3 ms·
I don't think it's a fuck off message at all. That would be just "fuck off". Why encourage recruiters if you didn't want to deal with them? To me it says "don'
by beachy 3y ago
I don't think it's a fuck off message at all. That would be just "fuck off". Why encourage recruiters if you didn't want to deal with them?
To me it says "don't just shotgun me with every rando candidate you have - I'll give you one chance, make it count". It's exactly the sort of thing you might say to a pushy recruiter you met at the bar who wants in to your business. To succeed, they must a) have a good candidate and b) understand your business (so they know that candidate is right for you).
And I'd say there's an enormous difference between what a software engineer does (spend months or years designing and implementing a system that is for a single "customer") to what a recruiter does (spend 1 hours of conversations/emails in qualifying a candidate who can be shopped out to any of a number of customers.).
- basil-rash 3y agoBut if the recruiter has already gone through the work of vetting the candidate, why would the company not just talk to the candidate directly and “cut out the middleman”, so to speak? What guarantee does the recruiter have that providing the company this holy grail candidate will be met with anything more than “wow good eye, thanks!”
- beachy 3y agoThat's not usually how business works. Many reasons, but talent is still hard to find and employers don't want to piss off someone who can find staff for them. And it's likely against the agreement the recruiter has with the candidate for the candidate to go direct to the employer.