3 ms·
A recruiter makes the most money by getting the most people hired, not by getting fewer people hired for the most money.
by pagekalisedown 15y ago
A recruiter makes the most money by getting the most people hired, not by getting fewer people hired for the most money.
- protomyth 15y agoThat isn't quite true. A lot of recruiters that I've met get paid based on the salary of the recruited, so fewer people at higher salary might make the recruiter more money.
- pagekalisedown 15y agoIt doesn't usually make up the difference.
- salemh 15y agosalary fee % n fee total 65000 0.2 3 39000 80000 0.2 2 32000 90000 0.2 1 18000 120000 0.2 1 24000 Simplistic EG (and a 2x 80,000 vs 120,000 is realistic), but, like a real estate agent, the cost of NOT closing the sale is greater then pushing for a marginal increase in the sale. EG salary, pushing for 115,000 vs 105,000 the difference in fee on 20% is 2,000. Which is ~200-400 dollars difference in commission. Losing the offer for pushing for 115,000? 2,300~4,600 (10-20% of fee).
- pagekalisedown 15y agoPrefix a line with double spaces preserves the formatting: salary fee % n fee total 65000 0.2 3 39000 80000 0.2 2 32000 90000 0.2 1 18000 120000 0.2 1 24000
- protomyth 15y agoYour making some interesting assumptions like it is three times as easy to fill a $65k spot than a $120k spot. The recruiters I knew had pretty good contacts that gave them the ability to place highly paid salaries (Oracle DBA, SAP developer) at a pretty good clip, much better than the generic recruiter. Their shooting for the higher-end gave them the right reputation to do this well.