4 ms·
In my experience, head hunters usually get paid a fee equal to N months of your salary (where, most often, 3<=N<=6). If they negotiate my monthly salary up to 1
by smanek 16y ago
In my experience, head hunters usually get paid a fee equal to N months of your salary (where, most often, 3<=N<=6). If they negotiate my monthly salary up to 12K instead of 10K they'll probably make 6K-12K extra, so they do have an incentive to negotiate.
Of course, their incentive is much smaller than mine, since an initial 2K/month salary boost might translate to 50K in extra salary over my tenure with that company and, conceivably, extra hundreds of thousands over my career.
- andrewf 16y agoIf it would take a recruiter more than 20% more effort to get your salary up by 20%, they are better off putting their time into placing as many people as possible. Because they can increase their total commissions by 20% if they increase their number of employees placed by that much.
- natch 16y agoTrue if they can find a pool of candidates that don't care about getting better compensation. Many people, like me, are not in that pool. If they can't get me the compensation I ask for, they won't place me. Someone else will place me instead. So by not doing that 20% of work, they are losing not 20%, but 100% of what they would make from my placement. But yes, perhaps they can make it up by finding people who don't care about compensation. But really my take on this is different. If it takes an extra 20% of work, then the hiring company is probably not for me. I'd rather work for companies where good compensation is a given, because they tend to do other things better as well.
- prostoalex 16y agoExactly, they could spend next day negotiating on your behalf to get extra 10% for you and 2% for themselves, or placing another candidate, and boosting their revenue by extra 100%.