Recruitment agencies impersonating in-house recruiters

[sal]

All the same, if an agency is hoping to make financial gain by deceiving contractors - and wasting their valuable job finding time - then that is crossing the line.

So you decided to waste some policeman time as well...

On the main topic, do you have a proof that it was an impersonation and not a genuine in-house recruiter or is it just a "gut feeling"? Did you give the references over the phone instead of sending them to an e-mail address with the appropriate domain name?

[tinopener]

I have done wrong.

I am now going to the police station to hand myself in for wasting police time.

Goodbye everybody, and sorry for wasting your time.

[northernladuk]

So you decided to waste some policeman time as well...

Could be a policewoman.. or a civilian operative.

On the main topic, do you have a proof that it was an impersonation and not a genuine in-house recruiter or is it just a "gut feeling"? Did you give the references over the phone instead of sending them to an e-mail address with the appropriate domain name?

What does it matter?

[TheFaQQer]

What does it matter?

If an agent rings you and says "I'm calling from IBM blah blah - can you email me your references?" and then gives you an email address of "[email protected]", then you should be able to spot that they aren't really who they said that they were.

[kal]

If an agent rings you and says "I'm calling from IBM blah blah - can you email me your references?" and then gives you an email address of "[email protected]", then you should be able to spot that they aren't really who they said that they were.

Indeed, funniest is when I get a bob agent contacting me via LinkedIn asking me to 'revert my CV to [email protected]'

[northernladuk]

I think you are personalising this. This is a deliberate business practice carried out by a significant number of agencies.

I'm fascinated that you seem to want to dismiss these types of activities as "just business". I tend to see this as more of a PPI type of deal where eventually there will be legislation or direct enforcement action by the data protection registrar on a significant number of agencies.

That's very nice.... but generally it is just business and can be managed as you can see in the two references section. This only becomes an issue when people don't deal with it properly. The first port of call would be the agents bodies as well. Did people go straight to the police when they were unhappy about their PPI? Did they bollocks. Eventually there might be but there isn't now so why do you think the police will be interested.

You've got to apply a bit of common sense and logic to the situation. Calling the police just because you've been had by some dodgy sales tactics is hardly a measured and managed reaction. In fact, PPI is out in the open.... and still the police are not involved.

If you are so strongly against this and want to make a difference why not do a bit of research and avail us with the relevant legislation and guidance to prove there is an issue here?

EDIT : Oh and..

I'm fascinated that you seem to want to dismiss these types of activities as "just business".

Well in the paragraph above you call it...

This is a deliberate business practice carried out by a significant number of agencies

So you say it's a fairly common business practice so surely it's just business??!?!?

EDIT 2 : Oh and remember PPI wasn't a failed product, it was just miss-sold to some people that wouldn't have gotten benefit from it so a really poor example. You were also paying for it so can prove loss so have a claim. There is no loss here, except for the loss of a few tears by the look of it.

[psychocandy]

Except that being a scumbag isn't breaking the law so they wouldn't.

Debatable and difficult to prove if an agent claims to be 'from' a client rather than 'representing'.

Can imagine the call.

Police: Hello this is the police. We've had complaints of you getting information by pretending to be from XYZ.

Agency: No they must have misheard. I said representing XYZ.

Police: OK sorry for wasting your time. Bye.

[psychocandy]

I think you are personalising this. This is a deliberate business practice carried out by a significant number of agencies.

I'm fascinated that you seem to want to dismiss these types of activities as "just business". I tend to see this as more of a PPI type of deal where eventually there will be legislation or direct enforcement action by the data protection registrar on a significant number of agencies.

Your not wrong of course and maybe your right to take a stand but look at all the things agents do? A lot of it borderline illegal IMHO anyway and certainly dodgy dealing. Where do you start?

[northernladuk]

Your not wrong of course and maybe your right to take a stand but look at all the things agents do? A lot of it borderline illegal IMHO anyway and certainly dodgy dealing. Where do you start?

With a box of tissues..

Or how about REC to take it to source or PCG to push it. It's funny how the people that get most upset about this appear to be the ones with the least understanding of what to do about it. Speaks volumes.

[northernladuk]

Debatable and difficult to prove if an agent claims to be 'from' a client rather than 'representing'.

And what law has been broken here?