Interesting reply from a recruiter

[Luigi]

Here is the reply that I got this morning from a recruiter:
“Unfortunately, for this role, the client wouldn't consider candidates that have previously been contractors for their permanent roles”.

I have never seen anything like that in the past 20 years. Is this a sign of things to come?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ladymuck]

Quite possibly. Long term contractors could be considered a flight risk when the market picks up again. Considering some contractors have worked at clients for longer than some employees is irrelevant

[coder]

Here is the reply that I got this morning from a recruiter:
“Unfortunately, for this role, the client wouldn't consider candidates that have previously been contractors for their permanent roles”.

I have never seen anything like that in the past 20 years. Is this a sign of things to come?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I dont think this view point will last post april - there will be a lot of contractors opting for permanent roles fr the stability. Why pay PAYE for no employee/workers rights, and then have to chase contracts every 6-12 months?

[LadyPenelope]

I've never seen them be so overt about it, but I've long suspected this is the attitude.

Hirers really seem to struggle with the concept that people could switch between contract and permanent. The client will want the breadth and depth of experience that a contractor's cv supplies, but they so often don't trust us to stick around.

[northernladuk]

I read that they will not consider people that were permanent and then have swapped in to a contractor role doing the same job. Friday to Monday contractor. We see it quite a bit on there and when we do the answer is usually leave and go be a proper contractor. They are just a permie with a different remuneration method.
They don't have the skills to hit the ground running or bring experience from many other clients to the table like a seasoned contractor will and haven't been tested properly to see if they can stick around at new clients and deliver. We also see a lot of first time contractors that don't like what they are doing or can't hack the role. The travel time or staying away is often quoted when they want to quit.

Seems a bit tight, but bearing in the mind the above, quite reasonable.

[jmo21]

I wouldn't worry about it OP, if I had a pound for every time an agent asked me "would you consider a permanent role...."

[simes]

I remember having that response to a perm role I (mistakenly) went for in 2008.

Didn't get it, hung out for contracting and all came good.

[ladymuck]

I read that they will not consider people that were permanent and then have swapped in to a contractor role doing the same job. Friday to Monday contractor. We see it quite a bit on there and when we do the answer is usually leave and go be a proper contractor. They are just a permie with a different remuneration method.
They don't have the skills to hit the ground running or bring experience from many other clients to the table like a seasoned contractor will and haven't been tested properly to see if they can stick around at new clients and deliver. We also see a lot of first time contractors that don't like what they are doing or can't hack the role. The travel time or staying away is often quoted when they want to quit.

Seems a bit tight, but bearing in the mind the above, quite reasonable.

I think you managed to read it completely the opposite way round

[tomtomagain]

Here is the reply that I got this morning from a recruiter:
“Unfortunately, for this role, the client wouldn't consider candidates that have previously been contractors for their permanent roles”.

Sue them on the grounds of discrimination.

[hairymouse]

I wouldn't worry about it OP, if I had a pound for every time an agent asked me "would you consider a permanent role...."

That's a good point, if the conventional wisdom is that clients won't hire an ex contractor as perm then why do they keep calling me? Since agents don't usually do anything unless it pays ....