Tony36 mentioned in another thread months ago they had potential positions for 50 employees and were using every means possible to attract the right people, including a recruiter.
Any examples, good, bad or neutral using a recruiter, any "value added" aspects to same, and any ideas on how much they get paid per sucessfull placement ?
GOOD ones, solid firms, can be golden. We used "Manpower", the higher turnover of our Manhattan offices 'til I go it sorted.
Appointee came in basically on premium "temp" rates. They, we, and Manpower knew in advance what the fee would be if they wanted to stay AND we wanted them to stay. It was a percentage of starting annual wage. Yah ALWAYS place the top slot FIRST. Right one helps with the rest. Wrong one has to be shed, at once.
There was ALSO a pro-rata refund if they didn't stay a minimum period. Fee wasn't even due "right away". ISTR at least a month after hire, perhaps more. OTOH it was a long time ago. late 1980's.
Even earlier days, (around 1970) we had used "Tech Serv", or some such, metro DC area, for electronics assemblers all the way up to graduate Engineers.
Up to the employer to observe and assess after that.
Serving a while IN a job AS a temp, meant those who did not fit had not had to guess.
Neither did we!
I'd do it again. Took about a year, 55 R/T DC-NY in 52 weeks, but eventually, we had staffed from Office Manager down to receptionist, either off Manpower placements, or the people THEY found. Did have to send-off a Director of Engineering and two VP's, but that's a different problem, different level, not a "recruiter" arena.
There you use "head hunters" for utmost discretion. You tell them in advance what the "targets" be. Those potential hires are usually already legends in the industry. And ALWAYS already in well-compensated employment.
But I'd do the "vanilla" staffing ONLY with a proven-performer of a "recruiter" as well.
Yah don't want to become a revolving door or a milch cow.