

All that is wrong with the Recruitment Industry - Peroni
http://voltsteve.blogspot.com/2011/07/all-that-is-wrong-with-recruitment.html

======
rickmb
What I am missing from this analysis is the underhanded methods used by many
recruiters.

I've had recruiters publishing our job postings via various job boards in
order to intercept potential candidates. I've had a candidate who was told the
recruiters posting he responded to was no match for him, when in reality we
had simply told the recruiter we had no need for their services. Luckily the
candidate managed to Google us. I've had my own CV offered to other companies
without my permission. Many a LinkedIn group is set up by recruiters as their
own private fishing pool.

What actually surprises me most is the apparent naivety of these recruiters: a
lot of these job postings and CVs are easily traced back to the source. Some
are very recognizable (it's a small world), most are easily googled.

~~~
Peroni
Good point. There are a few more I could add to that list that are a bit more
controversial which I'll address in a week or two with a new blog post.

As for the ones you've mentioned, let me at least try and explain the method
behind the madness.

 _I've had recruiters publishing our job postings via various job boards in
order to intercept potential candidates_

This happens all the time and I bet the recruiters version has a slightly
higher salary too right? The bottom line is that this is actually an illegal
practice, at least in the UK but it isn't policed. It's against the law to
advertise a vacancy that doesn't exist or duplicate a vacancy that you are not
recruiting directly for. Why do they do it? Like you said, they want the
candidates to come to them first so they can then claim them and introduce
them to you for a fee.

 _I had a candidate who was told the recruiters posting he responded to was no
match for him, when in reality we had simply told the recruiter we had no need
for their services._

This is just pure laziness. Most recruiters hardly bother to give negative
feedback in the first place as there is nothing they can personally gain from
it. I think all feedback is useful personally.

 _I've had my own CV offered to other companies without my permission._

Another ridiculously common tactic. The idea is to test out the CV, generate
interest and if they get any bites they will then call you and try and get you
on board. Lazy recruitment again.

~~~
ig1
The last is also illegal in the UK.

------
gpjt
Great to hear from a recruiter who's trying to do something good in a very
broken industry. On the subject of horror stories...

One guy called me a while back (in my role as an employer) who, when I
politely said that we weren't interested because we always recruit directly,
told me that he had been responsible for someone leaving our company a few
months ago and he would now actively try to "poach" more people away until we
agreed to use him.

Needless to say, we won't be doing any business with him or his company even
if we decide to use agencies in the future. If it weren't for UK libel laws
I'd mention his name as a warning to others.

~~~
pavel_lishin
Is it illegal to mention his name because you can't prove what he said?

A lot of Britain's laws seem awfully strict to me, but I'm fully aware that
that's a result of cultural conditioning by living in the United States for 17
years. (I wonder what most UK citizens think of America's laws regarding
speech, libel and slander.)

~~~
ZoFreX
Our libel laws are currently being rewritten, basically, due to huge demand
for change. Yes, as they stand they are a bit unreasonable, you have to be
able to prove you're correct rather than the other person prove that you're
incorrect, which makes it dangerous to call out people like chiropractors.

------
Isofarro
I notice Peroni covers the ground between the recruiter and the employer (and
for that, thank you); but is very quiet about what's going on between the
recruiter and the target. I'm disappointed by this, because it affects actual
developers in a very negative way. The constant unsolicited intrusions despite
requests not to are annoying.

And there seems to be no way out other than delete everything on the web that
makes any sort of statement that I am a developer with skills in {KEYWORD1}.

I currently have no desk-phone in my current role. This is deliberate. I do
not want to be cold-called by recruiters. And yet, that doesn't work. They
continue to wheedle their way through our receptionist ("being discreet")
trying to get hold of me. Including one fishing for more information by
pretending to have a package addressed to me that needs to be delivered at a
specific unspecified time.

This continual harrassment is the same as spam. Unsolicited commercial
approach that only benefits the sender. And so in my eyes, these recruiters
are no better than spammers. Just more annoying because they don't limit
themselves to email.

They are on par with the plethora of dodgy mobile phone renewal operators.

~~~
Peroni
_...but is very quiet about what's going on between the recruiter and the
target._

When you say target, I assume you mean the candidate or potential employee? If
so, I do reference how I think people such as yourself can help reduce the
impact recruiters have on your day to day activity. Take a look at some of my
previous posts.

 _And so in my eyes, these recruiters are no better than spammers. Just more
annoying because they don't limit themselves to email._

That's an excellent comparison as that is exactly how we are generally viewed
and rightly so. I've known recruiters to literally wait all day outside a
companies building with a picture from linkedin in hand, waiting for a
specific developer to walk out and approach them out of the blue on the
street.

~~~
sequoia
As a developer, I can't help but feel that this would be an ego boost and a
really fun story! I know that's not what it's all about, just being honest. :)

It would NOT, however, increase my chances of working with that recruiter. It
would probably diminish them because the recruiter would seem overbearing and
desperate: neither traits I want in someone representing me to employers.

------
ZoFreX
I was on the phone to a recruitment agency and genuinely heard a bull horn
going off followed by cheering, I presume signifying a big "sale". This is one
of the best companies I've had dealings with, too. The worst edited my CV
before sending it to companies without telling me first - nothing like being
asked "So why were you fired from your last position?" in a job interview when
you left due to illness in the family.

Edit: Not to mention the INSANE amount of companies that claim to be
"specialist developer recruitment agencies" (or similar) but only accept CVs
in .doc format. Not even docx, they need the original proprietary .doc format.
They refuse to believe that it's difficult for me to send one rather than a
PDF, and apparently "[their] systems can't handle PDF files or DOCX files".
Sorry, what?

Anyway, it's far more work than its worth for me to produce a Word document
from a .tex, as the only solutions I've found are manual, but I doubt I'm
missing much by not interacting with these companies.

I am actually currently looking for work so if anyone knows of UK recruitment
agencies that don't entirely suck, please let me (and everyone else) know who
they are!

~~~
benburton
I don't do hiring directly, but when I see a LaTeX resume it's a +1 in my
book!

~~~
ZoFreX
This is refreshing to hear, thank you :)

------
tomjen3
I am not sure I buy the thesis. Greed and money are universal, yet most
businesses don't need the call centric approach. Not even companies which
sells very expensive things like, say, diamonds.

My guess is that recruitment doesn't generate much value, which is a bigger
problem than being greedy. After all, what does recruitment do that a job
board can't? Looking through a resume for keywords is easy to do with a
computer and most recruiters doesn't provide more than that.

Hopefully the recession will kill recruiters.

~~~
dnadolny
I disagree with recruitment not adding value. Imagine a recruiter that sent
you 5 qualified candidates who were all interested in your job. You would
spend a little bit of time in the interview to verify they were qualified, but
mainly you just have to decide who is the best fit for your team. Compare that
to hours of reviewing resumes, tens of hours of interviews on unqualified
candidates, etc.

A recruiter could offer a lot of value, the problem is that it's difficult to
show that you're a useful recruiter. This is an econ problem[1], where you
have people offering something valuable and people offering something not very
valuable and you can't tell the difference. What's needed is a way of
signaling that they're going to be a good recruiter.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons>

~~~
lsc
Sure, if a good recruiter was better at sorting resumes than one of your
developers, they'd add value. hell, even if they were only slightly worse,
they'd add some value.

The thing is, to justify current prices, a recruiter would need to be rather a
lot better at picking good prospects than your in-house hiring manager, and
many times better at sorting resumes than someone who actually does the job
you are hiring for. My understanding is that the fee charged is in the tens of
thousands of dollars; for that, you had better save me a lot of employee
hours, or get me a dramatically better candidate.

~~~
Symmetry
In theory, recruiters can save a lot of work by sorting resumes once and then
using that sort to give some subset to companies A, B, and C - rather than the
sort being repeated at each company.

~~~
lsc
I agree that it is possible for a recruiter who knew the job well enough and
that had multiple clients looking for people in the same field to more
efficiently sort the resumes, but even if you could find a sufficiently
skilled recruiter, I don't think there is 1/3rd of a year's salary worth of
value in that alone. I mean, maybe if the recruiter charged me a week's
salary, it'd be worth it for the time I'm saving, but 1/3rd of a year is a lot
of money; that's a lot of time I or my people could spend sorting resumes.

I mean, if the recruiter knew more about the position than I did, that'd be
different. I mean, this would be very unlikely if I was hiring someone in my
own field, but hey, sometimes you need to hire outside your field. I can see
using a consulting recruiter for that, but most of that value is teaching me
what to look for in an accountant (or whatever I'm hiring for) and they'd need
to sit in on the interview. Really, in that case, I'd be looking more for a
consultant than a recruiter.

------
Robin_Message
It's interesting to read this stuff and I'm glad you're doing your best to
improve UK recruitment. One small thing: all-caps is unnecessary (unless it
was a play on RFC should), italic (or bold if you must) is better. Your text
is bit of a wall, it might be better unjustified, slightly darker and with
some paragraph spacing. I see you're composing it in what looks like Word.
Blogspot probably has better defaults if you copy-paste in plain text instead
(or use the eraser on the toolbar).

~~~
Peroni
Thanks for the feedback. I've changed the font colour and eliminated the caps.
I find the readability & aesthetics better if the text is justified although I
will have a play with paragraph spacing. Thanks again!

~~~
Robin_Message
That looks better. A few more paragraphs and it'll be a joy to read.

------
joshz
I don't know how it is nowadays compared to 2~3 years ago when I searched for
a job in UK but imagine that with stackoverflow careers, coderstack, linkedin
(not groups), github jobs, monthly hn who's hiring posts the situation
improved at least slightly.

Weirdest experiences I had were when recruiters would call from a blocked
number and leave fart noises or some other idiocy on my voicemail. Or when one
guy flat out said (and one implied) that if I don't give him all the companies
I ever talked to, he'd not give me the "offer" he "had" for me.

Minority of recruiters were good but most pretty scummy.

~~~
Peroni
_Or when one guy flat out said (and one implied) that if I don't give him all
the companies I ever talked to, he'd not give me the "offer" he "had" for me._

Please tell me you're exaggerating?

~~~
copper
I've met more than a few recruiters who do that here too.

In fact, I think I have even worse stories to share: one recruiter who shall
forever remain in my email blocklist took my resume, promised she'd ask me
before sending it to any company, and then, naturally, sent it to a place
where I was already having discussions, which led to quite a bit of
unpleasantness all around.

------
jarrettcoggin
Dear Recruiters,

One of the biggest problems I've had with recruiters is the sheer amount of
them I was called by, half of them very hard to understand, another third
being very pushy about the amount being offered being "set in stone", and a
slim sliver of the rest being genuinely decent recruiters trying to do an
honest job. This is one of the biggest turn offs I have regarding recruiters.
Be honest, try to do your due diligence in regards to the person you are
calling (don't call a DBA about a web dev position), and you will already be
largely ahead of the game. I have had multiple recruiters call me up about
positions that I didn't want even after I SPECIFICALLY told them I was not
interested in positions of type X (don't repeatedly call me about QA positions
when I said I was not interested in them).

One of the best ways I found to get my attention was to SLOW DOWN. First,
mention the name of the company. Second, mention what position this is for and
what product I'd be working on. After that, mention the technology stack if
applicable. After that, ask if I'm interested and/or if it is okay to send me
the job description (if you send a job description or email, thank me because
this makes me feel less like a slice of meat that you are trying to use).
After that, ask when is a good a time when you could call me back (the next
day is my preferable choice). THEN HANG UP. This should take about 5-15
minutes.

In the first phone call, I should not hear "this is for X amount an
hour/year/whatever". I also should not have to wait until the end of the
conversation to hear what company this is or what position this is for.

What I will do is review the position and when you call back (if you say you
are going to call back, do it), I will give you the yes/no.

This is the best way to get your foot in the door in my opinion/experience.

~~~
ZoFreX
"First, mention the name of the company."

No agency will give me this, I assume because they're worried I'll apply
directly and skip their fees? Please chip in if you know why!

It's super-annoying, because there is a lot of cross-over with local agencies
and they know it, so they want to know a list of all the agencies I'm
currently engaged with to avoid this (ostensibly), which is completely
backwards.

I agree with all your points. It's amazing how many businesses that contact
people by phone get the very basics wrong, so many companies I deal with
_always_ have terrible line quality for example.

My pet peeve is how pushy they are. If I say no, I don't want to work for that
company, then why push it? I often have good personal or technical reasons for
turning it down, and it's a complete waste of both our time to spend 30
minutes pushing it on me - and it looks really, really desperate.

~~~
jarrettcoggin
I agree with you. It's INCREDIBLY hard to get this information out of some
recruiter. I've made it a personal policy that I tell the recruiter I need to
know at a bar minimum the company's name and the job description before I
discuss anything else with the recruiter, send them a resume, or give them the
OK to submit me for the position. A majority of the recruiters that I have
told this to either refuse to give me the information, hang up and pass me to
a coworker, or INSIST on why I want to know this information. If they ask why,
I respond with something like, "You don't buy an unknown car based on the
color and price alone, do you?"

For the really pushy ones, I make it a point to tell them I'm not willing to
work with them because they are making the process a high-pressure
environment. I also tell them to take me off their list.

I've had one recruiter call me up, give me his 2 minute spiel about the job
position, and ask me when I was available for the interview all before I had
said another word other than "Hello." I told him I wasn't interested, he
stuttered, then asked if I was interested. I responded that I was NOT
interested. He hung up, called me back 10 minutes later, and repeated his
spiel. I told him that I was not interested. He was shocked that I was not
interested and asked again if I was interested. I responded that I was not. He
asked when I had time available to be interviewed. I was IRRATE at this point.
I asked him for his name and his company's name and after he supplied the
information, I told him not to call me again and that I was blacklisting him
in my search for a possible new job.

All the while, I was happily employed and was just seeing if I was interested
in anything else.

~~~
ZoFreX
I've been talking to a friend who works in recruitment for the last couple of
hours and the biggest thing I've gotten out of it is: Slow down. Even though I
used to work in sales I've failed to spot that a lot of recruiters are
basically doing a sales push on me, and rushing me and making things far more
stressful. It's almost 11 at night and I'm frantically editing my CV because a
recruitment agency I've been in contact with for less than 12 hours wants me
to send it over ASAP, tomorrow at the latest? He's introducing me to the (to
me revolutionary) idea of slowing down and actually /using/ the recruiter's
skills, getting CV feedback from them, finding the right jobs, etc.

I'm actually looking forward to dealing with recruitment agencies with this
in-hand now! (although I will of course like you not be speaking to those that
insist on being high-pressure).

------
pr0filer_
In the Netherlands the situation is pretty much the same. I personally never
use recruiters to find a job. I had put my CV shortly up on a website and got
harassed months after with job vacancies that didn't even relate to my CV.
Most developers around me also hold a grudge against recruiters and see it,
like mentioned in your article, as a necessary evil.

It's not nice being treated as livestock.

~~~
Peroni
It's a global issue. A lot can be done to change it though. Have a look at my
previous post 'Questions from my experiences as a recruiter on Hacker News'
for tips on how to deal with sub-par recruiters.

[http://voltsteve.blogspot.com/2011/07/questions-from-my-
expe...](http://voltsteve.blogspot.com/2011/07/questions-from-my-experience-
as.html)

~~~
pr0filer_
I think the advice you give is interesting, though i'm more curious to hear
why you think people should use a recruiter in the first place? I can see the
potential training or retouching of a CV, but i feel somewhat confident that i
got that right. So then, what's left?

And isn't the harassment a trade-off for, as what i perceive, being too lazy
to find a job yourself?

~~~
Peroni
Assuming you are dealing with a relatively decent recruiter:

 __EMPLOYER BENEFITS __

1\. Access to candidates who aren't active on job boards.

2\. Significant reduction in the amount of time spent screening candidates.

3\. Some companies want to keep a low profile and don't want to advertise the
fact that they are hiring.

 __EMPLOYEE BENEFITS __

1\. Good recruiters will have the ear of the top CTO's & Directors so your
details can be put directly in front of the right people.

2\. A huge amount of work isn't publicly advertised so you need a recruiter to
connect you to said roles.

3\. Career & CV advice. Recruiters _should_ be advising you on what you can do
to improve your chances of getting a better job or salary.

------
talmand
Recruiters for the tech field in the US are no better. My recent experience is
that a large number of them have absolutely no clue about the industry they
are recruiting for. I am a Web Designer/Client-Side Developer. I work in HTML,
CSS, Javascript and pretty images. But I kept getting recruiters insisting on
submitting me for jobs involving .Net development, SQL and other various
server-side technologies. I kept having to tell them I didn't want to have
interviews for jobs I had no business applying for, heaven forbid I actually
got the job. So far I only had a good experience with one recruiter out of
many in my area.

Of course, some of the employers weren't much better. No one can decide on a
job title nor job description so you get a bunch of different postings and you
have no idea if you qualify. I can't tell you how many job postings I saw that
required three people (designer, client-side developer, server-side developer)
in the one position that paid below the going rate for just one of the skill
sets. It's as if they hope to find that rare individual that can do EVERYTHING
and is willing to do it for just a cup of coffee a day. Often times I would
discover that the employer thought they wanted Skill Set A when they really
wanted the non-related Skill Set B of which I did not qualify.

Sometimes it seems as if an employer finding a good employee is by pure luck.

------
Peroni
Thanks for all the attention folks! I'm always keen to hear feedback &
thoughts or even suggestions for future posts from HN.

~~~
rjd
Thanks for taking a stand. Trying to write a nice reply without going into a
recruiter rant.. I've deleted my response 3 times now :)

One thing you left out was laziness and stupidity. Recruiters that can't
understand requirements and blag into an interview you aren't skilled for. Or
won't get a JD so you have to go to the interview to find out what the hell
the position is about. Wastes everyones time, so many of them are like that as
well.

London recruiters generally have a special place in hell :) But if you want a
good recruiter story...

I was in London during the end of .com boom and the aftermath. I ended up
making good friends with a recruiter who couldn't place me as I was young and
times weren't the best.

He had an allowance for smoozing premium clients, several hundred quid a week.
So he jacked up my CV, altered my records in the system, and we'd blow that
huge recruiter bounty you mentioned on dinner, booze, strip clubs, smoozing
other clients. It was awesome (and fraudulent) but still awesome.

Another good story is same guy introduced me to a client, we got drinking at
lunch as part of the interview, turned into an all nighter, client broke out
the coke stash, partied like the .com bubble was collapsing around us. Best
interview of my life.

Next day I got a call saying I couldn't have the position because we got on to
well and it wasn't good for boss worker relations... but was I keen to hit the
town in the weekend LOL

Ahh.. the good old days, god bless London. But I'll never go back.

~~~
gaius
Don't recruiters usually only get that "bounty" once you've been there 3 or 6
months?

~~~
rjd
Yep, but some of that bounty goes into a fund to head hunt new placements.
You've probably encountered yourself without realising, when a recruiter meets
you in town and buys you a coffee. He doesn't pay for that coffee the agency
does.

Im not sure what its like ATM as i avoid recruiters like the plague these
days, but it went nuts in the .com days. I remember people getting given cars
as joining bonuses and all ksorts. It was mental.

Spending £200 quid a month on me, at the time didnt even raise an eye lid. It
probably would now, but so much then.

------
hr
Do you think there's a recruiting board somewhere where they complain about
snarky coders?

~~~
Peroni
I love the relevance of the username! I'm not aware of any particular
recruitment forums, mainly because I avoid them like the plague however the
general consensus is that a lot of coders, particularly the more experienced
ones are arrogant and self-centred. Most recruiters don't realise that the
attitude they face is primarily based on the fact that coders don't like
dealing with recruiters.

~~~
hr
Thanks, I've been an executive recruiter for 15 years and only read HN because
of the thought leaders who write here. I recruit and work with high level
execs who actually understand and respect the value of a good recruiter. Your
posts are interest generating because they showcase the low underbelly of the
industry and not the well respected recruiter. Still thanks for writing.

~~~
Peroni
_I recruit and work with high level execs who actually understand and respect
the value of a good recruiter._

The difference between executive search & volume recruitment is chalk &
cheese. The two are mutually exclusive.

 _Your posts are interest generating because they showcase the low underbelly
of the industry and not the well respected recruiter._

As I stated categorically in all my posts, there are plenty of good recruiters
out their however there are infinitely more bad recruiters that drown them
out. I'm not claiming to be a lone ranger in a rogue industry, I know there
are plenty of others out there just as fed up with the self-inflicted negative
attitude towards the industry, the difference is I am making my opinion heard.

~~~
hr
Perhaps you should provide equal time and write about good recruiters and the
value they bring to candidates and companies alike. Maybe "All that's right
with the recruitment industry"

I fail to see how speaking negatively about an industry helps promote it's
value.

~~~
pavel_lishin
It would only make sense to devote equal time to the good recruiters if they
were 50% of the general population of recruiters.

------
bluedanieru
>If you currently engage a recruiter and they fit the description of the above
to the letter then congratulations. What you have found is an individual rarer
than a quark.

Rarer than a quark?

~~~
gaius
I think he means a boson.

~~~
ZoFreX
Doesn't work either - either bosons exist, and are plentiful, or there are
none of them. Being rarer than one is either not special, or impossible!

~~~
Peroni
I need to work on my analogies. I've been using that phrase for months, trust
HN to point out the error! To be fair, I base the analogy on the following:

 _Due to a phenomenon known as color confinement, quarks are never directly
observed or found in isolation; they can only be found within hadrons_

~~~
mctavjb9
"Rarer than a free quark" would save your analogy.

~~~
Confusion
Rarer than a magnetic monopole would also work, but doesn't quite have the
same ring.

------
hr
'there are plenty of good recruiters out their however there are infinitely
more bad recruiters...' I know there are plenty of others out there just as
fed up with the self-inflicted negative attitude towards the industry, the
difference is I am making my opinion heard.'

Perhaps you should provide equal time and write about good recruiters and the
value they bring to candidates and companies alike. Maybe "All that's right
with the recruitment industry"

~~~
Peroni
_Perhaps you should provide equal time and write about good recruiters..._

No is the short answer. The purpose of the blog is to expose the flaws in the
industry and motivate people to start making changes. The mere existence of
the industry is testament to the fact that it's a necessary service and it
wouldn't succeed if some people weren't doing a good job. A multi-billion
pound industry doesn't need any more champions.

~~~
hr
'...purpose of the blog is to expose the flaws in the industry...'

Judging from the activity there's plenty of recognition of the industries
flaws. Unfortunately, negative press is more interesting to read.

'...expose the flaws in the industry and motivate people to start making
changes.'

Sooo you propose 'dark' without 'light'....'up' without 'down'?

------
hr
Has anyone stopped to ask, 'Why do I only get calls from bad recruiters'? "Why
am I not on the radar of good recruiters'?

~~~
Peroni
I've yet to hear anyone make that claim. The issue is that _most_ of the calls
are from bad recruiters, not all. The reason for that is because _most_
recruiters are terrible, not all.

~~~
hr
I doubt you will hear anyone make that claim, but only b/c it's not a
flattering revelation. Truly I do understand your points and they are valid.

How about a post then on how to attract good recruiters? Seems
constructive....doesn't it?

~~~
aristus
That's an interesting (and uncomfortable) idea, but a deeper problem is how to
tell the "good" and "bad" recruiters apart. This is the same problem of
telling "good" and "bad" candidates apart, and the irony is not lost on me.

What is your constructive advice about how a "good" developer should get your
attention, while simultaneously _dis_ couraging contact from bad ones?

I suspect that the answer is something like "be an experienced executive",
which is obviously not an option for most people in the early part of their
careers.

~~~
hr
Good question and difficult to answer...truthfully I hadn't ever given it much
thought until this article.

But first, I can tell good candidates from bad by what they've accomplished,
who they've accomplished it for, what they say, and what people say about
them.

I'm a good recruiter not because I never talk to the wrong candidate, I'm a
good recruiter because I know the difference between the right and wrong
candidate.

So yes you are still going to have to talk to bad recruiters. However, the
best way to attract great recruiters is to be great at what you do!

~~~
aristus
...perhaps we should demand to see recruiters' resumes in exchange. :D
Asymmetrical relationships tend to create feelings of resentment.

~~~
hr
Funny and true.

