Reply to: Agencies - Any Complaints

Lorien eh...the three jobs Ive applied for with them this week they have called me back first thing following morning (applying after 11pm).

It makes a nice change for an agency to call you instead of you having to call them!

Mailman

I maintain a blacklist that includes both agencies and the individuals working for them that have given me the less-than-respectful experience.

I also maintain a whitelist. Sadly, I can keep that information in my head as that is much smaller than the blacklist.

I note the comments about MSB below. From comments I have read over the years, I have studiously avoided them. Now I see three satisfied "customers". From my limited experience, I give good marks to Lorien, but I see a negative comment on this thread.

It is clear to me that any grade of performance has to be regarded in the same way as feedback on eBay participants. Deal with these people at your own risk.

My experience with UK agencies and the UK market is limited. I am from the USA and have an active entry clearance (HSMP). I have yet to be working a contract in the UK, thus my experiences are restricted to the conduct of agency personnel in respect to my candidacies.

Let me say briefly that if a UK agent or agency comes off as arrogantly ignorant in regard to my credentials, or does not actively or accurately represent me, those entities end up on my Outlook Notes file and the communications go to a special folder.

I will not deal with those who act as if they are trying to qualify for a permanent residency in the USA. Unfortunately, the US government does not take one's attitude into consideraton for granting immigration credentials. For such individuals, I recommend marriage to a Yank :-)

I am currently contracting through MSB and have also had NO problems at all and the occasional lunch thrown in. I guess, like previous posters have said, it all depends who you are dealing with.

Have previously been very impressed with MODIS.

Do not like Lorien though after they tried to shaft me into IR35 with their inflexibility over crap T&Cs that they didn't even seem to understand themselves.

Have been replaced by an Indian worker by an agency after playing hardball to get their markup reduced from 25% to 15%.

Andrew,

I have to agree with you completely. Have had absolutely no problems what so ever with MSB, been taken out for lunch, coffee and drinks...lots of drinks! Heck...they even pay on time, which is more than I can say the previous sharks I was with!!!

At the end of the day though MSB are like any other agency, you either love them or hate them.

Mailman

had a call from a typical wide eye MSB tosser.
Told me he had a few contracts coming up and asked me had I been to any interviews recently...then proceeded by asking me names of companies and individuals who had interviewed me.......
I told him to write the questions down in an email and I would reply with an updated copy of my cv.....and of course no email was forthcoming

I have got my last 3 contracts through MSB, only a 2 week gap between each of them as well. They have never missed a payment, and have never been rude on the phone. And strangley enough they are even more pleasant when I am looking for work than when I am in work :rolleyes

Even taken me out for 5 lunches in the last 2 years (admittedly with my boss for 3 of them... hunting more leads... but a free lunch is a free lunch!).

Although I have been dealing with the same agent for each role. As a bonus she is a real good looking woman....

Not saying MSB are good for everyone, but in my experience they have been great so far (3 years, contracts and counting with them)

There are 2 types of problems with agencies:

1) the agency itself is not good, i.e. doesn't pay on time, has rubbish contracts, has a policy of opting you out, only pays monthly, whatever - these are common problems and one should try to avoid such agencies, full stop

2) the agent you're dealing with is no good. This happens far more frequently and is not really the agency's fault (although you could argue why do they employ such tossers). Unfortunately these agents move around, from agency to agency, so keeping a blacklist of agencies just because you haev been f***ed up by one agent is not really going to resolve your problems.

There is a huge turnover in the agent industry (how many times have I been on a 6-months contract and had about 3 or 4 agents successfully "look after" me - cos' they only lasted about 2 months in the agency), so you could argue that as well as keeping a database (blacklist / whitelist) of agencies, you should also keep a database of agents.

Probably a private blacklist is the best you can do. If there was a public blacklist that had any effect at all, like denying them enough work to put them out of business then either they just reopen under a new name, or the individual pimps go join other agencies and the disease spreads. Unfortunately there'd be no way to force them out of the industry and back to the used car lots they originally came from. Granted not everyone at a single agency might deserve blacklisting (but we'll give not give them the benefit of the doubt!), and each agency does tend to have it's own culture and usually gets people who fit with it.

Even if they're not total criminals, I always drop those who have clearly got no clue about I.T. whatsoever, ie. the chap who asked me "by the way, Sun - that's part of Solaris isn't it?"!!!. (If you haven't heard of Sun then there's little point me suggesting you to go google as you've probably not heard of that either, and take my CV off your database if you're able) The client's going to notice it too and I don't wanna be associated or represented by someone like that. (I do quite well at creating my own bad name thanks very much...) Always used to have a chuckle at the jobserve ads when there used to be more mainframe work around and they'd advertise for people with "DB2 and KICKS" experience.

I maintain a database--a blacklist (although there is a regrettably smaller whitelist) I keep. Those on the blacklist do show up from other sources as problems.

I maintain this as a performance database no different than what credit rating agencies maintain. Those individuals who treat me with contempt and their companies end up on the list. If anyone asks me, I will tell them of my experience.

I will not say to avoid them outright. There are buyers of junk bonds, and lenders to those who have problems paying bills. Such lenders get higher interest rates from these borrowers to offset the risk.

I am sure that there are those who transact business on eBay with those who have negative feedback. They choose to take the risk.

There is no reason why such a database on agencies and agents should not exist. This is just performance-related and one can make his own conclusions accordingly. For instance, with MSB mentioned here, I ignore MSB adverts and solicitations. Who really needs to be associated with such people when such association puts our own performance at risk of failure? At the least, we can tighten the terms under which we work with them.

I find it odd that these agencies and their personnel behave in this manner. There may be a time when one of us is in a hiring position. Would we even think of contacting them as clients?

We have to behave as businessmen to be respected as such.

Just remember that 'agencies' are not agencies at all, they are employment businesses. Their legal position is to source candidates for hirers, NOT, as is commonly supposed, to find work for contractors deemed as a work seeker (like a permy candidate or unemployed temp).

It's time employment businesses started treated us with kid gloves - like valued customers (but only if we're worth our metal anyway by being honest about our skills and abilities and can actually deliver on the job). After all, EBs couldn't survive without a database of candidate names on which they then use to market their own business with no immediate, if any, return for us (even when not phishing for leads). If I was going to be that brutal with them, I would suggest to all of you that we should all consider charging them for leaving our CVs on their databank to market themselves in this way.

As for paying travel expenses to interviews. Forget it. No employment business has the right to impose that on any contractor although they frequently do. Although, it is up to each individual contractor to decide that for themselves and to negotiate those terms with the agent. What is wrong is when they impose this stipulation as a blanket policy - an imposed condition of using an EB, as if we're all subject to some invisible CEO who makes the rules for all of us. EBs don't run our business, we each do and I intend to control my business at every stage, not let them do it for me. In my view, hirers should pay interview costs because by using an EB to source candidates we're 'making ourselves available to the hirer' who are the main beneficiaries of our availability for interview and for taking up the role - so we're are doing the hirer a favour, not vica versa.

MSB, mentioning no names, I got calls from 4 of there people within an 3hrs, Lost my temper with them, put the phone down on the chap. Then he called me back and gave me a mouth full of abuse,

1) Totally unprofessional.
2) I wouldnt touch them with a barge poll.
3) I was quite tempted to go round there office ask for the chap in question and giving him a good hidding, fecking agency scum !

I think has been quite good (MSB International)...yet the same contractors here who have dealt with MSB in the past wouldnt touch them with a barge pole.

Everyone gets f**ked over by MSB once. Your turn will come...

HI,

I think it's kind of relative. I mean an agency will ask me for references (which i'll only supply when I get to interview stage) which I guess they can/should use to get more background on me as well as using as leads (sheesh!) so maybe something like using ex-contractors' testimonials would be an idea for an agency? With they permission full transparency of course

Who knows. Being one of the ex-Aristotle contractors (i guess you lot know about that fiasco) I'll be very choosy in terms of which agency I now go with and what terms they have. I'll have to figure out how to decide if an agency is worth risking myself with when my currecnt contract finishes.

Cheers

Raz

The other issue is...what is a bad agency?

Ive had an agency with hold money from me, only to roll over like a puppy dog when I finally got serious with them and then Ive had another which I think has been quite good (MSB International)...yet the same contractors here who have dealt with MSB in the past wouldnt touch them with a barge pole.

Mailman

It has been said before on this board that the only people to blame when it comes to "bad contractors" are the Agencies.

The Agencies are the gatekeepers, it is they who post the jobs, get the CVs, have a spotty nosed kid on school holidays to read them and put them into their databases.

It is the Agents who are employed by the agencies who ignore the better contractors in favour of the cheapest so they can increase their margins and therefore their commissions.

If the agencies behaved in a professional manner and worked with the freelance community and clients instead of trying to rip off as much coin as possible, then you wouldn't have half the problems you have today.

So the next time you feel like venting about how poor contractors behave, remember it was the agency who put them forward and it was the client who interviewed and ultimately hired them.