Re: Recruiting dilemma

["William Sherman" <bsherman77 -at- embarqmail -dot- com>]

Since I am in the fire on this stuff all the time, here's my two cents on 
what happens today. Things are a bit different today than even five years 
ago.

Today, many "recruiting companies" are small shops, with one to five people 
maybe. A good web page, stock pictures, and they can appear just as big as 
anyone. A large number today are Indian. I am not sure if they are actually 
in India or if they are on-shore, although every one of them will have a 
stateside address. The stateside address could be a storefront or could be 
real. One issue I have noticed is many seem unaware or uncaring about US 
labor laws as indicated by the contracts they send.

So for Chris, review any paperwork they send very, very carefully. Cross out 
or change the stuff you don't like or is illegal. As someone told me once on 
a question of the legality of a clause, "I bet it is if you sign it."



Companies tend to send out requirements to a few selected shops, however, 
from the emails and phone calls that come in, either someone is intercepting 
and shotgunning these out to everyone they can find, or the "selected" shops 
list has gained many more than you'd think.  I often get a dozen emails on 
any job coming up, and over half will have Indian names, especially in 
anything related to healthcare or finance.



Companies are fed up with wading through multiple submissions. This is one 
reason they went to selected shops only, and it still isn't working, so some 
have initiated a computer filtering system for the recruiter to use. Shop 
ABC submits you and three days later Shop LMN tries but the computer bounces 
your name. This is getting more common.

So in Chris' case, once submitted by this first one, any end-runs won't work 
unless you somehow get the resume in paper to the boss, and then it will 
still pop back through the first recruiter for pay, commission, and so on. 
The lesson is to never submit with the first person to call. Always tell 
them you want to think about it. There typically will be a few more 
calling/emailing you soon.

However, if you get information on the company from the recruiter, then 
taking that proprietary information and using it yourself or with another 
recruiter will get you marked quickly and recruiters will not trust you or 
bother with you.



Unless the email starts "Hello, Chris" or something similar, understand you 
are just one of many in that broadcasted email. Even if you get one with 
"Hello, Chris", the recruiter probably sent that out to every person that 
popped in the keyword search as the results came to her. She will hesitate 
enough to pop your information on the screen so she can act like she knows 
you. She didn't seek you out as the BEST candidate; she sought you as A 
candidate.




Recruiters are most likely young and inexperienced. Long ago, recruiters 
were people in the industry who had decided to step away from the work and 
recruit. They were typically good at providing the company a great product 
because they could sift the wheat from the chaff before the company ever saw 
the resumes. If a candidate showed up at a company, they were a qualified 
candidate.

Today, it is a path right out of college for a business major or sales 
major. After all, they are just selling a product - you. As such, they shift 
wheat and chaff by buzz words and key word searches on resumes. With the 
right resume, I could have most of them submitting me for chief brain 
surgeon at any hospital. I wouldn't get through five minutes of interview 
with a real doctor, but I could blow most recruiters away.

However, they are young and energetic. They can run your resume all over, 
but the lack of experience means they often can't tell you are the perfect 
candidate and the other eight they have to submit are piling it on higher 
and deeper. They also don't have the knowledge to tell a client when they 
are wrong, what they need, or how to fix their requirements. For example, 20 
years ago, a company wanting to hire a tech writer at $12 per hour would 
have been told by the recruiter this is a very unrealistic price and the 
client will not be happy with anyone who willingly works at that low price. 
Today, they blindly pass on that $20 is the tops to potential candidates and 
too bad if they need more. They will find someone and the company will end 
up being unhappy.



So should you bail on this recruiter? Too late if she has submitted you.

Should you jump to another? Only to find other opportunities, as this job is 
tied to the first recruiter.

Should you expect faster results? Yes, and no. Yes, because she probably 
called you and acted like the job needed to be filled yesterday. No, because 
she knows when things really happen and that may still be a week away.

Will you hear anything back? Only if you get the job. You have something 
like a 5% chance of getting a call saying you were rejected.



In the long run, you may be beat out by lesser candidates because they:

1. required less money
2. are closer
3. are younger (yes, illegal, but it still happens)
4. got in before you, and:
 a. the company got tired of reading resumes
 b. the company decided that one had enough to keep them happy
 c. the other recruiter was taking less of a cut.

While a job is very personal to us, as it is what keeps us fed, these job 
searches need to be handled in a cold and impersonal way, because the 
companies don't care about you. They are looking for a meatsack to fill 
their spot, and that is about all there is to it.



Good luck on the job, though. Hope you get it.




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chris Morton" <salt -dot- morton -at- gmail -dot- com>
To: <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2013 4:08 PM
Subject: Recruiting dilemma