Is this illegal or just part of the territory?....

[strawberrysmoothie]

Ok, I will make this brief as I can...

Is it illegal for recruitment consultants to put up ads with misleading salary rates?

The reason I'm asking is I applied for a role (the role had the day rate clearly listed with a lot of details as to what the role involved). and the agent called me back within a few minutes after I sent my cv.

He discussed the role, he told me who the client was and asked what rate I was looking. I told I wanted the top rate as I was an exact match to what the client required. He told me could I go in at a 'lower rate' as that would be better for the client - I told him to go 'procreate himself' as what I'm asking for is clearly within the day rate limits. He agreed and wanted me to have a telephone interview but wanted to confirm a day and time and would call me back in the morning.

I got a call the following morning stating that they didn't want to interview me as 'i was too expensive' and the usual blah blah blah.

Personally couldn't give a monkey's about the role, but I'm curious as to legality of putting up job ads with misleading salary rates. If it is illegal it might be good leverage to point this out in a negotiation.

[PrinceNamor]

I don't think it's illegal, just usual agent bullsh1!t to try and harvest as many cv's as possible before seeing who they screw over.

[DaveB]

You weren't too expensive for the client, you were too expensive for the agent. They found someone else to go in at a lower rate so they make more on the deal (hint: the rate to the client stays the same regardless).

[SueEllen]

Whether it's illegal or not unless you can prove it - which you can't unless you recorded all the conversations - you can do nothing about it as the agent will just deny it.

Also if you recorded the conversations you have to be very careful how you tread legally.

BTW it's not illegal to record the calls it's what you then do with them which may not be legal.

[The Agents View]

Whether it's illegal or not unless you can prove it - which you can't unless you recorded all the conversations - you can do nothing about it as the agent will just deny it.

Also if you recorded the conversations you have to be very careful how you tread legally.

BTW it's not illegal to record the calls it's what you then do with them which may not be legal.

People on this forum are ridiculously blinkered.

If you were selling a piece of IT hardware - lets say, a Server, and you sold it to a client at list price plus a bit of margin, then found out, that the supplier could do it cheaper, then that is not "bulltulip" or "agency games" thats GOOD BUSINESS.

As it happens, more and more, agents are being locked down on margins, so when rate fluctuates, so does the charge rate.

It is entirely possible, that what you were seeing, is the result of the response to the job - if you only have one person, and they want top dollar, great - if you have 4 or 5, it's unlikely that the top dollar bod will get the job - so you either sack them off, or put them in as a benchmarker - neither of them will get YOU the gig.

Recruitment consulants, are business people, and you are their product. They make the sale, and then the cost comes out of that sale - it's really that simple.

[TykeMerc]

People on this forum are ridiculously blinkered.

If you were selling a piece of IT hardware - lets say, a Server, and you sold it to a client at list price plus a bit of margin, then found out, that the supplier could do it cheaper, then that is not "bulltulip" or "agency games" thats GOOD BUSINESS.

Nice smokescreen, admittedly horribly ineffective.

If you're suggesting that simply because Mr Nice Agent finds a contractor that will work for less then he will pass that saving on to Mr Hard Done By Client then you're quite frankly trying to sell snow to an Eskimo.
Unless the agency client relationship is on a fixed margin/agreed rate card then the only party that gains benefit from a cheaper contractor is the agent as they certainly won't reveal to the client how much the contractor is being paid.
Incidentally I've seen instances (and had 3/4 of a rollout team in positive revolt which nearly caused the end client to get involved) when agencies on a rate card system aren't paying what they should be.

[Ignis Fatuus]

'scuse my ignorance, is this a good précis?

1. Yes, the agent was lying.
2. That's just GOOD BUSINESS.

Don't get me wrong, I'm far from being anti-agent. I worship the very ground that they slither on.

[TheFaQQer]

'scuse my ignorance, is this a good précis?

1. Yes, the agent was lying.
2. That's just GOOD BUSINESS.

Don't get me wrong, I'm far from being anti-agent. I worship the very ground that they slither on.

[jmo21]

Nice smokescreen, admittedly horribly ineffective.

If you're suggesting that simply because Mr Nice Agent finds a contractor that will work for less then he will pass that saving on to Mr Hard Done By Client then you're quite frankly trying to sell snow to an Eskimo.

To be fair, I don't think he was suggesting anything about passing it onto the end client, the good business part for them being that the agency gets the increased markup.

[TykeMerc]

To be fair, I don't think he was suggesting anything about passing it onto the end client, the good business part for them being that the agency gets the increased markup.

Fair enough, obviously I was giving TAV vastly more credit than he deserves (which is none in the case of the majority of agents), I think I'm in danger of being too nice to be a real contractor these days.