Agencies & Consultancies

I do notice the agencies dont reveal who they are. I will wait for the comment about me not revealing my name but I will if they will. I have also got wind of a blackbook agencies have, if so its about time that the data protection act is invoked on some of these agencies and lets really see the comments they have on the candidates.

I think more people should pay the fee to the companies concerened and see what info they keep on us.

Agencies is not something you can refuse as long as your given 1 months notice to your data controller, and guys you can see your files for 1 year eg files from 1 month, 3 months, 6 months 9 months and 12 months



please no moderators out of the country as this is a uk law

The Agencies win again!!!

Good Arguement, well presented

Stop deleting posts. Let people express themselves.

No, I actually disagree. I am however too busy finding people jobs to spend a lengthy amount of time discussing this point with people who have no idea of what we do.

[Taunting comment deleted by Moderator.]

[inappropriate post deleted by moderator]

Regards agency rates:



I have had untold problems due to the greed of agencies. You may believe that it is none of our business (from the contractor’s point of view) but when agencies ask for upto 33% then the contractor and the business are effectively having their hands tied when the overall rate is top dollar and the scope for renegotiation becomes very limited. I lost some excellent contractors due to the agency rates being none negotiable.



If the contractor chooses to work under a Ltd co. then what exactly do agencies do after the initial contract agreement? - very little! I’m quite happy to accept that a certain amount is due for ’finder’s fees’ but if the contract is continually extended, because the contractor is recognised as valuable to the company, then the agency is getting money purely for administration work - invoicing, contract extensions etc.



It has nothing to do with small mindedness (by the contractor anyway) it’s about value for money.



I’ll stick by my original statement - Some agencies are unprofessional in their attitude. You may be the exception but somehow I doubt it - when was the last time your advised a candidate they were unsuitable for a position purely on reading their cv?

[duplicate post deleted]

Saying that agencies are unporfessional is a bit unfair I think. Obviously you take the position that agencies provide no help etc. You are wrong, without us you would find it a lot more difficult to get a job. Also, asking our rates is silly. We work within specific budgets for our clients and that is of no importance to you. The problem is that so many people are so small minded that they see so many things in the wrong light. If you run a Ltd company and you are contracting then you have no reason to ask our cut.

Paul is spot on that it is nothing more than professional courtesy to reply to all candidates - How many companies advertising directly never respond to applications? - erm none - But hey they are professional!



I wouldn’t expect a critique but a ’thanks but no thanks’ is the least I expect.



I would also like to see recruiters specify their cut as well.

Having been on both sides as recruiter and prospective candidate I know they’re are often problems later on with these consultants who charge exorbitant rates for let’s face it doing next to nothing.

Oooeer. This is getting interesting!



One thing that was raised by a recruiter previously was a suggestion that, as part of the job advert, the recruiter was to specify 2 or 3 primary requirements, i.e. "Key Requirement 1’, "Key Requirement 2" etc.



The suggestion was that in the application process, the applicant would be required to answer these key requirements selecting answers from a picklist etc, showing how he/she considers himself/herself to be qualified against that key requirement.



The suggestion was explained thus...



Advert

Key Requirement 1: 10 Years Petro-chem

Key Requirement 2: MS Project Expert

Key Requirement 3: Able to Work in Australia

(plus usual text-based job description)





Application

Key Requirement 1: 10 Years Petro-chem [ 8 ] years

Key Requirement 2: MS Project [ expert ] level

Key Requirement 3: Australia Work Permit [ Yes ]



If something like this was arranged we could automatically create a simple (private?) web page for each job advert that shows the applicants and ranks (for the recruiter) each one using the answers to the key requirements. We would need to have get the recruiter to specify the required key-skill answers to be either a picklist of percentages, years experience or a list of ’expert’, ’novice’ etc or perhaps a fixed width text input field. This would allow the applications to be ranked for the recruiter (as opposed to him getting an un-filtered bunch of cv-attached emails) and speed up the selection / sorting process.



We could also offer a hyperlink that could send an auto response from the recruiter to the applicant like ’I think we may be in touch’ or ’thanks for the application, but we wont be coming back to you’ etc, and once this link was clicked for each applicant on that job list his/her name would dissapear (ie recruiter having responded).



This could speed up the recruiters selection (providing the job posting / application remains simple and quick) and also force the recruiter (asuming he/she wishes to use the system) to action each applicant and take them off such a ’pending’ listing. In this way we would know if our application was going anywhere and the recruiter (by actioning each applicant using the ’your ok’, ’your not ok’ hyperlink) could selectively get the CVs sent to him or not.



Any ideas / comments / offers of a specific proceedure ?

Paul,



If we replied to every candidate that approached us then we would never get anyone a job because we would spend all of our time telling people why they are not right.



In terms of adverts, I believe that they are now so specific that we shouldn’t receive 200+ applications per role but we still do.



You may only apply for jobs that are 100% relevant for you but the majority of people out there send their CV’s to any job that they have 50% of the skills for.



If we could get people to respond to jobs that they are 80%+ suited for then we could spend more time helping people find the right role

[Deleted by Moderator.]

The reason that jobs are placed on jobserve etc is that it is easiest and quickest way to get immediately available consultants. It also brings a lot of permanent consultants who are looking for first time contracts. Generally Recruitment Consultants will have an idea of who is available from their databases, via resource teams.



Yes I am a Recruitment Consultant

are you saying that jobs are put out to jobserve etc before you look at your own database of candidates.



If this is the case why do you keep peoples details on file.



I do take it that you are a recruitment consultant by your remarks

and just how many jobs are out there ??????????



It doesnt seem to me there are falling out of the trees

Before you start crucifying agencies who don’t respond or come back with responses like ’the position has been put on hold’, you should try and get an idea of what we go throuch from request to placement.



1 - Client comes to us with a requirement/Client is canvassed for business.



2 - Roles are generally advertised on jobserve etc.



3 - Agent searches databases/networks.



4 - Candidates are submitted to client



5 - Interviews



6 - Offer/Placement



Easy yes?



No! In this current climate we will typically get over 200 responses per advert. Out of those 200 there will usually be 5% of candidates who could be suitable. The other 95% are not the right fit. When we are getting 50/60 calls per day asking us for feedback then it becomes quite difficult to give individual feedback on all CV’s. People should realise that if their CV is sent and they don’t get feedback then they are not suitable and they should leave it. They shouldn’t pester agencies to the point of becoming a pest.



Sorry about the rant, but sometimes I feel that people should look at the ’bigger’ picture before making judgements.....

what are the rules for agencies etc to place "vacancies" on Planning Planet?

We have had a lot of emails from PPers who have said that in the vast majority of cases they have ’received no feedback at all’ from certain recruiters. This is true I know. However, there are some VERY professional and reliable recruiters in our list and is is unfair to generalise about them.



If anyone has any ideas on how we create a fair league table of sorts, we will be pleased to help facilitate it. As you know the site is run by volunteer planners for us planners.



One idea would be for some of us (any volunteers?) to work on this issue. If no-one volunteers specific ideas, or proceedures then we will make slow progress (a bit like the rail project I’m on!) - we are planners, so this should not be a difficult thing for us!



If people are unhappy about the perceived quality of "many of the recruiters on the site" then we would welcome them introducing us to some of the "recommended" ones. The site is only as good as we choose to make and develop it, so why not work together on this?



Regards.