Agencies to avoid....

[Diver]

I would have told you to whistle. The agent decides who goes forwards to the clients, not you.

Then why contact the contractor in the first place if they weren't considered suitable for the role?

And the statement "The agent decides who goes forwards to the clients, not you" is rather sweeping and rather arrogant!
To be perfectly frank here, and I know it is only semantics, but; You (If indirectly) work for the contractor as well as the client. YOU ARE AN AGENT NOT AN EMPLOYER. If the agent decides who goes forwards to the clients is an absolute, then what if the contractor, after vetting the potential client, decides he does not want to be put forward for the position. are you going to tell the contractor that he/she Is still going to be put forward?

Watching this thread I have come to two conclusions;

1. Contractors do overestimate their self worth and their ability to micro manage their own destiny.
2. Agents who's entire career and financial well being rests on the backs of the contractors, are too often arrogant and too often overconfident in their ability to "Select" candidates for roles they know nothing about other than some the terminology used.

In the past 5 years I have only used one agent. He contacts me with roles that He already knows I am suitable for, and Only those roles, and Only when I have let him know that I am looking.
He is the only agent I am linked to on linked in and 5 of my past colleagues are now working the same way with him (exclusivity). He does not fish. he is not pushy and he always looks for the best deal for us. Because of this, he now has a loyal and marketable following.

Other agents need to take a leaf out of his book.

[BolshieBastard]

I would have told you to whistle. The agent decides who goes forwards to the clients, not you.

And I decide who has my exclusivity, not an agency drone or account manager who generally knows sweet FA about my specialism.

What agency do you work for BTW so I know to avoid them? Come on, tell us all!

[MyUserName]

In the past 5 years I have only used one agent. He contacts me with roles that He already knows I am suitable for, and Only those roles, and Only when I have let him know that I am looking.
He is the only agent I am linked to on linked in and 5 of my past colleagues are now working the same way with him (exclusivity). He does not fish. he is not pushy and he always looks for the best deal for us. Because of this, he now has a loyal and marketable following.

Other agents need to take a leaf out of his book.

Do you fancy sharing his details?

[Diver]

Do you fancy sharing his details?

I did. but just went to get them off my linkedin and he's left recruitment and is now working as an accounts manager for the NPD group of companies (whoever they are).
Looks like we both lose

[MyUserName]

I did. but just went to get them off my linkedin and he's left recruitment and is now working as an accounts manager for the NPD group of companies (whoever they are).
Looks like we both lose

Bugger

[The Agents View]

Then why contact the contractor in the first place if they weren't considered suitable for the role?

Bear in mind that alot of the time, it's not just skills we're looking for - it's a cultural fit, that will work with what is on site already. A candidate can have every skill on the job spec - but if they're arrogant in the way described in previous posts, I'm not putting them forward because they will represent my business poorly. That is my perogative - I judge who is going to represent my business in the most positive way, and select them for submission. As an example, a candidate such as BB, who has sent an email which effectively says "You are not qualified to judge my ability, you have no value, you will do this that and the other" - is not the kind of person I want labelled with my business name, so I'd not give him the opportunity to represent my brand.

And the statement "The agent decides who goes forwards to the clients, not you" is rather sweeping and rather arrogant!

I am engaged for my professional services. My professional services include screening for everything from the skills to perform the role, to cultural fit. If I don't feel the candidate is right for the role, they don't get presented to the client. With my clients, that means that contractor won't be seen by the client.

To be perfectly frank here, and I know it is only semantics, but; You (If indirectly) work for the contractor as well as the client. YOU ARE AN AGENT NOT AN EMPLOYER.

Wrong. I pay you, your contract is with me, not the end client - Hence I decide who I bring in to perform this sub-contracted work. It's true, I work for the candidate and the client - however on balance of importance to me the client is 51% of the equation, and the candidate 49%. Clients are far less expendable than candidates. That's not to say that candidates should be treated as a commodity, but they are certainly easier to come by than clients.

If the agent decides who goes forwards to the clients is an absolute, then what if the contractor, after vetting the potential client, decides he does not want to be put forward for the position. are you going to tell the contractor that he/she Is still going to be put forward?

Personally - no (Although I can see how it might happen). Ultimately though, there would be no point in putting forward someone who isn't interested in the end client (although they generally won't know this until a bit later anyway) - this is part of the reason to ask about who you should avoid approaching on their behalf. The thing you have to remember, is that we don't make any money unless someone is placed - we don't get paid for CV's, or Interviews, etc.

The whole recruitment process is a two way street - if you don't want to work for the end client, I'm not intersted in putting you forward to the role....what would be the point?

1. .
2. Agents who's entire career and financial well being rests on the backs of the contractors, are too often arrogant and too often overconfident in their ability to "Select" candidates for roles they know nothing about other than some the terminology used.

However, that is what we are engaged to do - arrogance doesn't come into it - selecting the candidates most likely to result in cash in your pocket, is the only thing that really matters - in my industry, I'd rather have someone with 75% of the skills required, and the right personality, than someone with 100% skills, but no personality fit. That philosophy has seen me successful enough to set up my own agency and maintain contracts with major blue chip businesses.

In the past 5 years I have only used one agent. He contacts me with roles that He already knows I am suitable for, and Only those roles, and Only when I have let him know that I am looking.
He is the only agent I am linked to on linked in and 5 of my past colleagues are now working the same way with him (exclusivity). He does not fish. he is not pushy and he always looks for the best deal for us. Because of this, he now has a loyal and marketable following.

Other agents need to take a leaf out of his book.

You're talking about 50% of his working life really - having a marketable base is perfect, and I'm pleased that works for you - but rest assured, when roles come up that he doesn't have a base of contacts for - he's doing the same as the rest of us.

[Battenburg]

...You're talking about 50% of his working life really - having a marketable base is perfect, and I'm pleased that works for you - but rest assured, when roles come up that he doesn't have a base of contacts for - he's doing the same as the rest of us.

Of course he does, he's in business like we are. If only it was the majority of agents who operated professionally, and not the minority. I wish there were more "entrepreneur"-style agents with whom I could forge a professional relationship, rather than the faceless sales persons operating in huge organisations. I am envious of the previous correspondent who said they have managed to find such an agent.

I have agencies I'd prefer to work through but having been out for nearly a year now I cannot afford to be fussy (I even responded recently to Computer Futures!)

My most recent experience yesterday was thus. The Agent:

- failed to send me the promised JD in his reply email
- on the second attempt, sent me the wrong JD
- suggested I send him a copy of my passport before I was submitted (oh dear!)

Another one recently asked the following stupid questions:

- how "technical" I am?
- how long does it take me to write a script?

If he'd read my CV he'd have known that these are not the questions you ask someone with my background, i.e. 15 years' experience in contracting/consulting.

On another occasion recently, an agent, who had previous told me the budget had been signed off for the interview I was attended, then admitted it hadn't been. At which point I knew I had wasted my time, effort and money attending the client interview through an agent who was incapable to being professional. To make matters worse he then asked me if I was "going shopping" after the interview. Would he ask a bloke that, I wonder. Perhaps he thought while I was in London I'd might like to splash out on a new outfit as well as wasting £50 on the fare/expenses.

To add insult, I have just read the new REC Report: "UK recruiters are thought of as professionals by the majority of the public, according to a new report".

Did REC include contractors in their survey of the public?

[tractor]

...

If an agent does not represent the contractor, they are not an agent they are a representative for the client. Might be semantics for some but that's the way it actually is. I have often thought about this. Contrast it with the sports world. Can you imagine Beckham's agent telling him there's a 10% cut across the board and suck it up or walk? No, it wouldn't happen.

So the sooner 'agents' stop pretending they are representing contractors the better.

It would be nice if the 1/2/3/4 tier systems of leeches were replaced by the system of factors one for the client and one for the contractor, then you would hear much more of John Hurt's Montrose saying 'My factor will call upon your factor....' whilst negotiating. Contractors would have a real representative and so would the client.

Then agents would really have to earn their money instead of pushing someone elses' corporate broom

[Bumfluff]

The best insight I've had to an agents mentality in resent years is some of the cr*p they post on linkedin, its like watching school kids having an argument, other agents grassing on other agents, pointing fingers talking about spoof jobs and cv's and actually naming people.

It can be said that we are no better on this forum but at least we do it behind are avatar , not in our own name and employers name and not for hundreds thousands of people to see who could be current or potential clients.

[Diver]

The best insight I've had to an agents mentality in resent years is some of the cr*p they post on linkedin, its like watching school kids having an argument, other agents grassing on other agents, pointing fingers talking about spoof jobs and cv's and actually naming people.

It can be said that we are no better on this forum but at least we do it behind are avatar , not in our own name and employers name and not for hundreds thousands of people to see who could be current or potential clients.

Never mind all that carp

How about posting a full sized pic of your avatar. it would probably be your most appreciated post and get you loads of +rep