3 ms·
I've been thinking of a new recruitment model: guaranteed employment. Suppose a recruiting agency guaranteed their recruits, as in, "We'll pay their salary for
by drcube 14y ago
I've been thinking of a new recruitment model: guaranteed employment. Suppose a recruiting agency guaranteed their recruits, as in, "We'll pay their salary for the [six months | year | whatever]. If they are acceptable, at the end of that period, you pay us back double. If they don't work out, let us know ASAP and we'll eat the cost."
The incentives are all right here. The employers essentially get a year long job interview. Qualified candidates are basically guaranteed a job. And the recruiters are rewarded for successfully meeting their clients' needs, and punished if they get it wrong. The current situation rewards harassment and puffing up their candidates' resumes.
- yalurker 14y agoAs long as we're talking incentives, your plan gives a huge incentive to fire someone just before the end of their first year of employment. At the end of the year you're faced with paying a recruiter 2 years of salary, but if you fire them you just got a year of work for free.
- drcube 14y agoThat's just a technicality. :P But seriously, I think this sort of service would be aimed at employers looking for long term professional employees, not some temporary code jockey. In that case, dismissing a proven employee in order to save a years' salary would be counterproductive. However, your criticism is valid, and measures would have to be taken to keep employers like that at bay.
- ryanwaggoner 14y agoYou could get many of the same beneficial incentives (and few of the really negative ones that your model creates) just by splitting the recruitment fee into two parts: 50% upon candidate placement, 50% once they pass a 3-month milestone.