atw: Re: WARNING: Recruiter advertisements are ONLY trawling for resumes for tender responses!
- From: "Christine Kent" <cmkentau@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2012 18:25:27 +1000
C'mon Warren, this has been going on for years and years and years and
years. Why are we still surprised when the behaviour or recruiters remains
and its traditional level, somewhere deep in the mire where the light
doesn't shine - there is nothing new here. (With apologies to the few
truly decent recruiters out there who DO know their business and do try
their best to be ethical despite unethical behaviour in turn from their
clients.)
I have been somewhat entertained by a similar discussion taking place with a
"start-up" meetup group where these shocked young males cannot grasp how a
recruiter who knows less than zero about what they do can pass judgement on
them. Welcome to the real world boys. It is as it has always been, so mote
it be, amen.
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Warren Lewington
Sent: Tuesday, 14 August 2012 4:27 PM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: WARNING: Recruiter advertisements are ONLY trawling for
resumes for tender responses!
Hi all.
A large number of the contract roles being posted at the moment are not
genuine. I have found this out after stupidly sending resumes off - and on
one occasion after specifically asking if the role has been funded and
authorised. To which question, the answer was "yes." Twice in the last 24
hours I have later been called and told that the "role" I applied for is a
tender response and they (those placing the bid) want to use my resume as
part of the bid.
Well. I think if all you want is a resume for the off chance you might win a
tender bid then you should damn well say it in the advertisements and more,
you should be paying for it. I spend a lot of time updating my resume, which
reflects the skills I have taken years of effort, energy, and graft to
develop.
So for me, in this respect, the resume is a product or commodity of
considerable value, and should be treated as such.
SO YOU SHOULD BLOODY WELL PAY FOR IT. Especially if you win the bid, and
don't choose to use the people whose resumes you took and put into the bid -
and I know that happens - I have worked in a bidding department for John
Holland...
To follow that up, I have today (15:50 actually) called the ACCC to ask
about the false advertising regulatory framework and have been told that
(basically) if there is no monetary exchange (commercial or otherwise) then
the advertisements and unethical behaviour such as we are seeing from the
recruiters is out of the ACCCs capability to act against. Well, I bet the
recruiters must know that already.
I think this sort of behaviour is beyond dishonest. It demonstrates to me
the lack of trust that recruiters and their cronies higher up the food
chains have rightfully earned. I also think that the recruiters on the list
should be ashamed of your own industry. You need to shape yourselves up. You
cannot deny or defend yourselves in the face of such miserable hyena like
ethical behaviour.
If you are having trouble understanding honesty, ethics, and integrity; then
perhaps you should talk to a local minister, imam, priest or rabbi; they can
assist you with a moral compass. I can give you several names if you want
them.
Unimpressed.
Warren Lewington.
Other related posts:
