Burning bridges or much needed spring cleaning in this industry

[yetanotherbob]

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/recruiter-spam-tuliplist-kevinjohn-gallagher

Never thought someone would go to that extent of publicly naming but he's right to question the actual value addition that this industry makes...

[ladymuck]

Looks like it's been taken down, whatever it was

[yetanotherbob]

Looks like it's been taken down, whatever it was

Still there - on https://www.linkedin.com
sub-url: /pulse/recruiter-spam-tuliplist-kevinjohn-gallagher

Posting the URL here somehow mangles it irreparably - replace tulip as you see fit

[GJABS]

Use this redirect to get there:

http://tinyurl.com/j5anc7r

[Lockhouse]

Use this redirect to get there:

http://tinyurl.com/j5anc7r

Smart Guy. Great PR.

[squarepeg]

Some agencies are grossly under-represented on that list...

[SlipTheJab]

TBH theres not much point is there, you just need to play the game, personally I've not had to use an agent to source a role for 5 years now, I use my network to bypass them, clients still use them for payroll sometimes which is a pain but can't be helped I guess. My point is that this way you avoid all of the fake roles, CV harvesting and lies.You have to accept that fact that as email is free to send you'll get a load of keyword based spam, delete it and keep invoicing

[SueEllen]

As email is free you are allowed to have more than one email address.

[Willapp]

As frustrating as this is, I can't see it changing as the strategy these recruiters adopt is very low cost to them (automated keyword matching + mass emails) and if it reaches one person who's right for the role and they fill it, why would they care if 10,000 other people get pissed off?

When I'm not actively seeking a role I completely ignore LinkedIn (clicking that link is the first time I've been on the site in nearly a year - had dozens of invites and inbox messages from, you guessed it, recruiters) and any direct mails just go into junk. Far as I'm concerned they aren't going to be offended if I ignore them then as soon as I want a role I'll just start contacting agents that I know and trust and usually get something that way.

[yetanotherbob]

As frustrating as this is, I can't see it changing as the strategy these recruiters adopt is very low cost to them (automated keyword matching + mass emails) and if it reaches one person who's right for the role and they fill it, why would they care if 10,000 other people get pissed off?

When I'm not actively seeking a role I completely ignore LinkedIn (clicking that link is the first time I've been on the site in nearly a year - had dozens of invites and inbox messages from, you guessed it, recruiters) and any direct mails just go into junk. Far as I'm concerned they aren't going to be offended if I ignore them then as soon as I want a role I'll just start contacting agents that I know and trust and usually get something that way.

To be fair, most LinkedIn messages I got have been quite relevant and personalised - and if so, I make it a point to send a proper reply note if I am unavailable. I never accept invites though, from anyone I don't know in a professional capacity, especially recruiters..
But the flip side of LinkedIn spam, if it is widespread, is that it might stop actual professionals from reaching out to each other.