5 ms·

The recruiter did good work here. I suspect this was a screw up in internal HR. The external recruiter has absolutely no incentive to send you for an interview

The recruiter did good work here. I suspect this was a screw up in internal HR. The external recruiter has absolutely no incentive to send you for an interview you will bomb out of.

viraptor 6y ago
I'm not sure. Recruiters can spray and pray with candidates the way candidates can spray and pray with applications. They're not going to be great quality, but if you're paid commission on a hire and the recruitment channel can handle the load... what's to stop the recruiter?
- pc86 6y ago
  Aside from it destroying future business (we've had recruiters change candidates' resumes on us and that recruiter is blacklisted - by name - forever, to anyone who will listen), most contracts will have a 30-day clause where if the employee leaves for any reason within 30 days the fee is returned. Some even have if employee is fired within 30 days that the next placement fee is discounted.
  - thrwyoilarticle 6y ago
    When I connect with recruiters on Linkedin, I often notice they've spent a short time at their current position. Their tactics might not be sustainable. That said, it's a bit absurd there aren't separate classes of users on Linkedin. Do I need to know a recruiter's work history?
- notahacker 6y ago
  Spray and pay works for sending people a little underqualified for a job. Sending people who don't know why they've been put forward for a job under false pretences just means the client won't interview any more candidates you send, especially if that candidate is plenty employable enough not to bother bluffing their way through. And unlike candidates, recruiters can potentially get paid to fill a lot of a company's vacancies, provided they don't get blacklisted by them...
  - sitkack 6y ago
    The good recruiter matches the right candidate to the right company. The dysfunction is a property of the system and is borne by everyone.
  - wott 6y ago
    > Sending people who don't know why they've been put forward for a job under false pretences [...] Isn't this called 'consulting'?
- jschwartzi 6y ago
  And that's probably how I got an interview with AWS once upon a time.
eternalban 6y ago
Nonsense told to me repeatedly by recruiters over the years: - (your point) no incentive to send you for an interview if not a good fit. - "I make more money if you make your money" often said to spin the "what is your salary requirement" question Most recruiters work for an agency. Agencies have accounts with businesses. The account is central. You are in no position whatsoever to make determination as to what incentives drive the recruiter's business. Recruiters also routinely b.s. young developers by "I get more if you get more money" when pressuring them into agreeing to a "salary expectation" right at the beginning of the employment negotiation.
- indeed30 6y ago
  Yes, recruiters have accounts with companies, but in my experience the recruitment fee is a percentage of salary, and the individual recruiter compensation is on a commission model. In short, I personally have no problems in believing that the higher the salary, the higher the payment to both the recruitment company and individual recruiter. However, I think we all know that closing the deal is far more important to the recruiter than negotiating small changes to the salary, so your point stands.
  - buu700 6y ago
    I haven't worked with a recruiter, so this is pure speculation, but it seems to me that a recruiter's greatest incentive would be to close any deal at all as quickly as possible, because they're competing against the alternative of you finding a position on your own first (or otherwise no longer requiring their services). Getting you a high salary is just gravy.
    - kamarg 6y ago
      > they're competing against the alternative of you finding a position on your own first (or otherwise no longer requiring their services) Almost every recruiter will constantly ask you if you're interviewing anywhere else or working with any other recruiters. They do this so they can be sure nobody else has the right to represent you to a client but also to gauge how much effort to put into presenting you to any of their clients. If you're not working with a a single recruiter exclusively, you'll often find that the amount of work they put in to get you in front of their clients drops dramatically to the point they no longer return your calls/emails.

The recruiter did good work here. I suspect this was a screw up in internal HR. The external recruiter has absolutely no incentive to send you for an interview you will bomb out of.

viraptor 6y ago

I'm not sure. Recruiters can spray and pray with candidates the way candidates can spray and pray with applications. They're not going to be great quality, but if you're paid commission on a hire and the recruitment channel can handle the load... what's to stop the recruiter?

pc86 6y ago
Aside from it destroying future business (we've had recruiters change candidates' resumes on us and that recruiter is blacklisted - by name - forever, to anyone who will listen), most contracts will have a 30-day clause where if the employee leaves for any reason within 30 days the fee is returned. Some even have if employee is fired within 30 days that the next placement fee is discounted.
- thrwyoilarticle 6y ago
  When I connect with recruiters on Linkedin, I often notice they've spent a short time at their current position. Their tactics might not be sustainable. That said, it's a bit absurd there aren't separate classes of users on Linkedin. Do I need to know a recruiter's work history?
notahacker 6y ago
Spray and pay works for sending people a little underqualified for a job. Sending people who don't know why they've been put forward for a job under false pretences just means the client won't interview any more candidates you send, especially if that candidate is plenty employable enough not to bother bluffing their way through. And unlike candidates, recruiters can potentially get paid to fill a lot of a company's vacancies, provided they don't get blacklisted by them...
- sitkack 6y ago
  The good recruiter matches the right candidate to the right company. The dysfunction is a property of the system and is borne by everyone.
- wott 6y ago
  > Sending people who don't know why they've been put forward for a job under false pretences [...] Isn't this called 'consulting'?
jschwartzi 6y ago
And that's probably how I got an interview with AWS once upon a time.

eternalban 6y ago

Nonsense told to me repeatedly by recruiters over the years: - (your point) no incentive to send you for an interview if not a good fit. - "I make more money if you make your money" often said to spin the "what is your salary requirement" question Most recruiters work for an agency. Agencies have accounts with businesses. The account is central. You are in no position whatsoever to make determination as to what incentives drive the recruiter's business. Recruiters also routinely b.s. young developers by "I get more if you get more money" when pressuring them into agreeing to a "salary expectation" right at the beginning of the employment negotiation.

indeed30 6y ago
Yes, recruiters have accounts with companies, but in my experience the recruitment fee is a percentage of salary, and the individual recruiter compensation is on a commission model. In short, I personally have no problems in believing that the higher the salary, the higher the payment to both the recruitment company and individual recruiter. However, I think we all know that closing the deal is far more important to the recruiter than negotiating small changes to the salary, so your point stands.
- buu700 6y ago
  I haven't worked with a recruiter, so this is pure speculation, but it seems to me that a recruiter's greatest incentive would be to close any deal at all as quickly as possible, because they're competing against the alternative of you finding a position on your own first (or otherwise no longer requiring their services). Getting you a high salary is just gravy.
  - kamarg 6y ago
    > they're competing against the alternative of you finding a position on your own first (or otherwise no longer requiring their services) Almost every recruiter will constantly ask you if you're interviewing anywhere else or working with any other recruiters. They do this so they can be sure nobody else has the right to represent you to a client but also to gauge how much effort to put into presenting you to any of their clients. If you're not working with a a single recruiter exclusively, you'll often find that the amount of work they put in to get you in front of their clients drops dramatically to the point they no longer return your calls/emails.