Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site sol1.UUCP Path: utzoo!decvax!harpo!whuxlm!akgua!sol1!sue From: sue@sol1.UUCP (sue) Newsgroups: net.news,net.followup Subject: Recruiter Responds (long) Message-ID: <259@sol1.UUCP> Date: Mon, 18-Feb-85 11:29:19 EST Article-I.D.: sol1.259 Posted: Mon Feb 18 11:29:19 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 20-Feb-85 04:09:55 EST Reply-To: sue@sol1.UUCP (Susan Wulf) Distribution: na Organization: THE SOLUTION, Lincoln, NE Lines: 393 Xref: sol1 net.news:1181 net.followup:1428 Okay, boys and girls.... You've had yours, now I get mine. It seems there is a general lack of understanding out there with regard to just what it is a recruiter (or in your favorite, slang... headhunter) does and just how the work is accomplished. Follows, a brief explanation of some of the most misunderstood elements. Companies (clients) agree to work with me in order that they may receive only qualified candidates for positions they have open. This process saves those clients from having to separate the wheat from the chaf themselves - saving them precious man-hour dollars. Apparently more dollars than what my fee amounts to or they wouldn't come back time and again to further utilize the service I offer them. REVIEW: Clients pay my fees, not my candidates. My commodity is people, i.e. (candidates). I am not "advertising" my commodity. I am posting jobs for people who may be interested in those jobs which my clients have open. It may be interesting to you who are so terribly inflamed, that the very employers who are paying for your UUCP transfers are often the same parties who are also paying my fee. Seems to me that cleaning up the junk-mail you flamers generate would save your employers more money than what it costs them to transfer my postings. Many of you have mentioned you feel things would be just ducky if I were to make public the names of the clients as well as a client contact person. Yes, I suppose you WOULD like that! But you see, that defeats the intent of the client ... to have me do their sifting for them. They don't WANT to hear from you directly. The alternative to my not posting my openings as I do is probably your not hearing of them at all. Following: a mixed-bag of support & "other" mail, interspersed with some comments of my own with regard to it. > My personal opinion: the presence of recruiting info on the net (which your > company pays for) is analogous to the job ads in the back of the tech maga- > zines that your company pays for. It's not the main reason you pay for the > service, and you don't really lose that many people because of it. If net. > jobs continues to exist, let it be open to any and all recruiting activities. Jim (Mac) McParland / Cap Gemini DASD on assignment to: AT&T Information Systems > I agree with sue@sol1's viewpoint on this matter. It does > seem to me that the original complaint has its foundation in sour > grapes ... after all, how many psychologists get jobs in this > fashion? From a psych student, - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Henry C. Mensch | User Confuser | Purdue University User Services {ihnp4|decvax|icalqa|purdue|uiucdcs|cbosgd|harpo}!pur-ee!pucc-i!ag5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - "Hope is the thing with feathers." > ......................................... This means that the kind of > person reading the net is changing-- less technical or computer oriented, > and less knowledgable or interested in the ramifications of their postings. > They don't know about uucp, or uucp costs and overheads, multipoint > networks, software overheads, and the like. They know personnel, marketing, > scheduling, or whatever. RESPONSE: Know your subject matter. I may not be as knowledgeable as some of you old-timers but am not totally oblivious to technical, computer-oriented matters myself. Part of what makes me a successful EDP recruiter is my background. Six lab hours away from my degree, I was forced into educational limbo as a result of personal economics. For the past six years I have programmed on an IBM mainframe, an Apple II+ and for the past 2+ years, have worked on UNIX systems (mostly as a user). I know four languages and am working on a fifth, 'C'. I work in a people-oriented profession because I enjoy people much more than long hours, sitting speechlessly before a terminal. I know about UUCP, it's associated costs, multipoint networks, software overheads, etc. I merely didn't feel it necessary to qualify myself to all of you in this specific manner with grande bravado. sol1!sue >If you want complete freedom of the net, everyone else gets it, too... RESPONSE: Seems righteous enough! sol1!sue -- From the ministry of silly talks: Chuq Von Rospach > Bridges run both ways. As long as you want the advantages of a free and unre- > stricted network you have to also accept the limitations-- we all know these > quite well-- innapropriate postings, endless duplications, useless banter, > wild flaming, and other useful additions to our little group. -- RESPONSE: This was of particular interest to me and you'll see other reference to the subject later on as well. Many have claimed their employers pay UUCP so that they can enhance their work-skills via the Net (and have flamed my use of usenet on behalf of their employers w/regard to associated expenses). This leaves one to wonder exactly what percentage of y'all use the Net soley for the purpose your boss *thinks* you use it. How many of you are being paid $$$/hr. by the boss-man while posting to flames (playing Rogue, etc.); not to mention the phone bill the gracious man/entity endures to transfer those mental enimas. Sue From the ministry of silly talks: Chuq Von Rospach From: ndiamond@watdaisy.UUCP (Norman Diamond) > Why don't we create net.jobs.hh ? Norman Diamond RESPONSE: Now there's a *constructive* suggestion. I read .flames and .followup for quite awhile with mild interest and without becoming actively involved simply because the subject matter didn't stir me. Now, of course, that's been different lately due to the draw of the matter. POINT: No one made me read those postings... I did so because I was looking for something that may have been of interest. My contention is that if you're not interested in looking for a job, you probably won't be reading Net.jobs *and* that if you are looking for a job, even casually, your chances of finding a prospect are only increased via increased postings. If net. jobs.hh is THE place to post, then I'll be happy to comply. sol1!sue From: gam@amdahl.UUCP (gam) Organization: Blue Mouse Trailer Resort, Hellmouth, CA > It is very simple, really. If "The Solution" becomes a conduit for > advertising to Usenet, I will no longer allow their articles to pass > thru here. This applies to any other site wishing to post advertisements > (as opposed to press announcements or individuals' commercial > transactions). > Other sites can act as they want in this matter. If they feel I am > wrong they can cut of news to me; if I is right then the goal > has been accomplished. -- Gordon A. Moffett ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,sun}!amdahl!gam From: ihnp4!lanl!unm-la!jay (Jay Plett) > You may have noticed that your postings are generating a fair amount > of negative response on the net. I agree. > Please discontinue your use of the net for commercial advertising > purposes. > As system manager at this site, I am considering discarding all postings > from your site. -- Jay Plett RESPONSE: Apparantly, Someone has died and left individuals such as your- selves God. The Net in general has *already* made it clear, common concensus that they will not tolerate individuals who cling to attitudes such as yours. Would you both support book-burnings too? sol1!sue > ............................................................. I'd hate to > stop getting a group because someone three links back cut it off in his own > disgust (yes, I know: "Go find another feed..."). I mean, I can see people > deciding that there's too much dreck in net.sources and cutting it off > completely.... -Dragon UUCP: ...ucbvax!dual!lll-crg!dragon RESPONSE: Hear, hear! sol1!sue From: rmf@petfe.UUCP (Ralph M. Friedman) [] >> Your hysteria seems to be taking up more space than the postings that >> you are ranting about. > Ditto. -- Jack Hagouel ..!ittvax!hagouel (203) 929-7341 RESPONSE: -posted to Net.jobs in general for the flamers to see, I quite agree. sol1!sue From: steiny@scc.UUCP (Don Steiny) > Aren't there many students that use the net? Headhunters > might be helpful to them. I have met many headhunters in my career > and some of them are creeps and some of them are nice. One called > me periodically for a few years and when a friend graduated from > college (who I recommended as a UNIX expert) the headhunter > spend weeks getting him job interviews and such. That sure beats > the hell out of going to "recuitment day" and going to the tables > signing up for interviews. After all, headhunters talk money. > When I first started programming professionally I had no > idea what the going rate was. -- scc!steiny Don Steiny - Personetics @ (408) 425-0382 ihnp4!pesnta -\ 109 Torrey Pine Terr. fortune!idsvax -> scc!steiny Santa Cruz, Calif. 95060 ucbvax!twg -/ From: ritzenth@bgsuvax.UUCP (Phil Ritzenthaler) > ENOUGH ALREADY ABOUT HEADHUNTERS ON NET.JOBS. If you have a discussion about > this, there are other nets more appropriate. > I am not saying that this discussion is not important, it is just that I look > at this net for jobs, not discussions or flaming. Thanks P. J. Ritzenthaler RESPONSE: Don't know about the rest of you :-) but that's all I was using it for..... sol1!sue From: jjk@burl.UUCP (jjk) > I think the objection here is not about "commercial uses of net.jobs" > so much as the posting of "blind" ads. The thing that makes the postings > of headhunters annoying -- and distinguishable -- is that they do not > name the companies for whom the jobs are publicized. > > If we allow AA Personnel (or whoever) to post such blind ads, we are > giving them a commercial advantage over their competitors, who will > rightly claim that if AA can do it, they should, too! I think it > is best to not allow such blind ads at all, and thereby avoid the > problem of where to draw the line for commericial uses of Usenet. > -- > Gordon A. Moffett ...!{ihnp4,hplabs,sun}!amdahl!gam RESPONSE: Gordon... NO recruiter places ads which name the client company! Reference my explanation early on in this posting. sol1!sue > HOW DOES A BLIND AD HURT ANYONE?? If one doesn't like blind ads > then one does not need to express any interest. I would rather see blind > ads for jobs in net.jobs than the large amount of flames and discussion > that I've been seeing today. I know, this is a flame too, but i finally > decided I had to say something. _____________________________________________________ "One more red nightmare..." John J. Kenney (AT&T Technologies, Burlington, NC) path: ...![ ihnp4 ulysses cbosgd mgnetp ]!burl!jjk RESPONSE: Thank you, John. > From: mark@cbosgd.UUCP (Mark Horton) > I don't see what all the fuss is about. Net.jobs was created especially > for "help wanted" and "job wanted" postings. These headhunters are > using it for exactly that purpose. As long as it doesn't overflow into > other groups like net.general, net.followup, and net.news, it shouldn't > be bothering anybody. > I am assuming that the headhunters are posting a relatively small volume > of news to net.jobs. If the group starts showing up in the top 25 > newsgroups, or if these postings are somehow qualitatively different from > some company posting a "help wanted" notice to net.jobs directly, and > this difference causes a problem for the people who read net.jobs, then > perhaps it's time to talk (or at least to ignore the postings.) > Now can we go on with our lives? Mark RESPONSE: Let it suffice to say that I have been inundated with flames and letters of support, the latter which I have found to be heart-warming. If it weren't for the flames, then there wouldn't have needed to be any support mail. You folks' traffic has outweighed my postings enormously. sol1!sue From: rcd@opus.UUCP (Dick Dunn) > Geeez--weren't any of you guys alive in the '60's? You play the same game > you do with the people who barrage you with ads containing business-reply > cards or envelopes: give a bogus answer. Let them waste time figuring out > that they're getting a non-answer--THAT makes them pay for it. > Don't abuse the technique--you don't need to flame someone just because you > aren't interested--but when someone gets out of hand and/or won't pay > attention to a reasoned request, zing them via e-mail. > The advertising potential of the net is large--but so is the potential > response to offensive advertising; it cuts both ways. If people respond > when they're offended, the advertiser gets the idea quickly. -- Dick Dunn {hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcd (303)444-5710 x3086 ...Cerebus for dictator! RESPONSE: Dick, it has been my experience that game-playin can also cut both ways. Re: bogus answers.... "you always hurt the one you love". Did it ever occur to you that your petty bogus-trick could be damaging to fellow netters who are seriously searching for a new place of employ since sifting BS responses only denies purposeful time dedicated to helping those netters who have responded in earnest? However, many of us (including myself) *were* alive during the 60's and can quite readily tell a stinker from a flower. sol!sue Did you really expect me to be so insecure that I would simply take my ball, kick the dirt and go home? From: sgcpal@watdcsu.UUCP (Paul Arthur Layman -- EE) > I thought net.jobs was for posting job openings etc. If you > want to flame about the use of it by headhunters, move to the > appropriate net. All this flaming wastes my time more than the > headhunters. Paul A. Layman RESPONSE: none really needed... but would like to add that I did have productive plans for this day. -good thing this is on my nickel, not my Co's! How can I manage to complete the schema for my new dbase at this pace? sol1!sue From: jpm@bnl.UUCP (John McNamee) > The only way we are ever going to be able to control net abusers is to create > /usr/lib/news/blacklist, containing names of sites and/or users whose articles > bad idea open to a great deal of abuse. So we are stuck with headhunters > posting 1E6 articles to net.jobs and there is nothing we can do about it. > -- John McNamee ..!decvax!philabs!sbcs!bnl!jpm jpm@Bnl.Arpa RESPONSE: Right, John... a bad idea. Geez, am I also stuck with all the hothead flamers too? Don't think so since I know I don't have to read or respond to irrelevencies. sol1!sue From: crs@lanl.ARPA >> *** >> Aren't there many students that use the net? Headhunters >> might be helpful to them. I have met many headhunters in my career >> and some of them are creeps and some of them are nice. One called >> me periodically for a few years and when a friend graduated from >> college (who I recommended as a UNIX expert) the headhunter >> spend weeks getting him job interviews and such. That sure beats >> the hell out of going to "recuitment day" and going to the tables >> signing up for interviews. After all, headhunters talk money. >> When I first started programming professionally I had no >> idea what the going rate was. >> >> I think that as long as the commercial stuff does not get >> out of hand (what is it now, 0.01% of the traffic?) it provides >> a useful service. > One wonders if the traffic debating whether head hunters belong in > net.jobs doesn't exceed the head hunter traffic. Charlie RESPONSE: Yes, one does wonder. sol1!sue > Excellent point Charlie! > Besides is it really worth all the Hoo Hah, or do you all just *need* some- > thing to FLAME about? ^^^^^ Ron@men1 (Ron Flax) MTACCS Engineering Network ..!{seismo,umcp-cs}!{prometh,cal-unix}!men1!ron RESPONSE: There *must've* been some inert need. sol1!sue From: aps@decvax.UUCP (Armando P. Stettner) > Hi gang. > I just thought I would give my two cents worth here. It seems to > me that the purpose of net.jobs (or at least that to which it has > evolved) is to be simply a ``jobs'' forum: a news group where > someone looking for a job can look and a news group where those with > job openings can make those opening known. Head hunters make money > by placing people in jobs. So, if a head hunter ``advertises'' on > the net, they probably have openings to fill. > The only thing I would be concerned about is abuse of the access to > the net by head hunters (simply collecting names of people and > broadcasting (or multicasting) those names everywhere, indiscriminately). EXCUSE ME HERE, ARMANDO: I see the need to clarify... Lack of discretion is not an issue. In order to succeed, a recruiter must put that above all else; both with regard to clients and candidates. A good reputation requires careful nurturing. Operating in the manner you describe serves no purpose in my profession. sol1!sue > Think of the advantages: instead of having to print out (doesn't > everybody keep their resume on-line) and U.S. Snail mail a resume > to a head hunter with a potentially good opening, you can just > uucp it (mail) to them. AND MANY DO.... this serves to expedite the search. I am equipped with a letter-quality printer and obtain professional-looking results. sol1!sue > And besides, you don't have to read head hunter postings if you > don't want to. However, if you are looking for a job, sometimes, > it is wise to check every lead you can. aps. That's all folks. You've had your say and I've had mine. I've adored :-) the attention but really must return to my weekend duties. Future caustic postings to my maildrop will probably end up in file 13. ...stage left. Susan Wulf sol1!sue