agents fighting over a candidate

[billybiro]

It's a damned good question. With linkedin, jobserve and other social media agents are hardly needed. And are incredibly expensive.

Exactly.

In fact, the question was partially rhetorical. I think I know the answer, and I'll answer it by quoting from one of my all time favourite articles regarding recruitment agencies:

"Many organisations think themselves too busy to filter and headhunt. They don’t perceive the value of hiring well or the damage a few sleazebags can do to their reputation. Recruitment consultants promise to make hiring problem go away and companies – particularly lazy ones – soon grow dependent upon them."

[GreenMirror]

Then why do they use them?

It's entirely possible for any client to recruit both staff and contractors without necessitating the use of an agency if they're not bone-idle lazy in this regard, you know!

It's a damned good question. With linkedin, jobserve and other social media agents are hardly needed. And are incredibly expensive.

[billybiro]

Had to can an agency a couple of times for threatening candidates they lost out on. Most satisfying. What people fail often to understand is that clients tend to have as high a regard towards agencies as contractors do.

Then why do they use them?

It's entirely possible for any client to recruit both staff and contractors without necessitating the use of an agency if they're not bone-idle lazy in this regard, you know!

[LondonManc]

Had to can an agency a couple of times for threatening candidates they lost out on. Most satisfying. What people fail often to understand is that clients tend to have as high a regard towards agencies as contractors do.

This. Same goes on the permie side - got feedback from my new employers about the interviews/process and they said that some of the candidate cvs that were sent over were a joke (even though I managed to get the job....) and barely related to the role.

[chineseJohn]

Happened to my wife (not in IT) who was going for permie role. Got really messy, client was interested, then gave up when they were in the middle of a bun fight.

[MrButton]

Got any evidence for that? Or is just a feeling in your water?

Only once. The HR director pulled an interview I was meant to be doing as another agent came forward and kicked up a fuss about having an agreement first.

He couldn’t be bothered with getting “proof” or having to make a decision so binned it totally.

(He was a massive ego twunt though so maybe not a good example to base it on)

[NotAllThere]

Most clients won’t want to be involved in this squabbling even if there’s not a big fuss from the agent they’ll likely just bin your cv.

Got any evidence for that? Or is just a feeling in your water?

Multiplie submission happened many times when I was a hiring manager. I had a simple rule - whichever CV I happen to read first, the agency that sent me the CV gets the credit. I tended to read those from my (personally) preferred suppliers.

Any agency making a fuss gets canned.

Ignore the agent making all the noise if they make a fuss with the end client then they will get blackballed so its all hot air!

Had to can an agency a couple of times for threatening candidates they lost out on. Most satisfying. What people fail often to understand is that clients tend to have as high a regard towards agencies as contractors do.

[billybiro]

Or reply with if he does not 'jog on' you will email his handler at the agency with details about why lost the exclusivity commitment due to his 'unprofessional' behaviour, am sure his boss would like to get that email (whats good for the goose and all that).

Unfortunately, there's a high degree of likelihood that the agent's "boss" already knows all about this and the agents' "unprofessional behaviour" has probably been instigated by said "boss".

Thick as thieves in these recruitment agency hives of villainy, you know!

[billybiro]

.... this. Keep it professional and factual. He was being lazy and has missed out and he's trying to bully you now he can see there might be some money in it

Why the requirement to keep it professional?

The agent clearly isn't "keeping it professional" by trying it on when he knows full well that you've not provided any consent for his to be the sole representative.

Personally, I'd send a very firm but polite email (which you've already done) reminding him of the facts and that he hasn't got a leg to stand on to claim otherwise. If he responds to me again after that in any way, I'm telling him, in the most colourful and course language I can muster, that he can Foxtrot Oscar.

Don't allow these rapacious idiots to talk to you like that.

[LondonManc]

Yeah, I actually just did that.

I explained that while he didn't send me anything he had said he would, Agent B did everything by the book so there's nothing I can do now that I've given written consent to Agent B.

Looking forward to the reply!!

Spot on - if (and it's a big if) Agent A has claimed you're unprofessional and Client interviews you and raises it as a curveball, you've already got the answer right there. Could easily get Agent A burned off the PSL for being unprofessional. Win-win.

Agent B sounds much more reliable.