5 ms·

> ... when someone called because they wanted to get me a job She overestimates the bad recruiters. Recruiters have been known to advertise non-existent posit

> ... when someone called because they wanted to get me a job She overestimates the bad recruiters. Recruiters have been known to advertise non-existent positions so they can build up their folios. They have been known to alter resumes to make it look like the candidate is a fit when they aren't. They have been known to lie about candidates. They have been known to try to make the candidates do all the work. They have been known to take jobs posted by companies that do want recruiters involved and then repost them (it makes them look better having these jobs on their books). My biggest grievance is them having put in zero effort to check if I am a match for the company or the company for me, despite the means to do so being readily available. ie they are wasting the time of everyone involved. More personal context http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3661261 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3661261

devs1010 15y ago
I agree, some recruiters are borderline scam artists so you can't just take it at face value that they have a job to offer and are interested in you, there can be more to it than that
r00fus 15y ago
The awful recruiter is nowhere near as unethical as the awful hiring manager. I know folks who were asked by the prospective "hiring manager" at companies like Cisco (for a contract gig) to basically show how they'd do the first 3 months of the job. Some replied with a load of work that they figure would put them ahead of the other candidates. All they got for their efforts was the sound of crickets on the other end... turns out the "hiring manager" was really just trolling for the candidates ideas and work output.
dabent 15y ago
Thanks for the comment. I noticed Modis on your list. Do you recall how they earned the spot? I've worked for them (granted, years ago) with no problem. I've had very few bad experiences - never had my resume submitted without approval, or had my resume edited. I do check out a recruiter before working for them and maybe my internal warning system works. Often I try to work for companies that offer insurance, which is a hurdle that fly-by-night shops can't clear. Protip: If a recruiter ever uses the term "DIRECT CLIENT" in an email, they are ignored, especially if it's in all caps. That seems to be a great filter for getting rid of bad recruiters. I'm not even sure why so many places use it.
- rogerbinns 15y ago
  > I noticed Modis on your list. Do you recall how they earned the spot? They were added in February or March 2011. I don't record specifics as to why, but they all follow the same pattern - a useless content free email where it is obvious they have made no attempt to see if I am good match or the company is, despite the ease with which they could do that. The messages are usually almost indistinguishable from spam. They have to be pretty egregiously bad that I never want to hear from the recruiter ever again under any circumstances! See also http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3677709 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3677709

devs1010 15y ago

I agree, some recruiters are borderline scam artists so you can't just take it at face value that they have a job to offer and are interested in you, there can be more to it than that

r00fus 15y ago

The awful recruiter is nowhere near as unethical as the awful hiring manager. I know folks who were asked by the prospective "hiring manager" at companies like Cisco (for a contract gig) to basically show how they'd do the first 3 months of the job. Some replied with a load of work that they figure would put them ahead of the other candidates. All they got for their efforts was the sound of crickets on the other end... turns out the "hiring manager" was really just trolling for the candidates ideas and work output.

dabent 15y ago

Thanks for the comment. I noticed Modis on your list. Do you recall how they earned the spot? I've worked for them (granted, years ago) with no problem. I've had very few bad experiences - never had my resume submitted without approval, or had my resume edited. I do check out a recruiter before working for them and maybe my internal warning system works. Often I try to work for companies that offer insurance, which is a hurdle that fly-by-night shops can't clear. Protip: If a recruiter ever uses the term "DIRECT CLIENT" in an email, they are ignored, especially if it's in all caps. That seems to be a great filter for getting rid of bad recruiters. I'm not even sure why so many places use it.

rogerbinns 15y ago
> I noticed Modis on your list. Do you recall how they earned the spot? They were added in February or March 2011. I don't record specifics as to why, but they all follow the same pattern - a useless content free email where it is obvious they have made no attempt to see if I am good match or the company is, despite the ease with which they could do that. The messages are usually almost indistinguishable from spam. They have to be pretty egregiously bad that I never want to hear from the recruiter ever again under any circumstances! See also http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3677709 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3677709