Reply to: Website To Introduce Contractors to Clients

[LucidDementia]

Its rubbish. I applied for a role via Jobswerve to find I had to then 'register' for elevate. Only then there was no trace of the job I applied for nor could I find matching other roles.

When i contacted them, they said I hadnt registered properly (oh really?) and suggested I registered again. I did so and again, couldnt find the job i wanted to apply for.

Hacked off I then tried to remove my registration. Except there was no way to do so.

Im firmly of the opinion its just a spamming vehicle to garner cv's and leads.

My advice would be to stay well clear.

This makes reasoned sense, so fair enough. After being dragged through this thread I wish I'd never heard of them now. Forums are supposed to be relaxing.

[jmo21]

Their numbers don't look good either

[SlipTheJab]

Its rubbish. I applied for a role via Jobswerve to find I had to then 'register' for elevate. Only then there was no trace of the job I applied for nor could I find matching other roles.

When i contacted them, they said I hadnt registered properly (oh really?) and suggested I registered again. I did so and again, couldnt find the job i wanted to apply for.

Hacked off I then tried to remove my registration. Except there was no way to do so.

Im firmly of the opinion its just a spamming vehicle to garner cv's and leads.

My advice would be to stay well clear.

+1 All of these sites (apart from LI) seem a waste of time.

[jmo21]

Has Contractor Club gone then? It was a great idea but they just never had sufficient contracts and even when they did have suitable ones, he just used his wife to sift out CV's so it just became a mirror of the agency model.

Just going by posts 35 and 36 which resurrected this thread, so not 100% sure

[BolshieBastard]

The comment says nothing. Akin to me saying "Google's rubbish". I'd like to know if I shouldn't use the site because maybe they'll spam me to death or try to rob me or some such ? Or am I just listening to some bitter sack of tulip moaning online.

And as for having a vested interest - jog on. I heard about this site about 10 days ago, haven't used it myself and simply stuck it out there.
It's astonishing the attitude some of you carry around, really.

Its rubbish. I applied for a role via Jobswerve to find I had to then 'register' for elevate. Only then there was no trace of the job I applied for nor could I find matching other roles.

When i contacted them, they said I hadnt registered properly (oh really?) and suggested I registered again. I did so and again, couldnt find the job i wanted to apply for.

Hacked off I then tried to remove my registration. Except there was no way to do so.

Im firmly of the opinion its just a spamming vehicle to garner cv's and leads.

My advice would be to stay well clear.

[BolshieBastard]

You don't give 2 hoots, neither do I - fair for both of us?

Time will indeed tell if Elevate goes the same way as Contractor Club (the reason this thread bubbled back to the surface).

I see nothing in it that indicates how it will succeed where CC failed.

For me, and others here, it is a deeply flawed idea. And that's from someone that deeply dislikes agents.



Protection from claims of employment is what I mean, which may well be an irrational fear on the clients part, but certainly plays a part in that thought process.

Has Contractor Club gone then? It was a great idea but they just never had sufficient contracts and even when they did have suitable ones, he just used his wife to sift out CV's so it just became a mirror of the agency model.

[LucidDementia]

You don't give 2 hoots, neither do I - fair for both of us?

Absolutely.

Time will indeed tell if Elevate goes the same way as Contractor Club (the reason this thread bubbled back to the surface).

I see nothing in it that indicates how it will succeed where CC failed.

For me, and others here, it is a deeply flawed idea. And that's from someone that deeply dislikes agents.

Let's see what will be.

OP: Sounds like Elevate's no good for you.

[jmo21]

I don't give two hoots for your apology. Your approach of "shoot first ask questions if I can be bothered" will be its own reward.
I'll make it clear you're mistaken by never mentioning this website again whilst ignoring your lovely welcome and remaining on the board.

Apologise to me at a later date when you mean it and I'll probably accept. Is that fair?


What I offered was a link to exactly what the OP was looking for. Nothing more, nothing less.
Volume of traffic will be critical of course. As for it being a good idea? Given the general fear in the air about April, I'd say so. Time, I imagine, will tell.

You don't give 2 hoots, neither do I - fair for both of us?

Time will indeed tell if Elevate goes the same way as Contractor Club (the reason this thread bubbled back to the surface).

I see nothing in it that indicates how it will succeed where CC failed.

For me, and others here, it is a deeply flawed idea. And that's from someone that deeply dislikes agents.

The only true protection is underwritten by YourCo's insurance cover which would still apply/be required.

Protection from claims of employment is what I mean, which may well be an irrational fear on the clients part, but certainly plays a part in that thought process.

[LucidDementia]

I said they "value the service", and the protection is absolutely part of that.

The only true protection is underwritten by YourCo's insurance cover which would still apply/be required.

[LucidDementia]

That's a lot of text, with no mention of the "good things you heard".

Look, it's not uncommon for business owners/sales people, come on here (or other forums) with low post counts, mentioning some new service they've heard of that is good. When questioned, they say things like I've checked this service out, I think they'll make a lot of money, I *wish* I was involved.

If that is not you then I apologise.

I don't give two hoots for your apology. Your approach of "shoot first ask questions if I can be bothered" will be its own reward.
I'll make it clear you're mistaken by never mentioning this website again whilst ignoring your lovely welcome and remaining on the board.

Apologise to me at a later date when you mean it and I'll probably accept. Is that fair?

You're right, not many jobs on there, and really that is the only good thing you want from what is effectively just another type of job site. Is it a good idea to try and circumvent the quite common agency process? In principal, maybe. But as you say, volume of traffic would be critical.

What I offered was a link to exactly what the OP was looking for. Nothing more, nothing less.
Volume of traffic will be critical of course. As for it being a good idea? Given the general fear in the air about April, I'd say so. Time, I imagine, will tell.

[meridian]

If a Co wants some contractors, where is the most RELIABLE place for them to find some.

Sure they can put the roles on a site that allows direct contracts, they can also pay to put an ad on jobserve etc etc.

Then when they don't get many CVs they go to a couple of agents who supply loads of CVs.

After a couple of tries they will stop bothering with the direct route.

There simply isn't enough critical mass in the direct route yet.

Not getting many CVs is one side of the problem, the other side is that the vast bulk of CVs that they do get are from chancers, visa seekers, and generally people that are unsuited to the role.

Despite agents doing a generally poor and self-serving job, they are at the moment the best system that we have between contractor and client.

Given the expense that a client has to make in finding the right contractor, and then the overall cost of a contractor (yes, the client can get rid of an unsuitable contractor easily, but then they're back at square one in their search) any direct-to-client portal would probably need to provide at least some replication of what the agent is meant to do, in pre-filtering candidates. And something similar to "rate my tradie" type sites, though perhaps not so crass.

Whoever comes up with a decent business model for direct to client and reaches critical mass will probably make a fortune....

[jmo21]

With pleasure.

My wife, who works for one of the big global staffing agencies (not as a pimp, she's in finance), received the recommendation. As you might imagine quite a number of staff there know who I am and what I do... They let her know the site existed, it was opened by a both a disgruntled recruiter and an experienced contractor but was a long way from reaching its potential.

My personal extent of checking it out consisted of reading the site and a phone-call to a very helpful lady who was kind enough to send me their current open roles (there weren't many).
So as I say, I have heard good things but the traffic isn't there yet.

The concept isn't a bad one but it will never amount to anything if nobody uses it. It is what "we" need come April so in that respect I'm kinda disappointed not to have a vested interest. Love 'em or hate 'em I imagine they're going to make some proper moolah.
Judging something to be rubbish based on nothing more than an inability to pick the phone up and resolve an issue speaks volumes of someone's character, in my humble opinion.

Anyway, take it or leave it, no skin off my nose, I came off the bench yesterday.

That's a lot of text, with no mention of the "good things you heard".

Look, it's not uncommon for business owners/sales people, come on here (or other forums) with low post counts, mentioning some new service they've heard of that is good. When questioned, they say things like I've checked this service out, I think they'll make a lot of money, I *wish* I was involved.

If that is not you then I apologise.

You're right, not many jobs on there, and really that is the only good thing you want from what is effectively just another type of job site. Is it a good idea to try and circumvent the quite common agency process? In principal, maybe. But as you say, volume of traffic would be critical.

[jmo21]

In my experience it's not the value but the protection they value.

I have had plenty of conversations with honchos in big organisations (particularly MSPs) centred around the "risks of contracting directly".
The reality I think is more a risk that their HR people are about as useful as an umbrella in a hurricane.

I said they "value the service", and the protection is absolutely part of that.

[LucidDementia]

There simply isn't enough critical mass in the direct route yet.

This is very true indeed. However there never will be if we don't become that critical mass....

[MPwannadecentincome]

Of course there are, but I think the market shows that clients value the service agencies provide.

If a Co wants some contractors, where is the most RELIABLE place for them to find some.

Sure they can put the roles on a site that allows direct contracts, they can also pay to put an ad on jobserve etc etc.

Then when they don't get many CVs they go to a couple of agents who supply loads of CVs.

After a couple of tries they will stop bothering with the direct route.

There simply isn't enough critical mass in the direct route yet.