Ask HN: Do You Ever Sign 'Exclusive Representation' Agreements with Recruiters? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Do You Ever Sign 'Exclusive Representation' Agreements with Recruiters?

4 pointsjustboxing10 comments

I got the following today from a recruiter. Full agreement posted in comment as HN won't let me post it in text. The same job was sent by several different recruiters (all east indians). Race is important because I've only come across such situations with Indian recruiters trying to act as middle-men for Indian devs (like me).

Also noticed that 3 different guys gave me 3 different W2 rates and wouldn't budge.

I haven't seen anything like this before.

1) Is it normal to solicit such agreements? and

2) Have you even signed or declined to sign one? and

3) why did you or didn't you sign it?

[ I'm US Citizen and have no problem finding jobs, but the employer is very interesting and so I am considering it. ]

View on HN

Personally, I've never needed to sign something restrictive with a recruiter before actually getting an offer. I've signed things far more restrictive after accepting an offer (non-competes, etc).

If you think working through a recruiter who requires that you sign something like this is your best option, and it's a lot better than any secondary options you have, then you may want to sign it.

If you do think you want to sign it, you could amend it before you sign (to dilute some of the constraints) and see what they do.

E.g. IANAL but you could try rewording:

replace

> __JOB_TITLE_HERE__ , San Francisco, CA

with

> __JOB_TITLE_HERE__ , __POTENTIAL_EMPLOYER_HERE__ , San Francisco, CA

You might also want to amend that and make the "exclusive right to present and represent me" clause expire after a short period (3 months?).

You might also want to amend the non-disclosure agreement to make it expire after some time period after you sign it (3 months? 6 months? 1 year).

Again, if you have no alternative to selling your labour through these recruiters, they might just say "no" to any amendments. If you would be a good fit for the employer and your skills/experience are in demand, you probably have a much better bargaining position.

Thanks for your inputs!

> the employer is very interesting...

Then go apply direct to the employer firm or better still find a way to network and get referred in.

Frankly, a US company using an off-shore, low-cost resource for recruiting is a red flag.

Is that what this is? The employer is Gap.

[Edit: Didn't think of the referral. I already have a couple of former collegues who work there as Sr. Software Engineers. I guess I could contact them. Thanks!]

Paul Chapman is their CIO, give him a ping > https://www.linkedin.com/in/pauljchapman/

I've NEVER seen something like this. If you have any skill, don't sign it.

First, always ask a recruiter if they are a direct vendor to the end client. Anyone else is a middleman and mostly a waste of time unless you are desperate for a job.

Second, laugh at those people who want you to sign such garbage. Most of these "recruiters" are unemployed low skilled slimy sales type people who actually subcontract to the main vendor/recruiter. So yea, say no and move on.

Here's the full agreement text.

To Whom It May Concern:

By my signature below, I assert Supplier __RECRUITER_COMPANY_NAME_HERE__ located at ____ADDRESS_HERE_____ has the exclusive right to present and represent me “__MY_NAME_HERE__” at “__POTENTIAL_EMPLOYER_HERE__” for the following position(s).

__JOB_TITLE_HERE__ , San Francisco, CA

CONFIDENTIALITY AND NON-DISCLOSURE:

Our firm has furnished certain confidential information to a potential Candidate solely for the purpose of exploring a business relationship. This information includes, but is not limited to: pay rates, pay schedules, screening & interviewing processes, content of risk mitigating documents, details of assignments under consideration, strategic information of clients, and this information is all being furnished on a confidential basis.

The Customer information furnished to Candidate in connection with the business relationship is confidential and will not be used for any purpose other than as set forth above; Candidate agrees that terms of the potential opportunity are confidential and are not to be shared with the client hiring manager, other candidates under consideration or any other parties. Details of the information shared may not be utilized to directly or indirectly engage for compensation.

This Agreement will not prevent __RECRUITER_COMPANY_NAME_HERE__ from releasing the information to any party pursuant to a subpoena, search warrant, or other legal process, or if otherwise compelled to by law or regulatory authority.

If you have any questions, please contact us and we will be able to provide further clarification.

Please print, sign and fax to (866-___-____).

Candidate Signature:

Printed Name:

Date:

In the US, this would be non-standard in the sense that the specific practice is not common. On the other hand, recruiters positioning themselves between a candidate and a job are rather common.

To make a hand waving generalization there are three types of recruiter. A retained recruiter gets paid to search and gets paid whether or not anyone gets hired (in-house recruiters more or less are equivalent). Retained recruiters are great to work with because they have no incentive to waste your time. Next down the pecking order are recruiters who have a contract in place that pays when a candidate they bring is hired. This means they have an established working relationship with the employer backed up by a contract. They have some incentive to throw candidates "at the wall and see what sticks" but it is balanced by the need not to waste too much of the employer's time.

The last category of recruiters have no established relationship with the employer. They typically find jobs by searching the internet/job sites/etc. They find candidates the same way. Their entire model is based on throwing candidates at jobs and hoping that the company likes the candidate so much that the company will pay them a recruitment fee. If the company won't pay, the candidate won't get the job no matter how well suited. All it takes is an internet connection and a phone. Volume matters, quality doesn't. There is zero incentive to avoid wasting a candidate's time. There is a high incentive toward putting as little effort behind each candidate as possible.

That seems like the category of recruiter here. The only reason that a recruiter would want an exclusive agreement with the candidate is because the candidate has a non-trivial chance of finding, applying, and getting the job without the recruiter.

Personally, I would never sign such an agreement. It simply is not in your interests and it smells like a scam. [1] Once signed the recruiter can sue you and irrespective of merit, your best option will probably be paying to make it go away. But if you have any inclination to sign it, pay an attorney to look it over.

Good luck.

[1] Particularly since it appears to be culturally targeted.

in employment negotations, the only time you should start signing anything is when you have a job offer letter in hand with the salary you want, and the name of your manager, both in writing on that letter.

(rare exception: sometimes you might get asked to sign an NDA prior to being brought in for an onsite interview. even then, I would think very very carefully about signing it.)

My two cents: don't put companies on a pedestal -- we are certainly nothing special to them, after all. don't do anything you're not 100% comfortable about.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com