Are agency's destroying this country ?

hartcjhart

there are good and bad agencies, it is just finding out which are which,

I have worked via agencies for the past 15 years and love the flexibility it gives me,but I make sure they understand what is what,

if they try to give me a carp job I turn it down,and I make sure they realise that if they keep me happy I will keep the client happy and all will win

12bdebt3

You could be happy about the news of changing to the benefits system:

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/policy/welfare-reform/legislation-and-key-documents/universal-credit/

MrRedundant

Why would you think simply by applying you had the job?
Agencies are a pain and mostly unwanted but they do perform a function and to do this they need staff on their books all the time and not 2 days after the temp is needed.

jbreckmckye

jay_1978 wrote: »

The title is kind of harsh I know but this is something I feel strongly about, Not long ago I signed up to a agency after finding a full time job in my local jobcentre. I go and sign up and give all my details. I then ask when this job starts to which I am told that the actual vacancy didn't exist, Basically they put them out there to reel in the people with the relevant qualifications for when those kind of jobs would turn up, So from thinking I have a full time job. I was stuck doing 2-3 days a week at like 4 hours a day, Now I know this happens because I have seen other people on here discussing it, Its kind of annoying that every single vacancy you look at now if through a agency. I am not exaggerating either when I say " Every vacancy ", How are people supposed to have any kind of future if you have to go through a agency and not know if your going be working from one week to the next ? surely the powers that be can do something about company's constantly using these agency's ? If not then they need to stop complaining about the increase in unemployment.

Firstly, and half-decent agency would never do anything as downright dodgy (and legally shakey) as offer a non-existent post. They might post an ad about 'opportunities', but wouldn't actually lie to the public. However, you should expect employment agencies, and recruiters in general, to work for their clients - not you. You need to realize this.

When I worked in recruitment, we took the simple view that candidates weren't worth spending time on. They didn't pay the bills (the employer does), they wouldn't make repeat business (large companies can) and they were, for good or ill, ten a penny. A recruiter's job is to fill posts and get that perm fee. That commission makes most of their income. They are not, however, paid to land candidates their ideal position, act as careers advisors or deal with some random jobseeker's existential angst.

This sounds harsh, but once you understand this, you can work effectively with these people. They want to know you're easy money for certain roles. They want to hear how they can fight your case. They want to know how swift and flexible you are. If they can call you at 2am, have you interviewed in 48 hours and pocket ~10% of a decent perm salary before Radio 4's Thought for the Day, they'll love you, and keep you in mind. Play to that and you'll get a lot from them. Expect something else and you won't.

I hope that explains a bit more about recruitment.

TEDDYRUKSPIN

Simple answer is yes and no.

Unfortunately, due to this downturn - more and more fake recruitment agencies have sprung up and are there to exploit the vulnerable. All I can say, is be extra careful and make sure it is a reputable company.

All recruitment agencies work on one basis. To obtain the best candidate who will get the job and hence, get them the commission. It is a sales game and many companies use these agencies as they don't have the time, HR service to recruit.

So my answer is 'yes' and 'no'.

As for the banks have messed us up big? Yes and no. The answer is 'greed' that has destroyed the economy. The downturn will recover but will be very slow. Unfortunately, the way it is going it seems that it is a long way.

The country needs to stick together. The people I mean. It is a very difficult time.

Businesses must continue to recruit - no matter what. People need money. Money is used to buy things. Hence, the new circle of life! The government needs to still recruit and so on and so on.

Everyday has a silver lining! Hope to the new day!

Good luck.

MrChandlerBing

Agencies are important right now because someone needs to filter through the 100s of applications any one job gets. However I agree completely that if people have to work through agencies the countries economy will never recover. No job security = no spending.

GotToChange

I spoke to an agency on Monday this week. The role that they placed on the JCP website was "closed" when I called but I was *sigh* encouraged to send my CV (knowing full well that the expectation is that I will then go to register with them blah blah).

I duly sent my CV and a an explanatory letter (temp job soon coming to an end one way or another....) which included details of my present position.

A short time later, the agency called my place of work; the agency were scouting for business - in other words, they were more interested in having a job to put on their books to fill than speaking to me as a candidate for a postion that they have [or not]. Seems bonkers to me. But also sneaky (they didn't know that it was me they spoke to when they cold-called but they sure will tomorrow).

Also - I have heard frome a VERY reliable source that pretty soon agency staff must be taken on by an employer after a 12-week period. Or laid off - and the same person cannot be set back on for a certain length of time.

PasturesNew

My tactic has been: register with a few agencies that are advertising jobs of the sort/location/salary you're after. The reason for this is: if they have one, they might have future vacancies. Also, agencies only advertise once nobody on their books can do it.

When an agency gets a job on their books, their objective is pretty much: Get three candidates in front of the client, quickest, that could do the job. That's all. Sometimes they will be an appointed agency, sometimes they're just punting their luck and advertising a vacancy they know exists (but have no signed contract with the employer as sole agency). So - the quicker they can get any 3 good candidates in front of the client, the more chance they have that the client will interview one of them, hire one. They are competing, for speed, against the others.

So - to be in the race BEFORE they advertise next time, you have to be on their books. Then they phone you. They do a search of their database and it spits out a list of names. They start calling from the top.... they only need three people that can do the job to put forward. If your line's busy or you don't answer, they'll call the next person. Once they have submitted their three they will completely forget that job now - as they're chasing after the next one.

So, you have to be on their books - and you have to be one of the first three they manage to speak to on the phone that could do the job.

RedSoleShoes

jbreckmckye wrote: »

Firstly, and half-decent agency would never do anything as downright dodgy (and legally shakey) as offer a non-existent post.

But they do continue to advertise posts which have been filled, therefore, essentially, a non-existent post.

I do not want to send my personal details to someone who is leading me to believe that there is a job that I am interested in when, in fact, this job is no longer available.

Yes I do agree that it is best to register with an agency on-spec, and not in relation to a specfic post as it is highly likely that the post is long gone.

Googlewhacker

GotToChange wrote: »

Also - I have heard frome a VERY reliable source that pretty soon agency staff must be taken on by an employer after a 12-week period. Or laid off - and the same person cannot be set back on for a certain length of time.

I can't see this happening to be honest, 12 weeks is to short a time period.