Plan B - RecruitCOP

[privateeye]

I've been busy trying to find a business model that stops rogue recruiters in their tracks and gives the decent ones an advantage and here is what I have come up with for starters.

RecruitCOP is an automated online computer program that helps enforce The Employment Agencies Act and The Conduct of Employment Agencies and Employment Businesses Regulations.

Our system prevents bad practice in the recruitment industry and very effectively gives the red card to Recruitment Consultants who:

1. miss-represent or miss-sell a Job.
2. advertise non-existent jobs to obtain sales leads from job hunter CVs.
3. are not being open about commission rates when they are required to do so.
4. refuse to name the Client/Employer to an applicant.
5. wrongly tell applicants that the Client/Employer requires references prior to submission even if the Client/Employer does not require them, these are used for sales leads.
6. have surpassed their quota of CVs but are still telling applicants they will submit them to prevent competing recruiters getting suitable applicants.
7. knowing a job is filled are still advertising it to generate sales leads from applicant CVs.
8. do not inform the applicant of the status of any application.
9. claim to be on a Client/Employer Preferred Supplier List or represent an Employer when they are not.

This is achieved by providing an automated business workflow that ensures fake advertising of employment opportunities by Recruitment Consultants is not possible and that Recruitment Consultants on a Preferred Supplier List are able to be checked for authentication by job applicants increasing the chance of getting more suitable applicants. RecruitCOP also provides feedback to the Employer, Applicant, and Recruitment Consultant at every stage of the recruitment process.

RecruitCOP will also show you that the recruiter has actually submitted your CV – this same information is displayed to the Client/Employer.

If you are interested have a look at RecruitCOP and any feedback good or bad is appreciated - particulary if you can get your clients to use it as it is client driven. I aim to keep it free of charge to use and generate advertisng income.

[threaded]

What a good idea. Hope it does well.

[privateeye]

What a good idea. Hope it does well.

Thanks threaded - PR going into full swing

[AttitudeAdjuster]

Nice idea Privateeye, but what will we do when, inevitably, there are no recruiters left as they have all been filtered out!?

[privateeye]

Nice idea Privateeye, but what will we do when, inevitably, there are no recruiters left as they have all been filtered out!?

RecruitCOP was not designed to exclude recruiters or a clients right to use a recruiter that they wish. It is designed to simply enforce a code of practice and even rogue recruiters will be forced to abide by the rules. RecruitCOP can actually help recruiter companies keep their staff using a code of practice - it is often the case that the recruiter company is honourable but the tactics used by some of their staff is less than desirable.

RecruitCOP does not filter out the recruiters - RecruitCOP allows a client to register and set up a PSL including any recruiter they wish. When the client enters a new job only those on the PSL may be assigned to it. When the recruiter contacts you they can point you to the area on RecruitCOP that proves the client has put them on the PSL and included them for a specific job requirement. Any recruiter pretending to be on the PSL will not be able to do this. You will also see the job description as given by the client so a recruiter cannot change it or miss-sell the job.

The client actually enters the most important parts of the job - for example contract length, is it likely to be extended, are references required and when etc etc so the recruiter cannot miss-sell the job. If a recruiter says they have submitted you, you will receive an email stating you have been submitted and you can see it on RecruitCOP. This information will also be viewable by the client so they can query the recruiter if they have not received the CV and you can query them if you have not received the email etc. Each time the recruiter submits a cv a counter is incremented that is viewable by applicants so you know if they have reached their maximum quota and prevent them them pretending to have submitted you.

In effect what RecruitCOP achieves is forcing even the worst recruiters out there to abide by a Code of Practice if the client is using RecruitCOP. You will also get notified if the client changes the status of your application - rejected, interview or the job is closed.

RecruitCOP only fillters out recruiters on PSL/job basis.

[Mordac]

What happens when the agencies refuse to use the system (doubtless claiming incompatability with their own systems)? And what if they threaten to sue, claiming defamation?

Edit - forgot to say, nice idea, hope it makes a difference.

[privateeye]

What happens when the agencies refuse to use the system (doubtless claiming incompatability with their own systems)? And what if they threaten to sue, claiming defamation?

Edit - forgot to say, nice idea, hope it makes a difference.

Questions we are already prepared for:

The system does not need any compatibility with the agency system, all they need to do is enter the applicants email address. We have nearly completed making the data exportable should anyone wish it to be.

All RecruitCOP does is enforce a code of practice and fairplay, it does not slander anyone. It enforces honesty. There is no way that a recruiter can sue RecruitCOP - the job definition is input by the client not RecruitCOP and if a recruiter miss-sells a job and an applicant finds out about it on RecruitCOP then it is the recruiter who is at fault.

On the question of the recruiter just simply refusing to use the system we have already thought about this. Firstly the entire PSL would have to refuse to use it otherwise the recruiter(s) refusing to use it will only highlight themselves as potentially rogue recruiters against those willing to use it. The client would have to question why someone does not like honesty. Secondly the client/employer runs the show not the recruiters or contractor/permies.

Back to the question of a threat to sue - as a private eye I have daily contact with solicitors etc who have given fantastic input and pre-prepared statements in the areas that anyone is potentially going to make threats. At the end of the day no-one is going to like the fact that any court action against a program that simply enforces honesty will also require the prosecutor to publicy admit that they must prefer dishonesty catch 22. If we are threatened with a law suit on this issue we have a right to let other people know. We have already as part of the business plan been through the scenario's of a law suit - that was fun.

Thanks for your support

[AttitudeAdjuster]

Thanks for your fullsome answer Privateeye, but I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek with my (perhaps unfairly) flippant comment. I wish you all the best but speaking for myself and having read the views of others here and elsewhere, I now know that almost all agents would fail your worthwhile tests on each and every job they post. the number of times I have read a comment here and thought '..that's exactly what happened to me and I thought I was the only one!'

The problem as I see it, is with the present system that relies heavily on commission based payments, encourages short term thinking, has a very low entry barrier (in fact on second thoughts - no entry barrier!), high staff turnover and no enforceable professional code of practice.

[privateeye]

Thanks for your fullsome answer Privateeye, but I was being a bit tongue-in-cheek with my (perhaps unfairly) flippant comment. I wish you all the best but speaking for myself and having read the views of others here and elsewhere, I now know that almost all agents would fail your worthwhile tests on each and every job they post. the number of times I have read a comment here and thought '..that's exactly what happened to me and I thought I was the only one!'

I knew you were being tongue in cheek but you still had a valid question. No doubt that nearly every recruiter would fail the tests and get away with it if RecruitCOP operated by just publishing a code of practice (REC and ATSCO) but RecruitCOP goes much much further - it actively stops you breaching the code so even a rogue recruiter will have to become more honest or the client and applicant will clearly see it.

Its not designed to exclude any recruiter but put all competing recruiters for the same job on a level playing field which is in the best interests of applicants, clients, and even recruiters. It will even help the large recruitment companies keep their staff onside.

[ExpCont]

I have been contracting for about 10 years now, and something which I always found problematic was the handcuff clauses in contracts. I have never believed that an agency should be permitted to take a margin in perpetuity.

RecruitCOP could be a springboard for providing information about a contractor's rights and what the Conduct Regulations 2003 mean for the contractor, particularly with regards to handcuff clauses. All too often I hear that someone is being told that they should opt-out because the person will otherwise be caught by IR35 - this is simply not true.

As with seatbelt legislation or mobile phone legislation, times change, and what was once possible is no longer the case. With conduct regulations it is no longer possible to prevent a contractor from going direct - it's that simple. It allows only that the agency covers this eventuality in the end-client contract in the form of a transfer fee, or a final extension - but it does not prevent a direct relationship being born.

With the help of sites like RecruitCOP, the agency industry could change dramatically where it is normal that the agency is able to take a margin for 1 year maximum, and that contractors go direct or switch agencies.

Anything which attempts to provide more information to the individual contractor and enable him to see through what the agent is trying to hide, has to be a good thing.