3 ms·
No they take a percentage from the company. Generally a tech company won't offer a 17% signing bonus for coming direct. On the other hand, a company not using
by bbcbasic 10y ago
No they take a percentage from the company.
Generally a tech company won't offer a 17% signing bonus for coming direct.
On the other hand, a company not using recruiters wont pay 17% more just because they are saving money.
PS: I wonder why my GP comment is heavily downvoted? Maybe it sounds to pro-recruiter.
- einarvollset 10y agoPay attention: "you just don't see it" == "they take it from the company" Your assertion that a company wouldn't pay more without a recruiter makes no sense. Particularly if they're sourcing candidates off a trusted source Ps. I suspect your comments get downvotes because they come across as rash and not very well thought through.
- bbcbasic 10y agoIt makes sense from a simple supply/demand point of view. You only pay what you have to. Why pay the candidate more just because you saved some money elsewhere. That could be just added to the bottom line, used for growth etc. Now if the candidate is strong, a good negotiator, and all their competing candidates went through a recruiter then they may be able to claw back some of that as a pay rise. But I guess in most cases, not.
- nicholas73 10y agoFWIW, I think you are correct. Companies are interested in keeping people in the same paygrade at similar pay. People talk, after all. They cannot pay someone more or less based on whether there is an initial upfront recruiter fee, as the employees will find out soon enough and threaten to walk.