• MP79 (unregistered)

    Hardly the first time someone's been recruited to their own position. I think I remember snoofle talking about it happening once. Of course the obligatory BOFH reference should be mentioned as well :)

  • (cs)

    Intertrodeception!

  • (cs)

    I suppose we should carefully step around the pile of WTF that RJ himself crapped on the floor, then?

    Even if you ignore the rudeness of asking someone to send you something by email and then deleting the message without replying when there's something missing, it fails miserably on the practicalities aspect.

    Sure, Brandon was pretty much a screw-up of the sort that's common among recruiters, but black-holing his email and criticising him for lack of follow-through isn't going to help.

  • (cs)

    Brandon should be cut some slack. Rightly or wrongly, he was stuck taking care of the president's daughter. That's just how it was back then.

  • in-house-recursivity (unregistered)

    I had this same thing happen to me. But it was the HR of the company I was working with who contacted me for a position. So it's WTF^2.

    They grabbed a list of Zend Certified engineers and mailed them all. They didn't even check if any of those engineers were already working for them.

  • (cs)

    Stupid recruiters never fail to amuse me. Yet companies insist on using these clowns.

  • (cs)

    It would have been more fun to ask Brandon to phone RJ and see what Intertrode had made of his CV. See how many times you can get Brandon to bounce between RJ the candidate and RJ the employer before he drops the penny...

  • I know! I'll hire Me! (unregistered)

    So, RJ quits his HR position to hire himself for a senior .NET developer position. It's the ultimate in nepotism and cronyism all rolled into the same Bob Joe. RJ should call himself BJ, right after he gives himself one.

  • Cujo (unregistered)

    A recruiter that sent a resume along without asking the candidate? I had that happen to me once only. I don't deal with them or their company any more which cost them a pretty penny over the last 15 years.

    I won't mention the employer he was shucking for but the CIO was, and still is, a psycho and over the years I keep getting mail about the position from various recruiters. Each time I take the time to speak to them and find out the CIO is still there I mention what a bipolar freakshow the CIO is, they already know about it and probably wish I didn't. I actually feel bad for people who have to deal with nutjobs like that. I still can't believe the CIO is still there, but then again, I can't believe anyone would want to steal this bozo away.

  • ReallyStupidGuy (unregistered)

    "RJ did have to give Brandon some credit this time though. He finally found a viable candidate for a senior .NET developer position."

    Did he really? It seems that it is quite an assumption that Brandon did, just this once, not mail an underqualified candidate.

  • (cs)

    Unless US resumes are very different from UK ones (apart from us calling it a CV, of course) surely RJ's resume would have details of his current job on? At which point it's questionable whether Brandon actually read RJ's resume, or just found someone looking for a tech position and forwarded it on regardless...

  • faoileag (unregistered)
    the article said:
    RJ’s personal cell phone started ringing with a strange number showing on the caller ID. Since he was bored, he decided to answer.
    So if he hadn't been bored (e.g. because he had been reading TDWTF) he wouldn't have answered the phone when an unknown number shows up? After he had just posted his resume with his personal cell phone number as contact information?

    RJ can't be that desperate then to find a new job.

  • (cs) in reply to Steve The Cynic
    Steve The Cynic:
    Even if you ignore the *rudeness* of asking someone to send you something by email and then deleting the message without replying when there's something missing, it fails miserably on the practicalities aspect.

    Sure, Brandon was pretty much a screw-up of the sort that's common among recruiters, but black-holing his email and criticising him for lack of follow-through isn't going to help.

    Kneel before Steve the Cynic. He knows not fear, nor remorse, and certainly not the fatigue of being forced to handle two incompetent entities who always seem to make the same mistakes, in one case because apparently they are incentivised to lie and in both cases because they are not made accountable for making things harder for other people.

    Steve the Cynic strides through such trivialities, for these are the concerns of mortals and Steve is a machine-god, motivated like the sun and patient like the dead.

  • faoileag (unregistered) in reply to Shoreline
    Shoreline:
    Steve is a machine-god, motivated like the sun and patient like the dead.
    "Motivated like the sun"??? I thought a beetle has to push it to work every morning? That's hardly motivated behaviour, that is.
  • (cs) in reply to Shoreline
    Shoreline:
    Steve The Cynic:
    Even if you ignore the *rudeness* of asking someone to send you something by email and then deleting the message without replying when there's something missing, it fails miserably on the practicalities aspect.

    Sure, Brandon was pretty much a screw-up of the sort that's common among recruiters, but black-holing his email and criticising him for lack of follow-through isn't going to help.

    Kneel before Steve the Cynic. He knows not fear, nor remorse, and certainly not the fatigue of being forced to handle two incompetent entities who always seem to make the same mistakes, in one case because apparently they are incentivised to lie and in both cases because they are not made accountable for making things harder for other people.

    Steve the Cynic strides through such trivialities, for these are the concerns of mortals and Steve is a machine-god, motivated like the sun and patient like the dead.

    I think Steve the Cynic is a pretty cool guy. Eh trolls TDWTF and doesn't afraid of anything.

  • (cs) in reply to JimM
    JimM:
    Unless US resumes are very different from UK ones (apart from us calling it a CV, of course) surely RJ's resume would have details of his current job on? At which point it's questionable whether Brandon actually read RJ's resume, or just found someone looking for a tech position and forwarded it on regardless...

    The story seems to indicate that Brandon is just one of those "fake" recruiters that don't actually talk to candidates but will fish for resumes and send them off, hoping to land it and step in to collect the finder's fee. If he contacted RJ (as the job seeker) beforehand, RJ would have known that it's the same position. The story makes it sound like Brandon found the resume, passed it to RJ (as the person hiring) and THEN contacted RJ (as the candidate) after he had submitted him, without putting two and two together.

  • (cs) in reply to JimM
    JimM:
    Unless US resumes are very different from UK ones (apart from us calling it a CV, of course) surely RJ's resume would have details of his current job on?

    There's an issue with a measurable amount of recruiters in the U.S. these days. I'm dealing with that as I'm trying to get back to the SF Bay from TX.

    Recruiters these days who cold call and ask for an updated Word (I post PDFs for compatibility) resume are hoping to get their grubby hands on it so they can anonymize it to ensure the hiring company will not have a way to contact you. And of course, they won't tell you anything about the company so you don't do the reverse.

    It's kind of amusing in a sad way. It's actually made me kill my accounts on Dice and Monster and actually work on trying to rebuild my network back in SF.

  • QJo (unregistered) in reply to I know! I'll hire Me!
    I know! I'll hire Me!:
    So, RJ quits his HR position to hire himself for a senior .NET developer position. It's the ultimate in nepotism and cronyism all rolled into the same Bob Joe. RJ should call himself BJ, right after he gives himself one.

    He should have employed himself and consequently paid himself a double paycheck.

  • Harken (unregistered) in reply to QJo
    QJo:
    He should have employed himself and consequently paid himself a double paycheck.
    Didn't one of the horrible bosses in Horrible Bosses give himself a promotion, double paycheck, and double office?
  • anonymous (unregistered) in reply to Steve The Cynic
    Steve The Cynic:
    Even if you ignore the *rudeness* of asking someone to send you something by email and then deleting the message without replying when there's something missing, it fails miserably on the practicalities aspect.

    Sure, Brandon was pretty much a screw-up of the sort that's common among recruiters, but black-holing his email and criticising him for lack of follow-through isn't going to help.

    Well, there wasn't anything missing, per se... his second e-mail had the resumes attached. The candidates weren't qualified, but that's nothing that the recruiter could fix short of finding more candidates and I suspect he intended to do that anyway. Telling him to keep 'em coming was hardly necessary. I agree that black-holing the e-mail was a little bit overboard, though. That's what the archive is for.
    faoileag:
    the article said:
    RJ’s personal cell phone started ringing with a strange number showing on the caller ID. Since he was bored, he decided to answer.
    So if he hadn't been bored (e.g. because he had been reading TDWTF) he wouldn't have answered the phone when an unknown number shows up? After he had just posted his resume with his personal cell phone number as contact information?

    RJ can't be that desperate then to find a new job.

    Never heard of voicemail?

  • Chris Allen-Poole (unregistered)

    The real WTF is LinkedIn. The people who get candidates from there are trolls. I'm tempted to make a policy, "if a recruiter gets a résumé from LinkedIn, I will no longer work with that recruiter."

  • (cs) in reply to SeekerOfThings
    SeekerOfThings:
    Recruiters these days who cold call and ask for an updated Word (I post PDFs for compatibility) resume are hoping to get their grubby hands on it so they can anonymize it to ensure the hiring company will not have a way to contact you.

    That's possible, but kind of misses my point, as to do that Brandon would have to read the resume first to find out which bits to change.

    AFAICT RJ's current job is head of the development team, or some similar position, at Intertrode. Presumably, his resume includes his current job details, so his resume will say that he's head of the development team at Intertrode (no doubt it has amore impressive-sounding job title than that, though ;) ).

    So if Brandon had bothered to even read the resume, he'd know that the resume he plans to sent to the head of the development team at Intertrode, is from the head of the development team at Intertrode. Yet he still sends it.

    So, either Brandon doesn't even read the resumes before he forwards them on, or he's so dim that he can't even tell when he's sending someone their own resume.

    All of which just goes to prove that recruitment agencies are generally appalling, and should be avoided as much as humanly possible.

    *interesting aside

    I probably shouldn't complain too hard about this, actually: the job I had when i first started reading this site years back was found through a recruitment agency. They contacted me with a job that seemed to match my skills, and was paid at about the level I was expecting, and asked if they could put my CV forward. I agreed (obviously), and sure enough got the job. A few weeks after I started, while talking to one of my new colleagues, they told me a little story about how the head of IT sent them my CV along with an email saying didn't I look perfect and he'd get me on board ASAP. The new colleague apparently sought out the head of IT, printed copy of my CV in hand, gave them it, and said "where's his IIS experience"?

    Yes, for a specialist IIS support officer job, I'd submitted a CV that didn't even mention IIS doh Fortunately, i did have IIS experience, and I left that (temporary) job 6 months later with an enhanced CV and a glowing reference. But boy was I lucky that the agent & head of IT didn't read my CV properly...

  • James Rose (unregistered)

    Funny story, and I could so see it coming. The real WTF is recruiters. In 20+ years in IT I have yet to meet a single recruiter that had a clue.

    I even met with one recruiter, a guy in his early 20s who had never even owned a computer! WTF?! What kind of technical recruiting company hires a recruiter with THAT much lack of experience? oh yea, all of them.

    Beyond the usual lies, I've had recruiters add technologies to my resume and then get mad at me for not know those technologies. My current resume states NYC and Perm only, but every single day I get calls for temp jobs thousands of miles away.

    Ok, so I'm venting. <sigh>

  • (cs) in reply to I know! I'll hire Me!
    I know! I'll hire Me!:
    So, RJ quits his HR position to hire himself for a senior .NET developer position. It's the ultimate in nepotism and cronyism all rolled into the same Bob Joe. RJ should call himself BJ, right after he gives himself one.
    Will Ferrell SNL yoga skit...
  • (cs)

    Online resumes often have the current employer's name redacted for what should be obvious reasons.

  • Valerion (unregistered)

    The company I work for got so fed up with useless recruitment agencies sending absolute dross through to us that they actually started their own agency that concentrated on hiring for us, but did work for others too.

    Eventually, they shut it down because they too were shit.

    There are only 2 logical conclusions to this:

    1 - All recruiters are shit. 2 - Most candidates are also shit.

  • (cs) in reply to operagost
    operagost:
    Online resumes often have the current employer's name redacted for what should be obvious reasons.

    Ah, this is going to be one of those "we don't want employee rights because they'll cost rich people money" things, isn't it...? ;)

    Frankly, any mature employer is going to understand that their current employees may be looking for new opportunities, and any mature employee shouldn't mind their current employer knowing. There is no good reason to redact relevant details out of a resume.

    And I'd've thought the full details would still have been available to recruiting agents when they download them - particularly because you're otherwise likely to get this kind of situation.

    In fact, if people anonymise their current employer on their resume, or online recruitment sites redact the current employer automatically, they are both HUGE WTFs in their own right. And I'll be fascinated to hear what people come up with in an attempt to defend those positions.

  • (cs)

    TRWTF is companies are allowed to tell their employees that they can only use certain recruiters/channels to look for employees. That should be illegal. The world would be a much better place if that were the case.

  • dangerdad (unregistered) in reply to James Rose
    James Rose:
    My current resume states NYC and Perm only, but every single day I get calls for temp jobs thousands of miles away.
    Dude, this times 1000. I am so sick of this happening. No recruiter even notices those. It's part of the spam mentality I think--it costs nothing to spam out everyone who has a skill match, but would take work to find which ones might actually fit the job.
  • Calli Arcale (unregistered) in reply to chubertdev
    chubertdev:
    TRWTF is companies are allowed to tell their employees that they can only use certain recruiters/channels to look for employees. That should be illegal. The world would be a much better place if that were the case.

    Why? As stupid as stories like this are, there's nothing inherently wrong with requiring your employees use particular agencies for recruitment. It's just another form of outsourcing; hiring a company to recruit for you isn't, on a high level, any different from hiring a company to advertise for you or provide IT services for you or provide security for you or asset management or whatever.

    There's nothing wrong with a recruiting firm offering exclusive contracts. Indeed, those might be better, because if you have an exclusive contract, you might be paying them a flat rate rather than per hire. Recruiters who are paid per hire are far more motivated to lie about a particular prospective hire.

  • (cs) in reply to Calli Arcale
    Calli Arcale:
    chubertdev:
    TRWTF is companies are allowed to tell their employees that they can only use certain recruiters/channels to look for employees. That should be illegal. The world would be a much better place if that were the case.

    Why? As stupid as stories like this are, there's nothing inherently wrong with requiring your employees use particular agencies for recruitment. It's just another form of outsourcing; hiring a company to recruit for you isn't, on a high level, any different from hiring a company to advertise for you or provide IT services for you or provide security for you or asset management or whatever.

    There's nothing wrong with a recruiting firm offering exclusive contracts. Indeed, those might be better, because if you have an exclusive contract, you might be paying them a flat rate rather than per hire. Recruiters who are paid per hire are far more motivated to lie about a particular prospective hire.

    Because this article happens. A lot.

  • (cs) in reply to Valerion
    Valerion:
    The company I work for got so fed up with useless recruitment agencies sending absolute dross through to us that they actually started their own agency that concentrated on hiring for us, but did work for others too.

    Eventually, they shut it down because they too were shit.

    There are only 2 logical conclusions to this:

    1 - All recruiters are shit. 2 - Most candidates are also shit.

    3 - You're not (It is hard to be humble when you ARE perfect in every way).

    FTFY (Although many people might not agree)

    Joke Alert (maybe not?)

  • James Rose (unregistered) in reply to dangerdad

    Thank you kindly for the acknowledgement. I'm starting to feel a little insane about this.

    My "favorite" is when they call with a contract and I say; "thank you, but I am only looking for a permanent position" to which they answer; "but it's a long term" (and this has been said about a 3 month contract.

    I love what I do, and I strongly believe in Institutional Memory and that contractors have a value for a quick fix, but when i hear about long term contracts I feel like management doesn't see the value of a developer.

    Have a great day.

  • (cs)

    Let me check my email quickly...

    Permanent, San Diego No location, SFDC, which I say that I don't want on my resume Permanent, no location (assuming San Diego) Cupertino, SFDC Direct hire, LAMP (I'm a .NET guy), no location Mountain View, SFDC 6 month contract, "Web Quality Analyst", San Diego 3 month contract to hire, San Diego Permanent, San Diego

    So in the past few months, without even looking (this is all coming from looking about a year ago), I have a few that even match what I want (.NET, full time, San Diego).

    And this doesn't even factor in all of the ones that I probably deleted.

  • emaN ruoY (unregistered) in reply to chubertdev
    chubertdev:
    TRWTF is companies are allowed to tell their employees that they can only use certain recruiters/channels to look for employees. That should be illegal. The world would be a much better place if that were the case.

    Illegal for management within a company to do what it wants within the purview of its own business? Are you now going to tell us that it should be illegal to not hire any Jane or Joe walking in off the street that wants a job because everyone deserves a job?

  • An innocent abroad (unregistered) in reply to Steve The Cynic
    Steve The Troll:
    Sure, Brandon was pretty much a screw-up of the sort that's common among recruiters, but black-holing his email and criticising him for lack of follow-through isn't going to help.

    Yes, because it's every techie's duty to be educating the hard-of-thinking, during work hours. Because there's not enough stuff to do for them [since they've been automating everything, with computers, duh -- another few years and IT people have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do anymore, as they'll have written failsafe geek simulators; it's a dying industry I tell you].

  • (cs) in reply to emaN ruoY
    emaN ruoY:
    chubertdev:
    TRWTF is companies are allowed to tell their employees that they can only use certain recruiters/channels to look for employees. That should be illegal. The world would be a much better place if that were the case.

    Illegal for management within a company to do what it wants within the purview of its own business? Are you now going to tell us that it should be illegal to not hire any Jane or Joe walking in off the street that wants a job because everyone deserves a job?

    Yeah, sure..........

  • asdfg (unregistered) in reply to James Rose
    James Rose:
    Funny story, and I could so see it coming. The real WTF is recruiters. In 20+ years in IT I have yet to meet a single recruiter that had a clue.
    It is relatively hard for non technical people to vet technical candidates and the ones that are good at it tend to charge a bit more but they do exist. I've got 3-4 go to ones that I use when I can get the bosses to pony up for them... otherwise I might as well just go through hundreds of resumes myself.
  • (cs) in reply to asdfg
    asdfg:
    James Rose:
    Funny story, and I could so see it coming. The real WTF is recruiters. In 20+ years in IT I have yet to meet a single recruiter that had a clue.
    It is relatively hard for non technical people to vet technical candidates and the ones that are good at it tend to charge a bit more but they do exist. I've got 3-4 go to ones that I use when I can get the bosses to pony up for them... otherwise I might as well just go through hundreds of resumes myself.

    80/20 rule yet again. 80 percent of recruiters aren't worth the dandruff of the other 20 percent.

  • James Rose (unregistered) in reply to chubertdev

    I agree completely on the point that it difficult (impossible?) for non technical managers to hire technical recruits. MY issue is that the recruiters have less knowledge than those managers. The number of times I have had to explain to a recruiter that .Net does not necessarily equal web, and that I can, and have, build desktop and phone apps with .Net and that even Mac and Linux apps can be made using the Mono Project.

    Again, my issue is management not understanding the lack of value of the recruiters. Since posting my note a few hours ago I have had 3 calls and 7 emails for contract work outside NYC. This is my usual day. There has to be a better way for those who have ignorance to find the solution they need

  • Paul Neumann (unregistered) in reply to Valerion
    Valerion:
    The company I work for got so fed up with useless recruitment agencies sending absolute dross through to us that they actually started their own agency that concentrated on hiring for us, but did work for others too.

    Eventually, they shut it down because they too were shit.

    There are only 2 logical conclusions to this:

    1 - All recruiters are shit. 2 - Most candidates are also shit.

    Prey tell, which conclusion is correct?

  • (cs)

    I'm impressed; this is one of the few times I've seen someone get a Creative Commons image from Wikimedia and actually manage to follow the license correctly, with credit to the actual creator and the right license and all.

  • (cs) in reply to MP79

    What is BOFH?

  • The happy Bunny (unregistered) in reply to James Rose

    I, on the other hand would NEVER take a permanent job - it exposes you to horrendous office politics and endless bullying ("you will take your annual leave when I say, not when your wife says!)

  • (cs) in reply to The happy Bunny
    The happy Bunny:
    I, on the other hand would NEVER take a permanent job - it exposes you to horrendous office politics and endless bullying ("you will take your annual leave when I say, not when your wife says!)
    It must suck to work somewhere like that. Not all places are that bad though.
  • anonymous (unregistered) in reply to Paul Neumann
    Paul Neumann:
    Valerion:
    The company I work for got so fed up with useless recruitment agencies sending absolute dross through to us that they actually started their own agency that concentrated on hiring for us, but did work for others too.

    Eventually, they shut it down because they too were shit.

    There are only 2 logical conclusions to this:

    1 - All recruiters are shit. 2 - Most candidates are also shit.

    Prey tell, which conclusion is correct?
    Where did he say that one of them wasn't?

  • (cs) in reply to dkf
    dkf:
    The happy Bunny:
    I, on the other hand would NEVER take a permanent job - it exposes you to horrendous office politics and endless bullying ("you will take your annual leave when I say, not when your wife says!)
    It must suck to work somewhere like that. Not all places are that bad though.

    No kidding. My current place sure isn't.

  • Paul Neumann (unregistered) in reply to anonymous
    anonymous:
    Paul Neumann:
    Valerion:
    The company I work for got so fed up with useless recruitment agencies sending absolute dross through to us that they actually started their own agency that concentrated on hiring for us, but did work for others too.

    Eventually, they shut it down because they too were shit.

    There are only 2 logical conclusions to this:

    1 - All recruiters are shit. 2 - Most candidates are also shit.

    Prey tell, which conclusion is correct?
    Where did he say that one of them wasn't?
    Where did I say he said that neither which werent't?

  • (cs)

    mwahahahahahaha

    [image]
  • (cs) in reply to chubertdev
    chubertdev:
    Let me check my email quickly...

    Permanent, San Diego No location, SFDC, which I say that I don't want on my resume Permanent, no location (assuming San Diego) Cupertino, SFDC Direct hire, LAMP (I'm a .NET guy), no location Mountain View, SFDC 6 month contract, "Web Quality Analyst", San Diego 3 month contract to hire, San Diego Permanent, San Diego

    So in the past few months, without even looking (this is all coming from looking about a year ago), I have a few that even match what I want (.NET, full time, San Diego).

    And this doesn't even factor in all of the ones that I probably deleted.

    From the trash:

    San Diego, SFDC, full time Florida, SFDC, full time San Diego, .NET, full time Cupertino, SFDC, full time Mountain View, .NET, full time Tucson, .NET, full time Bloomington, IL, SFDC, full time Hartford, .NET, full time

    I guess that I permanently deleted all of the Qualcomm 3-6 month contract emails, and all of the Robert Half ones (which I would get 4-5 times a week). I could have also sworn that I had some from Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Leave a comment on “Recursive Recruiting”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article