It's been the afternoon of IT recruiter idiocy. What on earth is up with the pimps? Why is it I keep getting really junior pimps who, the moment it looks like a company is actually interested in my luscious IT arse, have to refer it to their "colleague," i.e., boss? Oversupply of cheap recruiter labour, undersupply of jobs or what?
(a): Long rambling followup call where the guy takes five minutes to tell me that there's no progress with the client as yet. Um, okay. I have email for that. And you keep dropping random meaningless phrases into your stream of babble, presumably a mechanism you have developed (I hesitate to apply the word "evolved" to one such as yourself) so that people won't notice when you're trying to think of what to say next. It doesn't work. Cross-office solitaire competition palling, then?
(b): I get through the initial pimp screening call. (After I got her to admit she had not in fact read my CV.) She then says "I'll just forward your CV to my account manager." So they now have pimps screening the CVs for other pimps.
Junior pimps ... they're so cute. Like baby cockroaches.
Ofcoursemanyrecruitersarelovelypeopleincludingtheoneswhogotmemylastseveraljobsandofcoursetheoneswhoreadthisjournal. *exhale*
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 03:16 pm (UTC)But then she's actually a sub-editor herself, which makes all the difference in the world.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 03:17 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 03:22 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 03:19 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 03:24 pm (UTC)pjardente: spray or squash?
DavidGerard: i guess that's not most people's image of cute
DavidGerard: atom bomb them and they're still there
pjardente: not really cute
pjardente: my idea of cute is breasts popping out of a blouse!!
DavidGerard: sex with pimps? that's bestiality that is
pjardente: we could make web site!
pjardente: PIMP sex in Brazil!!
DavidGerard: YOUR KINK IS NOT OKAY
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 03:26 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 03:49 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 03:56 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 04:47 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 03:57 pm (UTC)What they're like from the other side is another matter entirely.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 04:14 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 04:28 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-27 09:26 am (UTC)Huxley have worked fairly well for me. Organised and competent on both the pimping and the back-office (payments & Timesheets) side. This is not universally true, even of the biggest recruitment consultancies.
The only other recruiters I'd recommend on the bankery geeking side are MKM partnership and Astbury Marsden.
As for the rest... the annoying (but not the worst) thing about them is the compulsive need to wrap everything in sales-patter - they have no respect for your time, even when you are under pressure for time and ask clear factual questions. This endless dissimulation is a sign of their internal confusion and uselessness.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 04:14 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 04:43 pm (UTC)There aren't any *jobs*, are there? There's just an industry built around CV collection.
*cries*
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 04:50 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 05:30 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-27 12:00 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 05:58 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 06:00 pm (UTC)In my career as a temp ho' I've had only two companies that did more than pad their databases: one sent me to several interviews and the other sent me to several actual jobs. That was how I ended up a full-time employee with the City of Seattle's IT shop. Most people here started out as contractors.
(no subject)
Date: 2006-04-26 08:38 pm (UTC)I thought it was just us...
Date: 2006-04-27 03:00 am (UTC)