Dealing with Day Rate disclosure requests.

[The Agents View]

Back in the day when agents had to work for their money, they spent years building a portfolio by actually 'representing' the contractor and didn't need to advertise on monster etc.

Which is EXACTLY my point.... the demonstration would be that you can't just shove an advert out, and expect it to bring you what you need!

FYI/amusement - I spend more than 50% of my time building relationships with a portfolio of specifically chosen individuals. I spent the other 50% counting the money I've made by leeching off of other peoples hard work

[MyUserName]

...more than 50% of my time building relationships with a portfolio of specifically chosen individuals. I spent the other 50% counting the money I've made ...

[SimonMac]

I will have to remember his lack of a basic grasp of maths when negotiating a rate rise from him

[The Agents View]

I will have to remember his lack of a basic grasp of maths when negotiating a rate rise from him

Don't you know anything about recruitment?? It requires 110% of of your time

[Contractoid]

I will have to remember his lack of a basic grasp of maths when negotiating a rate rise from him

Can of worms well and truly opened here I see!!!

Personally I don’t have a problem at all with Agencies taking a fair cut in return for them spending time building up a client relationship and acting as my outsourced marketing department. I have a lot of respect for the Agencies and Agents I who act professionally and with who I have a long term partnership.
What I do object to is –

• Being treated as a commodity to make easy money from
• Never having calls returned
• Being lied to about roles that don’t exist or have not even been signed off
• Cold called to get insider information about my current assignment / company / past assignments but never actually have a position or get me an interview
• Horse traded with other contractors and terminated early for lower day rate alternatives

Sound familiar anyone?

Yes, I know not all Agents are like this. And CHOOSE never to work with ones that operate as per above!

[MyUserName]

Don't you know anything about recruitment?? It requires 110% of of your time

[Contractoid]

Oh no please not that phrase. Does my head in! Management Speak nonsence. On the Apprentice its up to what "Sir Alan I will give you 140%

[The Agents View]

Oh no please not that phrase. Does my head in! Management Speak nonsence. On the Apprentice its up to what "Sir Alan I will give you 140%

Maybe we should interface over coffee regarding this.....?


Just to be clear - I was wiggling, because clearly my brain is focused on the million other things going on in my life, and somehow I managed to make 50% + 50% still equal more than 100%

[The Agents View]

Can of worms well and truly opened here I see!!!

Personally I don’t have a problem at all with Agencies taking a fair cut in return for them spending time building up a client relationship and acting as my outsourced marketing department. I have a lot of respect for the Agencies and Agents I who act professionally and with who I have a long term partnership.
What I do object to is –

• Being treated as a commodity to make easy money from
• Never having calls returned
• Being lied to about roles that don’t exist or have not even been signed off
• Cold called to get insider information about my current assignment / company / past assignments but never actually have a position or get me an interview
• Horse traded with other contractors and terminated early for lower day rate alternatives

Sound familiar anyone?

Yes, I know not all Agents are like this. And CHOOSE never to work with ones that operate as per above!

Believe it or not - As an agent who is quite long in the tooth, and dared to step into IT recruitment a few years back (and got the heck out as quickly as I could too!) - I tend to agree with you. However, I would point out that there's a lot of stuff which is perceived as being the above, but actually isn't quite as sinister as you lot of have been led to believe.

1) Easy money - yes and no - once you've done the really hard bit between you, it's a difficult balance. Some contractors like to hear from their agents monthly just to catch up - some just want to be left alone - it's hard to tell that early on. It's also worth bearing in mind that in an agency environment, the contract consultants, are often competing with the permanent ones. Your £100 per day, might seem like a rip-off to you, but to us, you are a small part of what we have to acheive in order to keep our jobs, and make money. I'm pretty sure that every recruiter would like to have enough time to take amazing care of every contractor - unfortunately, corporate environments constantly ask "is what you are doing, making you money"....if the answer is no, or not at the moment, but it could, then you have to stop doing it.

2) As above. If there's no reason for an agent to call you back (and of course the only reason there would be, is if you have a possibility of making them money) then you're unlikely to get a call. Unfortunately, this problem is magnified by the fact that alot of the contractors who are looking, are benched, and therefore, all they are waiting for all day, is that agent to phone them. We know it's frustrating - we have the same situation with client companies all the time - ultimately, we want to make money and you want to work - however there is always someone in the chain that has a different agenda to either of us.

3) This is my biggest concern on this board. Alot of the scenarios touted as being "agency games" are not agency games at all - many of them are agents being too scared to tell applicant that they're not what the client is looking for. When you're kicking your heels, desperate for work, you look at every job advert and think "I could WALK into that". I know that feeling - I've done it. The reality is that the agent is there to provide a gateway to the dreamers, and get to the people who can ACTUALLY do the job - and whether some of the neanderthals on here like it or not, we do generally know what our clients want, better than the people who are approaching us.

4) This I think is your main, legitimate, gripe - The whole recruiter/contractor sector, really relies on quid pro-quo - you do something for me, I'll do something for you type stuff. Unfortunately, there are a few organisations who believe that this is one way traffic, and often that reflects in the type of recruiter they employ. The worst thing is, this is a difficult cycle to break. Ask yourself where you think your last successful agency role came from. I would hazard a guess that it came from someone fishing for roles, getting lucky, and putting your name to it. I can see your frustration at being stripped of your information - but, it does kind of go around and come around.

5) Your final point. Lets be clear, I hated IT recruitment, so got out ASAP, but in my years as a recruiter, I have never seen anyone tactically remove someone, to introduce a lower paid, higher margin resource. This job is about protecting what you've got, and building on it....not risking what you've got, in the hope that you might squeeze an extra few quid. Looking at this maybe slightly more subjectively - the notion that this kind of thing occurs, is, I believe, a result of poor quality contractors, being ousted, and needing to find an avenue of blame for their incompetence. The path of least resistance there, is always going to be the agent - especially on this board.


To summarise though - even as an insider to the agency business, I believe the model is fundamentally flawed. An agent should be an impartial resource advisor, able to advise both client and contractor on the best moves for them - without any vested interest. The agency model has grown from large corporations being highly risk averse and demanding to pay only when someone comes on board. With that kind of model, games are always going to be played. Unfortunately, I can't really think of a better model that allows the big rewards for those who are talented within the recruitment field - other than having them work as interims within internal recruitment teams (a pattern which IS starting to emerge at the moment).

I hope the above gives you a view from the other side of the fence. Whilst I might make the odd sarcastic comment about counting my riches - alot of that is driven by the assumption that everything that ever goes wrong when contractors are looking for jobs, is the agents fault. Unfortunately, the reality is that much of it has to do with the millions of people who have jumped on the contracting bandwagon over the last 15 years, and have diluted the quality of the true interim market place - sadly, many of the culprits, would never identify themselves as such - and so this constant friction between agent and contractor continues. At the end of the day, we all want to make a good living - something overlooked by both parties alot of the time.

[cojak]

Unfortunately, the reality is that much of it has to do with the millions of people who have jumped on the contracting bandwagon over the last 15 years, and have diluted the quality of the true interim market place - sadly, many of the culprits, would never identify themselves as such - and so this constant friction between agent and contractor continues. At the end of the day, we all want to make a good living - something overlooked by both parties alot of the time.

I must agree with this. It's mainly about supply and demand.

The only good thing I can see about IR35 reforms is that it will shake the contracting tree and all the pseudo contractors will come tumbling out, leaving the market to the rest of us.

(I've dealt with more competent than incompetent agents btw and never seem to get these fishing trips that many people here get.)