Recruiters

or Register to post new content in the forum

56 RepliesJump to last post

 

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Jun 28, 2006 2:24 pm

I think there are those who would be interested in knowing who pays you and how much?



Back to Top


What would you like to know and I will be more than happy to answer what I feel comfortable with.  Not sure how JC and RA feel about this, but I'm open to a discussion...

Jun 28, 2006 3:30 pm

All of our fees are paid by the hiring brokerage.  You will find that this is the case with the vast majority of recruiters today.  There is absolutely no cost to you.

Additionally, we do not try to sell you "follow up" services such as resume writing or interview coaching.  There is some disagreement on this among recruiters, but I strongly believe that taking money from candidates represents a conflict of interest.

Since all of our funds come from long term contracts with hiring brokerages, we are motivated to find a "win-win or no deal" situation for each candidate. 

Jun 28, 2006 3:49 pm

In 1970 or so, firms started transitioning from APFs (applicant-paid fees) to EPFs (employer-paid fees).  The thought behind this was that the unemployed  (who then were the ones looking for employment vs. the employed) had trouble finding the funds to cover these fees. 


It was a difficult transition at first, until the industry started doing this as a whole and it soon became understood that EPFs were the norm.


In my situation, I only work with experienced FAs moving from one firm to another, with verifiable assets.  Typically this is on the independent side, but have done some work with regionals and wires.


The fees are based on verified T12 and go against the branch P&L for a wire/regional or the Business Development Department's budget for independents.

Jun 28, 2006 4:14 pm
BrokerRecruit:

In my situation, I only work with experienced FAs moving from one firm to another, with verifiable assets.  Typically this is on the independent side, but have done some work with regionals and wires.


The fees are based on verified T12 and go against the branch P&L for a wire/regional or the Business Development Department's budget for independents.



We work with candidates both with and without books.

Like BR above, our firm places candidates with verifiable assets at wirehouse, bank and independent clients.  With a few exceptions, our fee to the hiring brokerage is a percentage of trailing 12.  The percentage of T12 structure is pretty standard when placing established brokers.

We also place FAs without books at the wirehouse level.  We only work with licensed, experienced reps with a proven track record.  The hiring brokerage pays us a flat fee per hire, and we refund the fee if the candidate does not work out.


Jun 28, 2006 6:16 pm

If I am a hiring manager why should I hire somebody being presented to me--with a fee attached--instead of somebody who I sense will contribute as much to my team that comes without a fee attached?


Why do I need a recruiter to tell me that Bob Broker at my competitor is looking?  Why doesn't Bob get in touch with me himself and negotiate a bigger signing bonus since Iwon't have to pay a recruiter?

Jun 28, 2006 6:20 pm

That's exactly why I don't work with wirehouses anymore.  It is silly to me to compete with everyone - current FAs, the managers, internal recruiters and a slew of guys like me looking for that one rep that will move.  It is fruitless in my mind. 


I prefer to work with the independent BDs that I have exclusivity with and work with the large OSJ practices.  Thus, I have capitalized on my relationship with the company, and can almost act as an external HR department from my office.

Jun 28, 2006 6:24 pm
BrokerRecruit:

I prefer to work with the independent BDs that I have exclusivity with and work with the large OSJ practices.  Thus, I have capitalized on my relationship with the company, and can almost act as an external HR department from my office.



So, I'm Bob Broker at Smith Barney and I've decided to become an Indy.


How do I benefit by letting you know I'm out here?  What would you be able to do for me that I cannot do for myself?

Jun 28, 2006 9:49 pm

NASD Newbie,


Please allow me to address your question as follows:


As far as the benefit to a candidate to use a recruiter, here is a real, and immediate example.   I have six candidates who will be starting with Smioth Barney on Monday.


Candidate #1:  He had met with UBS and basically turned them down after being treated like just another number.  Morgan Stanley had stepped up to the plate and was getting ready to make him an offer that he was ready to sign before I stepped in.  He didn't even know Smith Barney had an office where he was looking, much less that they were looking for one more candidate to hire this year.  Today he accepted an offer at Smith Barney. 


Candidate #2:  She had submitted her resume three different times to Smith Barney through their automated system to no avail.  Typically, they do not hire anyone without a degree unless they have a very good story to tell.  Enter me.  Because I am not an automated system that kicks her resume out because of the lack of degree, I had the privilege to hear and understand her story, and even better, I got the opportunity to tell her story to the hiring manager.  Four weeks later, she received an offer.  She starts on Monday.


Candidate #3:  She knew that Smith Barney was hiring, but she already had an offer at Merrill Lynch lined up.  We talk, I tell her about all of the advantages with Smith Barney, and she decides to put Merrill on hold.  She also starts on Monday.


Candidate #4:  He was days from signing the paperwork necessary to start his own Allstate Agency.  I get to talking to him, I make the introduction, and as you can conclude, he also starts on Monday...


Shall I continue??


Point number one.  If these candidates could have "just gone to Smith Barney themselves," then why didn't they?  There are many reasons as I have given examples of just a few. 


Point number two:  If it weren't for we recruiters, these candidates would never have shown up at he company front doors for an interview.    In other words, we act as agents not only for our candidates, but ALSO for the companies we represent.


Are there managers out there who try and do it on their own?  You bet there are.   But if they are like us, they are having to screen through 50 resumes and spending about 5 hours to read through these resumes just to decide to speak with 10.  And then they're spending an hour or two with each of those ten in order to qualify maybe three good prospects.  Out of those three, maybe one will get hired. So let's see, that's 5 hours for resume reading, then another 15-20 hous in initial interviews to qualify three in order to hire one.  By my calculations that's about 25-30 hours of initial screening.


How many managers do you know out there who have 25-30 hours to spend to find the exact right candidate? 


Instead, we recruiters spend those 25-30 hours to result in one hire.  And that is one reason why managers are happy to pay our fee.


Questions??

Jun 28, 2006 10:12 pm
RecruitingAce:

Questions??



Yes, one.


Why would a guy who graduated from the USAFA not be able to get a real job?

Jun 28, 2006 10:21 pm

Newbie, Newbie, Newbie...


Jun 28, 2006 10:34 pm
RecruitingAce:

Newbie, Newbie, Newbie...



Come on now, admit it.  You're wondering the same thing.

Jun 28, 2006 10:41 pm

That was pretty funny.

Jun 28, 2006 11:07 pm

My fellow recruiters have made some excellent points however I believe NASD Newbie is not sincere with his questions.

Jun 28, 2006 11:31 pm
NASD Newbie:
RecruitingAce:

Questions??


Yes, one.


Why would a guy who graduated from the USAFA not be able to get a real job?



You mean perhaps as a mid-level bureaucrat wage slave at a wirehouse?  A travelling branch manager on demand?  Vice President of Paperclip Procurement?  Something like that?

Jun 29, 2006 12:32 am

Okay, I hate to  bite, but I will.


I used to work at HP for 4 years, but left there to fly for an airline.  It turns out flying for the airlines after September 11th was a real drag - little pay, no time to spend with my 4 kids, etc.


So now I'm "just" a recruiter. No, it's not a "real" job.  I HAVE to be home every day, and I HAVE to make my own schedule, and I don't GET to answer to anybody, and for all that, I make more money than I ever did when I worked in a "REAL" job.  And it really stinks too when someone asks me to fly them somewhere around the country and I have to tell them, YES, because I am beholden to no one.


Newbie, come to think of it, this job DOES stink.  Are they taking any applications over where you work?  And.. where is it that you work?


Thanks for setting me straight...  


Jun 29, 2006 1:46 am

[quote=NASD Newbie][quote=RecruitingAce]

Questions??

[/quote]

Yes, one.

Why would a guy who graduated from the USAFA not be able to get a real job?

[/quote]



I have to join in on this discussion... I have had several family members that
have graduated from USAFA and USMA.



- Your a damn Clown for ever saying something like that about a United States Commissioned
Officer. They do more in four hours than you accomplish in a whole day.



- Who are you? What do you for a living, you most likely sell car insurance or
work at a call center.



How come everyone on this message board always has something negative to say
about one another? From what I see, the people that have something to say about
someone's success or idea on a topic and respond in a negative manner are just
clowns... that’s its, just remember Newbie you don’t have the stones ever
to put on a uniform (this of course does not count when you worked at UPS) and
do a job that no one wants to do; such as work at that call center.

Jun 29, 2006 8:45 am

Just when I was starting to like NASD better than BEF and Put...

Jun 29, 2006 9:16 am
RecruitingAce:

Okay, I hate to  bite, but I will.


I used to work at HP for 4 years, but left there to fly for an airline.  It turns out flying for the airlines after September 11th was a real drag - little pay, no time to spend with my 4 kids, etc.   



Why not go back to HP?

Jun 29, 2006 9:45 am

This is either going to be one of the hardest $50k/year careers out there, or one of the easiest $200k/year careers.  It's up to the recruiter and what they can do.


I have determined that going from wire to wire is something that can be done very easily, with the (for example) ML FA calling the MS BM and striking up a conversation without me being involved.  I won't compete with internal/other external efforts and will only work deals that I/our company have exclusivity with. 


It's much like being an FA, you find your niche (who you work for/who you work with/who you recruit) and running with it.  It oftentimes will take many years to get things off the ground and running. 


There are different fee structures that can be paid as well.  I do many deals that are split between front and back-end, where I have recurring revenue each month as opposed to a purely transactional operation. 


Many think that recruiting is for those that have failed in other professions.  I have now found that many internal recruiters and HR professionals are former externals who failed at this because it is infinitely more difficult.

Jun 29, 2006 1:37 pm
NASD Newbie:

If I am a hiring manager why should I hire somebody being presented to me--with a fee attached--instead of somebody who I sense will contribute as much to my team that comes without a fee attached?



Most national firms pay for headhunter fees out of a centralized budget.  This allows firms to take advantage of opportunities wherever they find them.  This is especially true when the new BM at a competitor's branch turns out to be a jerk and his whole office decides to change firms simultaneously.

Managers rarely fill all of their slots with internal efforts.  Frankly, I think they have better things to do than prospect for brokers.  Their time is best spent on interviewing, negotiating, onboarding and retention. 

On the competetive side, we find the people who are "just curious" and get them the information they need to make a decision.  Once they're committed to leave, we help them find their best deal.

On the transition side (no book) we find experienced candidates with a much better than average chance of success compared to your typical new hire. 



NASD Newbie:

Why do I need a recruiter to tell me that Bob Broker at my
competitor is looking?  Why doesn't Bob get in touch with me himself
and negotiate a bigger signing bonus since Iwon't have to pay a
recruiter?




This is a pervasive and annoying myth.  In no cases will our fee reduce the available funds for your deal
(at a wirehouse).  In fact, it has been our experience that represented
brokers get better deals because they are better informed of market
conditions, manager personalities, timing considerations and the
immediate needs of different firms.

Since we do several kinds of candidates (from trainees to producers to
managers) we are in touch with our BMs and RMs on a regular basis. 
This regular contact helps our account managers gather information and
build relationships.



Look at it this way:  It is possible for investors to work without a
financial advisor.  But they are better informed (and get better
results) when they work with a good advisor.  The primary difference is the investor pays their FA, while the hiring brokerage pays us.