolteachers manage to find my website and read the about page. It's on the blue Googles and the green Googles, and the blue texty clicky thingy on my resume will take you to it, too. If reading that prior to contacting me about my desire for a job is not in the recruiter's job description, what do they do all day?
I have always, always wondered that. The answer seems to be "have lunch".
Re: Tell HN: Tech Recruiters have no clue
#99Last, but not least, you have to realize that there are some companies that choose to use bad recruiters as a standard business practice. The prefer this. If they do then your recruiter pal isn't the problem.
You should know by now that if a job pays too well then there is a reason. If you are willing to take on jobs that others are most likely passing on then you might want to think about this.
A good recruiter, on the other hand, can create some really good conversations and teams that lead to some really successful companies. A good recruiter is not going to bother asking for references unless there is a reason to, unless they work for a big huge staffing agency and that company requires them to in much the same way that some programming jobs require CMMI. Contrary to britman's comments, recruiters ask for hiring managers because they do serve a role that is SUPERVISORY and that part of their job is to see the team as a big picture. They are often more reliable as a source than a peer. However, peers can be highly reliable too. Think of it as best of 3 - you might not get the truth on the first or even the second try.
Recruiters are a lot like detectives - they have to figure out of you are telling the truth or not, whether you can assess your own capabilities or not, and whether or not you can work well with others. In your case it sounds like the latter might be an issue. A good recruiter might find this post and not ask for a reference from you at all.
To leftnode's point, the "I make more, you make more" line is only true when there is no contract to hire or temp to hire in play. This ONLY applies when someone is doing a fee for placement that is straight up. NOT EVERY RECRUITER WORKS ANY OF THESE WAYS. Some work for the company, some freelance, etc. ASK!!! You are probably not going to get the particulars of how they are getting paid (e.g. the % if it is a fee for placement), but you should reasonably expect that they will tell you that they are getting a % of your hourly or a % of your first year's compensation, or if they are being paid for their time. If they don't want to give this to you then tell them to have a nice day.
If you, or anyone else here, want to talk about this in more detail feel free to email me - hackernewsrecruiter@jobmatchbox.com
Re: Tell HN: Tech Recruiters have no clue
#100Some advice: If you don't like dealing with recruiters, come up with your own marketing strategy that doesn't involve recruiters.
Easy to say, hard to do, no? If he could, wouldn't he already be doing it. Assuming that it would actually work better, of course, otherwise there wouldn't be any point.