No salary on job adverts!
Discussion
deckster said:
Hoolio said:
Orchid1 said:
Recruitment companies love doing that to save the client money. When you enquire about the job they ask your salary and low and behold the salary for the job is a grand or two above your current salary aren't you lucky.
It should be regulated more alongside the entire recruitment industry.
Rubbish. Recruiters placing permanent candidates generally get a percentage of the candidates first year package, therefore the higher the salary the bigger the fee for the recruiter. It should be regulated more alongside the entire recruitment industry.
If they can place high-quality people into the employer for a lower salary cost, then they are much more likely to get repeat business. That's worth a lot more to them than an extra grand on a single commission.
Good recruiters always bear in mind that satisfied candidates become senior managers / directors of client firms. Then the very same people become employers.
Because when 'they' (either the agent or the hiring manager) look at your CV and see salary expectations, it then sets an idea in their mind about where they're setting their offer budget relevant to your experience.
One of the main questions when being interviewed is 'what's your current package' which is completely irrelevant as that's what I'm being paid to do the job I'm doing now, that I negotiated, that I agreed with my current employer. The role I'm interviewing for is different, so the package might need to move a bit.
It's lazy recruiting to not put any kind of figure down and hope you get to save some money by offering your first choice the same +/-5% of what they're already on
One of the main questions when being interviewed is 'what's your current package' which is completely irrelevant as that's what I'm being paid to do the job I'm doing now, that I negotiated, that I agreed with my current employer. The role I'm interviewing for is different, so the package might need to move a bit.
It's lazy recruiting to not put any kind of figure down and hope you get to save some money by offering your first choice the same +/-5% of what they're already on
I just call/email saying I'm interested in the role but would need X amount before applying. If an agent calls me saying they have a role and ask my current package, I always add a % on top of my current salary. All smoke and mirrors until you get sat in front of the employer and are in a position to discuss salary.
deckster said:
Not rubbish at all. The recruiter doesn't care about the candidate, they care about fostering a long-term relationship with the employer.
If they can place high-quality people into the employer for a lower salary cost, then they are much more likely to get repeat business. That's worth a lot more to them than an extra grand on a single commission.
Deckster, do you have any evidence to back up your nonsense? Having been in recruitment for almost 20 years and now running my own agency I can tell you first hand that a successful placement comes from all parties involved being happy with the deal, candidate, client and recruiter. If they can place high-quality people into the employer for a lower salary cost, then they are much more likely to get repeat business. That's worth a lot more to them than an extra grand on a single commission.
I have a strong network of candidates and clients that have been built up over time, some of my clients were candidates I placed years ago and have moved into a hiring role, therefore having a good relationship with them is key for repeat business. We also place a lot of contractors and again, it's a relationship thing. When the contract comes to and end and if we aren't able to place them again you can almost guarantee an "in" with the new company they are working at via another agent as we have spent time and effort building that relationship.
Successful recruiters, client and candidates understand the importance of the relationships they make, clearly you don't.
Lastly, if an agency wants to negotiate a preferential fee with the client for repeat or exclusive business, that is between the agent and the client and has nothing to do with shoehorning candidates in at a lower salary! Candidates, in general, understand their market worth and in my experience won't accept a drop in salary unless there is a compelling reason for them to do so. People don't leave jobs just to get more money.
Hoolio said:
Deckster, do you have any evidence to back up your nonsense? Having been in recruitment for almost 20 years and now running my own agency I can tell you first hand that a successful placement comes from all parties involved being happy with the deal, candidate, client and recruiter.
I have a strong network of candidates and clients that have been built up over time, some of my clients were candidates I placed years ago and have moved into a hiring role, therefore having a good relationship with them is key for repeat business. We also place a lot of contractors and again, it's a relationship thing. When the contract comes to and end and if we aren't able to place them again you can almost guarantee an "in" with the new company they are working at via another agent as we have spent time and effort building that relationship.
Successful recruiters, client and candidates understand the importance of the relationships they make, clearly you don't.
Lastly, if an agency wants to negotiate a preferential fee with the client for repeat or exclusive business, that is between the agent and the client and has nothing to do with shoehorning candidates in at a lower salary! Candidates, in general, understand their market worth and in my experience won't accept a drop in salary unless there is a compelling reason for them to do so. People don't leave jobs just to get more money.
Spot on Hoolio. As you say it's all about developing relationships and you do that by gaining people's trust.I have a strong network of candidates and clients that have been built up over time, some of my clients were candidates I placed years ago and have moved into a hiring role, therefore having a good relationship with them is key for repeat business. We also place a lot of contractors and again, it's a relationship thing. When the contract comes to and end and if we aren't able to place them again you can almost guarantee an "in" with the new company they are working at via another agent as we have spent time and effort building that relationship.
Successful recruiters, client and candidates understand the importance of the relationships they make, clearly you don't.
Lastly, if an agency wants to negotiate a preferential fee with the client for repeat or exclusive business, that is between the agent and the client and has nothing to do with shoehorning candidates in at a lower salary! Candidates, in general, understand their market worth and in my experience won't accept a drop in salary unless there is a compelling reason for them to do so. People don't leave jobs just to get more money.
I ran my recruitment business for over 20 years before selling.
I had this the other day, alarm bells started ringing during the initial telephone interview when they said I was the first out of the 200+ candidates that they were speaking to.
It turned out the rate was about 40% lower than would be expected from the job title but the title had been inflated way above what the job actually entailed.
A shame but we nipped it in the bud quickly and no harm done.
I am very wary of jobs without salary (at least range) now and don't generally bother anymore.
Phil
It turned out the rate was about 40% lower than would be expected from the job title but the title had been inflated way above what the job actually entailed.
A shame but we nipped it in the bud quickly and no harm done.
I am very wary of jobs without salary (at least range) now and don't generally bother anymore.
Phil
Hoolio said:
People don't leave jobs just to get more money.
That's almost the opposite of what happens in many cases though, isn't it? Often the only way to get any meaningful uplift in salary is to leave a company, even one that is ostensibly a good employer in other ways. I've done it a number of times.Yes, many leave because of working conditions, lack of progression etc., but I'd guess a solid 50% of people leave because they're moving to a higher salary.
No disrespect to you - I'm sure you're a model recruiter - but the whole industry is a cesspit and this 'not listing salary' is just a symptom of the lose-lose game we all have to play.
Hoolio said:
Successful recruiters, client and candidates understand the importance of the relationships they make, clearly you don't.
I wish more people understood this, ive been given the run around so much, made clear what im looking for. Only having to turn down job offers because I haven't been listened too or the company is 'trying it on'.Its not hard to understand that everyone wants to earn the same or more than they are currently on, why ask what im currently on if your just gonna ignore it, Its disrespectful and tells me a lot about the inner workings of the company. Low ball me and you wasted our time and I no longer want to work for you.
Hoolio said:
Successful recruiters, client and candidates understand the importance of the relationships they make, clearly you don't.
Steady on. I appear to have hit a nerve, but please less of the personal abuse.My point, perhaps badly phrased, is that as a candidate you are the product, not the customer. You as a recruiter are effectively selling me as a candidate to the end client and whilst yes, it is beyond obvious to say that is is important to keep all parties happy - it is only commercially sensible that as the non-fee payer in the deal, I am the junior partner.
And I hope that you are big enough to admit that whilst you are without doubt a paragon of excellence, there are a significant proportion of recruiters out there who are only in the industry for a very short amount of time and who wouldn't know how to build a relationship if they had the manual in front of them.
A work for a large (ish) company.
Salary ranges vary massively for a job title, and will depend on experience and skills. There will be a lot of flexibility in the responsibilities and requirements in any position they recruit for. There may be a number of roles that they will fit people to suit depending on skills. They don't necessarily want to eliminate applicants because the pay is too low (or too high).
Salary ranges vary massively for a job title, and will depend on experience and skills. There will be a lot of flexibility in the responsibilities and requirements in any position they recruit for. There may be a number of roles that they will fit people to suit depending on skills. They don't necessarily want to eliminate applicants because the pay is too low (or too high).
deckster said:
Steady on. I appear to have hit a nerve, but please less of the personal abuse.
My point, perhaps badly phrased, is that as a candidate you are the product, not the customer. You as a recruiter are effectively selling me as a candidate to the end client and whilst yes, it is beyond obvious to say that is is important to keep all parties happy - it is only commercially sensible that as the non-fee payer in the deal, I am the junior partner.
And I hope that you are big enough to admit that whilst you are without doubt a paragon of excellence, there are a significant proportion of recruiters out there who are only in the industry for a very short amount of time and who wouldn't know how to build a relationship if they had the manual in front of them.
You're correct, candidates are our product. Without a product we can't make money, without a buyer we can't make money. My point is that to win repeat business with clients and to get referrals from candidates we MUST build a relationship.My point, perhaps badly phrased, is that as a candidate you are the product, not the customer. You as a recruiter are effectively selling me as a candidate to the end client and whilst yes, it is beyond obvious to say that is is important to keep all parties happy - it is only commercially sensible that as the non-fee payer in the deal, I am the junior partner.
And I hope that you are big enough to admit that whilst you are without doubt a paragon of excellence, there are a significant proportion of recruiters out there who are only in the industry for a very short amount of time and who wouldn't know how to build a relationship if they had the manual in front of them.
There are people in the industry who are just in it for a quick buck, you can generally spot them a mile off. They will most likely have moved jobs a lot themselves and have little to zero market knowledge. EVERY industry/walk of life has good and bad people in it, you've just got to pick the goods ones. Building relationships with a select number of agents will always mean you are top of their list to call.
Last point, good agents will put as much detail in a job ad as possible, including rate/salary when they know this. We don't like wasting time speaking to candidates who are not suitable for the role. When looking for a role you should be able to tell from the job ad if the agent has a good understanding of the job, the client, culture etc just from the ad. Don't waste your time by applying to jobs that don't have a listed salary/rate.
Hoolio said:
You're correct, candidates are our product. Without a product we can't make money, without a buyer we can't make money. My point is that to win repeat business with clients and to get referrals from candidates we MUST build a relationship.
There are people in the industry who are just in it for a quick buck, you can generally spot them a mile off. They will most likely have moved jobs a lot themselves and have little to zero market knowledge. EVERY industry/walk of life has good and bad people in it, you've just got to pick the goods ones. Building relationships with a select number of agents will always mean you are top of their list to call.
Last point, good agents will put as much detail in a job ad as possible, including rate/salary when they know this. We don't like wasting time speaking to candidates who are not suitable for the role. When looking for a role you should be able to tell from the job ad if the agent has a good understanding of the job, the client, culture etc just from the ad. Don't waste your time by applying to jobs that don't have a listed salary/rate.
Absolutely agree with all of this. Unfortunately it's almost completely irrelevant.There are people in the industry who are just in it for a quick buck, you can generally spot them a mile off. They will most likely have moved jobs a lot themselves and have little to zero market knowledge. EVERY industry/walk of life has good and bad people in it, you've just got to pick the goods ones. Building relationships with a select number of agents will always mean you are top of their list to call.
Last point, good agents will put as much detail in a job ad as possible, including rate/salary when they know this. We don't like wasting time speaking to candidates who are not suitable for the role. When looking for a role you should be able to tell from the job ad if the agent has a good understanding of the job, the client, culture etc just from the ad. Don't waste your time by applying to jobs that don't have a listed salary/rate.
You see, as consumers (or 'the product' if you look at things that way), candidates don't have the luxury of choice. If a company is contracted to recruit for a role then that part is fixed. Some agencies are hopeless, some have good staff and bad staff, and of course some agencies are exemplary.
It's all well and good an agency saying they are the best, but the chances of the next role I apply for using a company like this? Slim, if my experience is anything to go by.
And if a company - which might be a great company with a great role - employs a poor agency, or that agency allocates a new/crap recruiter to deal with it - then we'll probably never get to know about it as I, like many, will simply not entertain those that try and BS the initial conversations, evading questions on salary and talking about the role with very obvious lack of domain knowledge.
And the employer probably won't even be aware as they bought the service on price and will end up with someone who may or may not be good, but it's a lottery.
So frustrating for candidates and the good agencies out there who are stiffed on price by the more fly-by-night/churn/wideboy type recruitment setups.
deckster said:
Steady on. I appear to have hit a nerve, but please less of the personal abuse.
My point, perhaps badly phrased, is that as a candidate you are the product, not the customer. You as a recruiter are effectively selling me as a candidate to the end client and whilst yes, it is beyond obvious to say that is is important to keep all parties happy - it is only commercially sensible that as the non-fee payer in the deal, I am the junior partner.
And I hope that you are big enough to admit that whilst you are without doubt a paragon of excellence, there are a significant proportion of recruiters out there who are only in the industry for a very short amount of time and who wouldn't know how to build a relationship if they had the manual in front of them.
To your point about shisters in the recruitment industry, I've just had a call from a "candidate" - withheld number - enquiring about an investment banking role I'm recruiting for wanting to know the name of the company etc etc As soon as I asked him a coupe of difficult questions the phone went dead. Clearly an agent trying to pull the role from me. It's sad that in this day and age this goes on.My point, perhaps badly phrased, is that as a candidate you are the product, not the customer. You as a recruiter are effectively selling me as a candidate to the end client and whilst yes, it is beyond obvious to say that is is important to keep all parties happy - it is only commercially sensible that as the non-fee payer in the deal, I am the junior partner.
And I hope that you are big enough to admit that whilst you are without doubt a paragon of excellence, there are a significant proportion of recruiters out there who are only in the industry for a very short amount of time and who wouldn't know how to build a relationship if they had the manual in front of them.
I just play the game.Ask what the salary range is(nearly always a low ball figure)and if there is nothing else, go through the interview process.
They think they have a mug and I get valuable interview experience.
In the past I have accepted 2 of these positions as back up and when the position I was really after materializes have just called them to say I have been offered better.
The agency has never seemed surprised so I guess its an everyday occurance.
They think they have a mug and I get valuable interview experience.
In the past I have accepted 2 of these positions as back up and when the position I was really after materializes have just called them to say I have been offered better.
The agency has never seemed surprised so I guess its an everyday occurance.
Digging this up again - you apply for a role which has no salary listed; current role is completely different to advertised role; you know you'll be taking a big salary cut for the role anyway - at what point do you ask? When invited for interview? At the interview? Wait until offered the job? Don't want to waste anyone's time, but it is a factor...
I tend not to entertain adverts that don't specify a range. I've seen jobs in the past where they seem to tick a lot of boxes until you enquire and find out how little they are prepared to pay. I always think if they don't advertise it then they are low payers or will low ball you depending on what salary you are currently on. I appreciate that some people have more experience and may command the top end of the range while others may sit near the bottom but at least give people a heads up!
I often find jobs that look more senior or more pressured pay slightly less than I'm on but then I've been working since 1997 and have had plenty of inflationary and promotion rises over the years. A job with less salary wouldn't put me off necessarily if it was the right job but a job on significantly less would so it would be better not to waste the recruiter/employers time with an enquiry or my own by putting a range on the ad.
I often find jobs that look more senior or more pressured pay slightly less than I'm on but then I've been working since 1997 and have had plenty of inflationary and promotion rises over the years. A job with less salary wouldn't put me off necessarily if it was the right job but a job on significantly less would so it would be better not to waste the recruiter/employers time with an enquiry or my own by putting a range on the ad.
Gassing Station | Jobs & Employment Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff