Technology6 mins ago
Recruitment agencies dominating the jobs market..
16 Answers
How are people ever going to be able to secure long-term employment if agencies are allowed to dominate the jobs market as they do at present? Also they are encouraging employers to only want to hire people for short-term contracts rather than anything more secure.99.9% of jobs at Jobcentre plus(Minus?) can only be applied for through agencies instead of direct from the employer.You have to constantly pester them to get interviewed-which only gets you registered-after which they forget about you.Also there is an hour,or longer, of completing pointless tests. Anyone empathise?
Answers
1 to 16 of 16
In general terms I agree with you but as long as unemployment figures stay high and people from other countries in EU can come and work here the situation will not change.
It seems that lots of companies now have business plans built around the use of temporary staff.
It seems that lots of companies now have business plans built around the use of temporary staff.
21:09 Mon 19th Sep 2011
It's the employers who are driving this, you can't blame the agencies.
A lot of employers (like mine) are not allowed to take on new permanent staff at the moment, or if they do, they are for very short-term contracts. Staffing is at a minimum. Agencies avoid the need for expensive recruitment and selection, the agencies only put forward applicants who meet the employers' criteria.
The tests aren't pointless, everyone has to go through the literacy and numeracy hoops these days, adn you might be surprised to see what they throw up.
A lot of employers (like mine) are not allowed to take on new permanent staff at the moment, or if they do, they are for very short-term contracts. Staffing is at a minimum. Agencies avoid the need for expensive recruitment and selection, the agencies only put forward applicants who meet the employers' criteria.
The tests aren't pointless, everyone has to go through the literacy and numeracy hoops these days, adn you might be surprised to see what they throw up.
The RAs save a company spending time and money weeding out unsuitable applicants by sending them only people who meet their criteria. You would be amazed at the rubbish you get when not using an agency. I think they do vital work both in providing temps and full time staff. If companies didn't want to use their services then they wouldn't exist.
totally agree with you Funykrich.most of the jobs seem to be through agencies these days,when you phone about a particular job they are very vague.i dont think they have that particular vacany,e.g.WAREHOUUSE ASSISTANT they just want to bank loads of people with warehouse experience and say Fork truck drivers
It's part of the modern pattern of employment today. My brother's IT job disappears at the end of every year and each year he has to apply for another post in the company, knowing it will only last a year. My sister-in-law has a similar thing with another company - but her job goes every 9 months!
My neighbour works for a local music packing company who mostly employ agency staff. He says they daren't have a day off sick, take a holiday, be seen to be slacking, complain etc. He says the agency would just tell them there's no more work for them at the moment.
That says it all really. It's obvious to me that employers using agency staff feel they don't have the same employment constraints that apply to full-time staff.
'Time' magazine reported last week that there's much unrest in the US now about graduate 'internships'> Internships are similar to work experience where graduates are employed in a full-time post for no pay - or perhaps $50 per week - on the understanding they will be employed full-time after a year. The company just gets rid of them after 9 months and takes on another intern! It's common practice in the US apparently and it's starting in the UK now. The problem is that many US companies now won't employ anyone who hasn't had experience as an intern!
My neighbour works for a local music packing company who mostly employ agency staff. He says they daren't have a day off sick, take a holiday, be seen to be slacking, complain etc. He says the agency would just tell them there's no more work for them at the moment.
That says it all really. It's obvious to me that employers using agency staff feel they don't have the same employment constraints that apply to full-time staff.
'Time' magazine reported last week that there's much unrest in the US now about graduate 'internships'> Internships are similar to work experience where graduates are employed in a full-time post for no pay - or perhaps $50 per week - on the understanding they will be employed full-time after a year. The company just gets rid of them after 9 months and takes on another intern! It's common practice in the US apparently and it's starting in the UK now. The problem is that many US companies now won't employ anyone who hasn't had experience as an intern!
I've almost given up on applying for jobs offered through agencies. (There are one or two who occasionally bother to acknowledge an application but most of them don't even bother to reply).
Even when they've actually got work available they seem to discriminate on the grounds of age (and possibly gender), even though it's impossible to prove it.
I applied for a job through an agency and received a very enthusiastic phone call from them, but I was then asked if I was aware that the job was only part-time. I reached for the job advertisement, which I has to hand, and pointed out that it was advertised as full-time. The woman said "Oh, you applied for THAT job, did you. We thought it was for a different one" (despite the fact that my application clearly stated the job I'd applied for and included the agency's reference number). She said "Oh well, why don't you come in and register with us anyway, and we'll see if we can find you something".
Nearly a year after I'd registered, I was offered a few days casual work, doing 12 hour shifts in the pouring rain, on a traffic survey. When I got there I met another guy of around my age (50s) who had registered at the same time as me. We both had Microsoft Office skills and office-based experience at supervisory level. (The other guy had run a Government department, with 100 staff). But neither of us had been offered a single office-based job since we'd registered. There were also two young women, from the same agency, working on the traffic survey. They'd also registered about a year earlier but, despite very little previous experience, they told us that they'd been employed almost continuously throughout the year. Grrr!!!
Even when they've actually got work available they seem to discriminate on the grounds of age (and possibly gender), even though it's impossible to prove it.
I applied for a job through an agency and received a very enthusiastic phone call from them, but I was then asked if I was aware that the job was only part-time. I reached for the job advertisement, which I has to hand, and pointed out that it was advertised as full-time. The woman said "Oh, you applied for THAT job, did you. We thought it was for a different one" (despite the fact that my application clearly stated the job I'd applied for and included the agency's reference number). She said "Oh well, why don't you come in and register with us anyway, and we'll see if we can find you something".
Nearly a year after I'd registered, I was offered a few days casual work, doing 12 hour shifts in the pouring rain, on a traffic survey. When I got there I met another guy of around my age (50s) who had registered at the same time as me. We both had Microsoft Office skills and office-based experience at supervisory level. (The other guy had run a Government department, with 100 staff). But neither of us had been offered a single office-based job since we'd registered. There were also two young women, from the same agency, working on the traffic survey. They'd also registered about a year earlier but, despite very little previous experience, they told us that they'd been employed almost continuously throughout the year. Grrr!!!
It's not so much the temporary agency staff which are a cause of irritation. It's the fact that around 90% of all PERMANENT posts now advertised through Jobcentre Plus require applicants to go through an agency.
If, over a year, I see 200 jobs (with 200 different employers) which I think that I can really sell myself for, I'd like to be able to send my c.v. to each of those employers. With 200 different people looking at my c.v., there's a reasonable chance that someone might see something special in it.
However the reality is that nearly all of the 200 jobs will all be advertised through just 4 or 5 agencies. So I have to write to the same person dozens of times each year, knowing that the person who will be reading my c.v. has already binned it several hundred times over the past few years (without ever having had the courtesy to even acknowledge receipt of it).
If, over a year, I see 200 jobs (with 200 different employers) which I think that I can really sell myself for, I'd like to be able to send my c.v. to each of those employers. With 200 different people looking at my c.v., there's a reasonable chance that someone might see something special in it.
However the reality is that nearly all of the 200 jobs will all be advertised through just 4 or 5 agencies. So I have to write to the same person dozens of times each year, knowing that the person who will be reading my c.v. has already binned it several hundred times over the past few years (without ever having had the courtesy to even acknowledge receipt of it).
Sorry for the hijack too Funkyrich.
I was in business for twelve years hc4361. The reason I'm not now is due to how business owners are now treated in the UK. I was so continually beaten over the head by the Inland Revenue, VAT, Health and Safety, National Insurance, employment legislation etc that I eventually sold the company. Bear in mind that I never did anything wrong and operated the business legally and efficiently - but they actually succeeded in breaking me! Then, the only time all those organisations were pleasant was when I announced I had sold the company - and they suggested I start another saying the country needs employers etc!
It's not just employees that get treated as badly as they do now, but employers and business owners too.
I was in business for twelve years hc4361. The reason I'm not now is due to how business owners are now treated in the UK. I was so continually beaten over the head by the Inland Revenue, VAT, Health and Safety, National Insurance, employment legislation etc that I eventually sold the company. Bear in mind that I never did anything wrong and operated the business legally and efficiently - but they actually succeeded in breaking me! Then, the only time all those organisations were pleasant was when I announced I had sold the company - and they suggested I start another saying the country needs employers etc!
It's not just employees that get treated as badly as they do now, but employers and business owners too.
1 to 16 of 16
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles15 mins ago
What Is Blood Sugar And Why Is It...
How it Works43 mins ago
News75 mins ago
Businesses Warn Of Job Losses Threat As...
News126 mins ago
News128 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.