Reply to: Is there a way to force agency and client on transparent commission..??

[MrButton]

But you need to brush up on your written English. That's surely a key skill for any wannabe PMs?

....and someone in Testing/QA

[l35kee]

Having seen many occasions pimps 'games' on closer to agreement stage, is there a way to force agency to be transparent about what they are paying to consultants with client..?? ie 'open book' policy..?

This will help Client to see lions share of their payments goes to consultant rather than to pimp's pocket..

You are saying the lions share of a day rate goes to the agency?

Why don't you just think about what rate you want, and what rate you are happy to settle with and go from there? Also, hate to be that person again. But you need to brush up on your written English. That's surely a key skill for any wannabe PMs?

[SussexSeagull]

As has been said elsewhere build up your network and contract direct with clients. Admittedly I had a long time out before my current contract but I haven't dealt with an agency since 2014 and that was open books.

For what it's worth I think the agency model of recruitment is somewhat in decline in the era of LinkedIn.

[TheFaQQer]

Where are you getting this rubbish from. You pick one very rare and unusual occurance and then somehow convince yourself it happens all the time and take the entire industry with it? You really struggle with this contracting malarkey don't you.

Maybe it's a worrying trend?

[northernladuk]

What I have seen is recruiters change their own company very frequently. So maybe once they move they will take those client contracts & contacts to new agency they are joining..?

Where are you getting this rubbish from. You pick one very rare and unusual occurance and then somehow convince yourself it happens all the time and take the entire industry with it? You really struggle with this contracting malarkey don't you.

[SueEllen]

What I have seen is recruiters change their own company very frequently. So maybe once they move they will take those client contracts & contacts to new agency they are joining..?

They aren't legally allowed to. This is one of the reasons why our non-compete clauses are so long and in many cases badly written unless you contest it.

There are however ways around the restriction for both the agent and yourself but it depends mainly on the contract the agent signs and how canny they are.

[Darren_Test]

Well, the company won't be content when their £1000 a day contractor buggers off because they find something paying more than their received £100 a day.
I raised this once at client co, the issue that there were two agents skimming off the top. Of the £400 contract, £200 was being offered to contractor. The client wasn't best pleased.

It's a scam when someone who lines you up some work and creams more than 10% commission, that's why some client co's will now insist on a 10% commission only to their preferred suppliers. THat's the way it should be IMO

What I have seen is recruiters change their own company very frequently. So maybe once they move they will take those client contracts & contacts to new agency they are joining..?

[Darren_Test]

But are you absolutely sure they are doing these things? I don't think I've seen it and it is very bad practice so will unfold in the long run. Much better that an agent does good business with a client and secures a long term arrangement. They can do those things but I'd bet in a vast majority of cases they don't so you are making an issue where there isn't really one.

Maybe I am being naive but I've rarely, if at all seen this happen. I've had the silly stuff plenty of times, trying to nick 10% at the last minute, 2 references and all that which is just playing the game but I'm not so sure this is as big a problem as you are making out.

Thanks

[Darren_Test]

1) Build a solid network of clients so that when they need someone, they ask you directly and so don't need an agent at all.

2) Increase the influence of trustworthy agents and pick a few that you will work with - the ones that you know you like, and will go further to get you a decent rate at the best clients to work with. The ones who will come to you when they know that they have something ideal for you.

Maybe stop thinking about the agent as a pimp - because that really would make you someone who works for them and gets screwed lots.

thanks ..I liked last line a lot!

[TheFaQQer]

What tactics to play to reduce influence of pimps in the selection process..??

1) Build a solid network of clients so that when they need someone, they ask you directly and so don't need an agent at all.

2) Increase the influence of trustworthy agents and pick a few that you will work with - the ones that you know you like, and will go further to get you a decent rate at the best clients to work with. The ones who will come to you when they know that they have something ideal for you.

Maybe stop thinking about the agent as a pimp - because that really would make you someone who works for them and gets screwed lots.

[moggy]

have you asked your agency what their margin is?

[northernladuk]

What p**** me off is agencies got too much control in the contracting process. They can make suddenly a candidate 'unavailable'!! They could also make a less competent (higher commission) candidate as the 'best available option'. I have seen agents playing too many games in the favouring candidates for reasons that benefits them. I do fear some client contacts even have some 'commission- sharing' agreements with agencies..??

This can't be right...

Yes, they are the intermediary got contact with the client co, but they are not the key player. Candidate/consultant who perform work should be in control. How can we take control in this process...?? What tactics to play to reduce influence of pimps in the selection process..??

But are you absolutely sure they are doing these things? I don't think I've seen it and it is very bad practice so will unfold in the long run. Much better that an agent does good business with a client and secures a long term arrangement. They can do those things but I'd bet in a vast majority of cases they don't so you are making an issue where there isn't really one.

Maybe I am being naive but I've rarely, if at all seen this happen. I've had the silly stuff plenty of times, trying to nick 10% at the last minute, 2 references and all that which is just playing the game but I'm not so sure this is as big a problem as you are making out.

[Lance]

Many more clients are tying the agents down to a fixed margin as part of the their PSL (preferred supplier list) on-boarding process.
Not even huge companies either.
That way an agency has to play 'fair' to get a sniff of placing any candidates.

Usually it's around 13% for candidates the agency find, and 6% for ones the client has found but prefer to put through the agency.

So convince your client that this model works better. They're the only ones who can make it happen.

[Darren_Test]

What p**** me off is agencies got too much control in the contracting process. They can make suddenly a candidate 'unavailable'!! They could also make a less competent (higher commission) candidate as the 'best available option'. I have seen agents playing too many games in the favouring candidates for reasons that benefits them. I do fear some client contacts even have some 'commission- sharing' agreements with agencies..??

This can't be right...

Yes, they are the intermediary got contact with the client co, but they are not the key player. Candidate/consultant who perform work should be in control. How can we take control in this process...?? What tactics to play to reduce influence of pimps in the selection process..??

[TheFaQQer]

Well, the company won't be content when their £1000 a day contractor buggers off because they find something paying more than their received £100 a day.

Clients are never happy with people who jump from one contract to the next because they are offered a tiny increase. TBH, I'm not sure I disagree with them either.