WWYD? - Recruiter misbehaving

[fiisch]

Treading cautiously on this board, but thought I'd canvas opinion on what to do about a recruiter that I think may have misrepresented my application for a permie role.

I've recently been flirting with permie roles knowing that a). My contract is likely to expire at year end and b). A new baby has made me rethink work/life balance and longer term career goals and c). The market woes.

I was approached by a recruiter for a Business Consultancy role. All seemed well, until I was sent the job description, which referred: "Ordinarily you would be working on client site as a member of a delivery team and should be comfortable with living away from home, Monday to Friday, for engagements which are not commutable. When not assigned to a client site, you will normally be based from home."

I responded, saying thank you for opportunity, but due to current circumstances with new baby etc., this would not be suitable. Recruiter responded with updated job spec, deleting this paragraph and stating this was "pre-Covid" working, and now it would be max 1-2 days per week on site.

First interview went well, however when I asked the interviewer about working location, the response, albeit a bit woolly due to Covid, was that successful candidate had to be open to travel and staying away. I fed back to recruiter that this was not doable, and that job probably not for me. They told me to stick with it, and they'd pick up with the company and call me back. They didn't, and second interview arrived, and went pretty much the same way.

Feedback from second interview was very good and they were keen to progress to final stage, but asked what was my stance on travel. Gave the same response as I had before - some flexibility, happy for occasional overnight/longer stay, but regular week-in week-out 3 night stays away were not doable due to young family. Subsequently been told application not progressed due to wanting someone more flexible.

I am thoroughly ****ed off that I've gone through the rigmarole of two interviews only for something that I raised at the outset to be the reason for not getting the job. I said as much to the recruiter (a colleague as original guy was on leave), and he apologised but didn't offer up any reasoning.

So, what would you do? Would you shrug it off and put it down to experience, or would you stick it to the recruiter and forward the emails re.: working location to the original interviewer (HR) directly via LinkedIn?

[BlueSharp]

Treading cautiously on this board, but thought I'd canvas opinion on what to do about a recruiter that I think may have misrepresented my application for a permie role.

I've recently been flirting with permie roles knowing that a). My contract is likely to expire at year end and b). A new baby has made me rethink work/life balance and longer term career goals and c). The market woes.

I was approached by a recruiter for a Business Consultancy role. All seemed well, until I was sent the job description, which referred: "Ordinarily you would be working on client site as a member of a delivery team and should be comfortable with living away from home, Monday to Friday, for engagements which are not commutable. When not assigned to a client site, you will normally be based from home."

I responded, saying thank you for opportunity, but due to current circumstances with new baby etc., this would not be suitable. Recruiter responded with updated job spec, deleting this paragraph and stating this was "pre-Covid" working, and now it would be max 1-2 days per week on site.

First interview went well, however when I asked the interviewer about working location, the response, albeit a bit woolly due to Covid, was that successful candidate had to be open to travel and staying away. I fed back to recruiter that this was not doable, and that job probably not for me. They told me to stick with it, and they'd pick up with the company and call me back. They didn't, and second interview arrived, and went pretty much the same way.

Feedback from second interview was very good and they were keen to progress to final stage, but asked what was my stance on travel. Gave the same response as I had before - some flexibility, happy for occasional overnight/longer stay, but regular week-in week-out 3 night stays away were not doable due to young family. Subsequently been told application not progressed due to wanting someone more flexible.

I am thoroughly ****ed off that I've gone through the rigmarole of two interviews only for something that I raised at the outset to be the reason for not getting the job. I said as much to the recruiter (a colleague as original guy was on leave), and he apologised but didn't offer up any reasoning.

So, what would you do? Would you shrug it off and put it down to experience, or would you stick it to the recruiter and forward the emails re.: working location to the original interviewer (HR) directly via LinkedIn?

Ask yourself what do you want out of this situation? If it's to get even let it go, all you will do is burn a bridge with the agent/interviewer. Contact the interviewer on Linked in, say thanks for the interview but his assessment not to proceed was right the travel would of been a problem, as you had already explained to the recruiter and to ask to keep you in mind for any other roles that come up.

[_V_]

So, what would you do?

Nothing, sounds like usual recruitment stuff to me.

No different to the "I had 17 interviews, and got offered the job, but now the role have been pulled due to [insert nonsense here]"

[eek]

Nothing, sounds like usual recruitment stuff to me.

No different to the "I had 17 interviews, and got offered the job, but now the role have been pulled due to [insert nonsense here]"

+1 the problem is that you didn't ask about it at the first interview because any client is going to think this opportunity is so great no one is going to cause a problem with it.

[vwdan]

Just recruitment stuff. I'm a vindictive arsehole, but even so, like - it was a process, it didn't work out. Yeah, they wasted your time a bit but in fairness, at least you were given the opportunity to put yourself in front of the client.

I'd be disappointed, a little irritated, for sure but meh it happens.

I wouldn't go burning bridges, for sure.

[fiisch]

Ask yourself what do you want out of this situation? If it's to get even let it go, all you will do is burn a bridge with the agent/interviewer. Contact the interviewer on Linked in, say thanks for the interview but his assessment not to proceed was right the travel would of been a problem, as you had already explained to the recruiter and to ask to keep you in mind for any other roles that come up.

That's a brilliant idea - thank you. Slightly passive-aggressive, but ultimately it's a thank you note for the opportunity, but flags up that I gave my stance from the outset.

[vetran]

+1 the problem is that you didn't ask about it at the first interview because any client is going to think this opportunity is so great no one is going to cause a problem with it.

Some recruiters are like horny teenage boys they will do & say anything to get you in to a position.

Ask these questions at the interview if they are playing games. Obviously do it subtly so you don't burn your bridges. e.g. "looks like to do this job properly I would need to spend quite a few weeks on site? That wasn't in the job description I got"

[Whorty]

Try to look at the positives ... you made it through 2 interviews, got some good practice, and this is what you can use for your next opportunities. Don't burn bridges with the agent just in case they have another role pop up suitable for you - they're all about the money, they know you interview well so they will be more than willing to put you in front of the next client that comes along.

[GhostofTarbera]

Try to look at the positives ... you made it through 2 interviews, got some good practice, and this is what you can use for your next opportunities. Don't burn bridges with the agent just in case they have another role pop up suitable for you - they're all about the money, they know you interview well so they will be more than willing to put you in front of the next client that comes along.

Indeed 4 months at home with a screaming baby he will be begging the agent for overnight gigs


Sent from my iPhone using Contractor UK Forum

[ladymuck]

Just more evidence that recruiters shaft both sides of the transaction if they think they can get away with it.

I like the note to the interviewers via LI suggestion. It's well worth subtly dropping the suggestion that the recruiter should not have put you forward.

Other than excellent interviewing practise, it's also a good lesson learned that if there's potentially terms on the job you're not comfortable with then you definitely should raise them at the interview.