Comment by thr0wawayf00 | Hacker News Reader

Comment by thr0wawayf00 | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

> Independent headhunters and recruiters are a valuable resource

I had an experience with an independent recruiter that went so poorly that I haven’t been able to take those kinds of people seriously since.

A few years back, I was recruited to an up-and-coming startup in the healthcare space in a senior role. It was a massive pay increase, meaningful equity, and a company name I was proud to put on my resume.

An independent firm reached out to me about the role and I was definitely interested. One thing I noticed while doing my independent research was that lots of people had very poor Glassdoor reviews of the company, basically comparing it to Theranos in terms of its culture, constant firings, cult-like CEO, etc. I reached out to several former employees to discuss their experience and could not get one to talk to me about working there. Meanwhile, I was hearing from the recruiters that they hired a new exec team and most complaints were not relevant to the current situation there.

I brought the complaints up with the recruiter and the company during my interview process, and they both told me it was just a couple disgruntled former employees trying to make the company look bad. The recruiter offered to put me in touch with others they placed at the company, but I couldn’t view them as objective sources.

I started the gig and it took me all of two weeks to realize the company was in fact firing people constantly and I had been completely lied to by the recruiter and the company.

As much as I want to believe that there are recruiters out there that look out for devs, the reality is that software talent is the product in that relationship and there aren’t a lot of financial incentives to ensure transparency going into these professional relationships. Recruiters get paid when you sign, which creates an inherent conflict of interest when you’re looking to them as a trusted resource.

It's unclear to me what you'd like the recruiter to have done differently. They don't work inside the company and have no more access to unbiased information about it than you do as a candidate.

You identified some red flags yourself pre-hire and then bailed early when it turned out bad. It all seems pretty much fine.

"they told me it was just a couple disgruntled former employees trying to make the company look bad" is still deceptive with this setup. If they really don't have any inside info, why make that claim?

> It all seems pretty much fine.

I was terminated and feared what it would do to my career, it was most certainly not "pretty much fine."

> It's unclear to me what you'd like the recruiter to have done differently

This is my point, there's nothing you can make a recruiter do to truly act in your interest. Because they get paid when you sign, they're motivated to act on behalf of the company, not you the developer.

I started dealing with independent IT headhunters back in 1997. Back then they were more valuable, and seemed to somehow know about open positions that I did not know of.

Nowadays most independent recruiters I know of are rehashing the jobs I can see on Linkedin and the like. They're often 22 year olds at their first job right out of college.

There are some independent headhunters who add value, but most do not. The one thing they do seem to get is feedback they can pass on. Maybe companies feel more comfortable telling a third party.

> Recruiters get paid when you sign

As far as I understand it their fee is (often/always?) also contingent on you staying there at least 6 months.

fees are usually paid on candidate start date, with a rebate clause based on how long the candidate stays (i.e 100% refund if placed candidate does not stay past probation)

A lot of recruiters don't get paid when you sign, they get paid when you've spent something like 90+ days in the role to avoid that exact problem and align incentives a bit better.

Yes, it's a two-sided market like estate agents (realtors) and used car salespeople. But without enough turnover to do statistical satisfaction management like Uber. And the dating company problem that satisfied customers don't come back.

Most of them are just trying to churn you through the sales process quickly; some are outright scammers (if you've not had to blacklist a recruitment firm you've probably not done much hiring); and a very few are absolutely gold who will matchmake better than automated systems. Those people deserve positive word-of-mouth.

You could have done worse than two weeks. The former employees who would not talk were probably under a non-disparagement agreement from their severance - and that agreement under a non-disclosure agreement.

In this case however, the relative silence is a good indicator.

Usually, even if one leaves a place and can't share their grief they will at least try to point out a positive.

That said, phrasing such as "You'll become a world class VB6 Developer" is a lovely way to let people know what they are in for in a way that is not disparaging, per-se.

Was this collective health?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com