Flipping Agents!!!! Rant alert!!!!

[d000hg]

the point is, they agree to 15% and sign stuff till the cows come home. They still rip both sides off.

It's only when the client speaks to the contractor that the truth emerges

So, get it it writing that the agency will take no more than 15%. Then take someone they provide. Then sue them and tell all the papers etc.

[thunderlizard]

I still do not get why companies use agencies.

It's because agencies ring them up persistently and eventually they cave in. If you were a company that really had no idea where to start, then agencies will probably do a better job of getting somebody in through the door. But once you've got 1 or 2 people on your team who know what they need, you're better off without them.

RichardCranium's analysis of the situation is very good, and it's a shame fewer companies get round to costing up the saved effort and thinking "Is that really worth 20% of contract rate/30% of first year salary?"

[Hawkeye]

Because they like paying 90 days in arrears, and most contractors won't accept that? Because they don't like having different contracts and terms with every single contractor? Because paying one bill to an agency is easier than paying 10 different people? Because they can more easily sue the agency for their money if it goes wrong?

Ah OK. Basically companies pass on the risk. Between yours and Richard's post it seems that the overall benefits then will outweigh the costs. I suppose my dislike and frustration with recruitment consultants makes me blind to the actual benefits of them.

I guess I need to pull together a list of preferred suppliers for agencies going forward. Might also need to get a contract lawyer to check the t's & c's with each as it would probably then be a less risky strategy than taking contractors on directly in this case.

Thanks

[Hawkeye]

It's because agencies ring them up persistently and eventually they cave in. If you were a company that really had no idea where to start, then agencies will probably do a better job of getting somebody in through the door. But once you've got 1 or 2 people on your team who know what they need, you're better off without them.

RichardCranium's analysis of the situation is very good, and it's a shame fewer companies get round to costing up the saved effort and thinking "Is that really worth 20% of contract rate/30% of first year salary?"

It would be interesting to see how they do cost it up in a larger company bearing in mind that most larger companies I have worked for have a huge HR department that deal with all of the agencies and CV's.

See my current client is very small and when I took time out to review CV's everything pretty much came to a standstill and my work just started backing up.