m
^ Nice 
Lol, vindication at its best.
That’s hilarious! On the flip side, if they got you good candidates who performed, you might have made a bad business decision because of a personal vendetta.
Yeah, pretty much pulled a Trump here…
Candidates almost universally hate having to go through recruiters. Even on the 0% chance you burned bridges with ALL recruiters, you’d then just run an independent search and tap into a larger candidate pool than they have anyway (ie everyone avoiding them, arguably the majority of people).
Tangent but you haven’t gotten the full recruiter experience until you’ve taken time off work and spent hours of travel to get to interviews for positions that weren’t even what was discussed. Brutal industry.
That is exactly the problem. If I post a job today, I’ll have 1k resumes in a week. Sure, HR can scrub those that are unqualified, but I still have to do way more legwork than if I go through a recruiter. I’ve actually had good experience with recruiters for the most part. You all take things way too personally. Nobody is your friend. Recruiters want to put butts in seats. That’s it. If they don’t think they can put your a$$ in a seat, you will not hear from them again. It’s not personal. It’s business.
It depends on level maybe. I’ve been called by recruiters by maybe 4 jobs in 2016 that were not posted anywhere. I’d say above VP kind of level for certain jobs, you cannot accept resume spam as only a handful of people in the city have the background you want. It’s better for the recruiter to call these guys by themselves.
If you are hiring in a desirable location for a finance job, you will have plenty of candidates, more than you want. Sorting through, screening, interviewing them all take time. Some firms do not have the manpower or budget to keep a HR team for these purposes. Recruiters exist because they do all the legwork for you. Spending time doing the filtering yourself may get you better results (because most recruiters/HR don’t know what they’re hiring for) but it also takes time away from value-adding activities like research and decision making. For some roles where you just need a butt in the seat, recruiters save you time, for highly specific roles, they may not.
If the role is specialized, a lot of times, you need to hire someone who already has a job, is good at that job, and who therefore is not spending their time browsing eFinancialCareers. These people will not even be aware of the opening unless someone actively calls them. The universe of people with a specific high level finance skill - interest rate exotic derivatives trading, equity syndication in a specific industry, or something like that - is pretty small. You might not necessarily know the names of people at different firms like a recruiter does. It’s a function of results, not time or cost.
We found equally good candidates with a different agency and were able to get the rate down to 15 percent so I’d say it is a win on all accounts. The moral of the story is: Don’t be an ass.
Yup, that’s the job description for recruiters. 
These people don’t know the jobs they are filling, don’t know the people they are filling the jobs with, can’t remember anything, or follow thru with anything. I swore them off a decade ago, and will only discuss with hiring managers, those are the ONLY people who know what they are talking about, and the only people who matter.
And let’s not even get started on HR…