hourly rate beware?

[Ninja1980]

Are you saying that they allow direct contract or use HR teams and not use external agencies for recruitment?

They use both. Most places will use a combination of their own recruitment and external agencies. However, preference is given to in-house as it's so much cheaper for the company involved.

[Ninja1980]

We did have a survey on here and a majority were through agents...

SJD have also done a survery on how you found a contract and I think the numbers in both surverys kinda ruins the 'A LOT of companies perform in house recruitment' argument.

SJD survey here. I think it is a bit flawed as I am sure many of the rolls under linkedin, personal network, through job board will also include an agent so maybe they should re-think that question in future, but still..

Check page 10...

http://www.sjdaccountancy.com/sites/...y_Dec_2012.pdf

Here is the 6 months prior if that isn't enough for you. Page 10 again.

http://www.sjdaccountancy.com/sites/..._July_2012.pdf

I don't see how this survey is relevant. What I said was that in my experience a lot of companies are moving towards direct recruitment. This is particularly true for small to medium sized outfits as it makes good business sense.

[northernladuk]

I give up......

[Ninja1980]

I give up......

That's disappointing. I hope you don't adopt this philosophy with your clients.

[MyUserName]

They use both. Most places will use a combination of their own recruitment and external agencies. However, preference is given to in-house as it's so much cheaper for the company involved.

So 'most' place do use agencies then? They would not use them if they did not add value to the business, therefore they are not an unecessary overhead as proved by the fact that 'most' companies use them - QED.

Most contractors get their gigs via agencies as shown by the surverys NLUK gave you. Hence they clearly of use to contractors as they open doors into various companies and do the canvassing that contractors would otherwise do themselves - so they are of value to contractors - QED.

Whether one can go direct or not is not the point - the point you were arguing was that agencies were an unecessary overhead - hopefully you can now see that this is not the case.

[MyUserName]

That's disappointing. I hope you don't adopt this philosophy with your clients.

He would probably carry on if you paid him like his client does?

[Ninja1980]

So 'most' place do use agencies then? They would not use them if they did not add value to the business, therefore they are not an unecessary overhead as proved by the fact that 'most' companies use them - QED.

Most contractors get their gigs via agencies as shown by the surverys NLUK gave you. Hence they clearly of use to contractors as they open doors into various companies and do the canvassing that contractors would otherwise do themselves - so they are of value to contractors - QED.

Whether one can go direct or not is not the point - the point you were arguing was that agencies were an unecessary overhead - hopefully you can now see that this is not the case.

Non of the above alters the fact that agencies are an unnecessary overhead. If contractors go through an agent (in my experience) they get paid less. This is a fact.

By being market savy you can reduce overheads. Thus works in the same way for companies. Whether most people use agents is totally irrelevant.

[MyUserName]

Non of the above alters the fact that agencies are an unnecessary overhead. If contractors go through an agent (in my experience) they get paid less. This is a fact.

By being market save you can reduce overheads. Thus works in the same way for companies. Whether most people use agents is totally irrelevant.

Please provide the sources for this 'fact'?
Also, please provide the other sources I have repeatedly asked for.

Actually ... do not bother, if you had the sources then you already would have shared them.

I have patiently and politely said everything I need to say to show that you are incorrect, if you want to keep posting to have the last word then feel free.

[northernladuk]

Non of the above alters the fact that agencies are an unnecessary overhead. If contractors go through an agent (in my experience) they get paid less. This is a fact.

If my client was that blinkered and beligerant I wouldn't be with them for long TBH.

[Sausage Surprise]

No, not really. The only person providing any value for the client is the contractor, therefore any money payed by the client belongs to the contractor. The agency does not provide value, they are just an overhead and so their proportion of the take needs to be reduced as far as possible.

Boo2

Paid....it's a letter shorter too