Money for nothing and the commission is free

Posted by Jim Stroud

October 15, 2007

Karen Mattonen I have been watching this trainwreck for a while now, as it all started on LinkedIn, and a few other forums. Same ole story! A recruiter sends in candidate to company, the company doesn’t consider candidate; but eight months later a candidate is hired through the efforts of another recruiter.

The whole debate has had me pretty much shaking my li’l ole head in chagrin. Aren’t we recruiters an interesting bunch? So, we think if we submit a resume we automatically get a fee? Just submit any l’il biddy, piece a paper, that’s all, do nothing else, and we will generate a huge percent of an individual’s salary in compensation?

Sure, sounds great, wow, if that all there was to this job, there would be a lot of rich brothers and sisters out there wouldn’t there?

Okay, here is the legal skinny guys.. this is concise accurate information, so pay attention, if you really want to gain that fee without any expensive lawsuit, that ultimately costs you a lot, with no rewards.

First off, no contract, no fee.. and yes, your contract must spell out what it takes to earn that fee. Funny how the courts are, but they seem to depend on those funky little contractural details. Terms of Agreement. This helps remove all doubt of who owes who what, and who did what, or needed to do what to earn that fee. After there has been full agreement of terms in the contract, then obviously the recruiter must fulfill ALL of the obligations of the contract to facilitate the hiring process.

Most importantly the courts have also decided that there are four criteria to determine if a recruiter is going to get a fee…

The Recruiter must have a discussion regarding the applicant with the employer (written, or verbal, and based upon the written terms of the contract)

The Employer and Recruiter agrees to interviewing the candidate

The Candidate agrees to the interview

The Recruiter must help faciliate the interview process with the candidate and company

That seems obvious enough doesn’t it? If a recruiter doesn’t facilitate the hiring process, no matter how much they feel the “own” the candidate, they didn’t earn it. Yes, this is one of the major factors based upon the many and continual laws suits in this arena. The courts must be able to determine that the Recruiter in question is the motivating force behind the placements. But, again, the courts will still consider the contract and terms agreement. So (I stress another time) make sure your contract spells out completely what it will take to earn that fee.

Does your contract state how long you “own” the candidate?

Does it mention what Ownership means? Or even what a Referral is?

What about the steps for placement, what your agency will be responsible for, and what the client also is responsible as well to facilitate the process?

Does it mention a time frame for payment?

Are the terms of your replacement guarantee spelled out?

Does it have a legal Jurisdiction clause?

If there should be a need to go to court, where would have jurisdiction, what state, what city?

I cannot be enthusiastic enough on this area, if one does not have a written contract in place, and even if one does have one.. Document, document, document.

Document the details of conversations with clients and candidates; document when you sent the candidates; document all correspondances with the clients and candidates.

This is called a “Trail of Evidence,” and it is in YOUR favor. It helps show your actions and it shows the intent or malintent of the employer. Documentation reduces time and in legal terms that means it reduces Legal expenses…. and the courts really love that information.

Warmest Regards,

Karen Mattonen, C.S.P, C.A.C.
Advanced Career Solutions Inc/ACS
HVAC Mechanical Construction Search
www.acssearch.com

Proud member of good Standing with:
**National Association of Personnel Services
**California Staffing Professionals
**SHRM -Society for Human Resources Management

PROVIDING THE BEST – FOCUSING ON COMMITMENT, INTEGRITY AND ETHICS