Interested in hearing opinions / first hand experiences with Staffing / Placement agencies. I am not with an agency, nor do I know exactly how it works, but it seems they place / sell / pimp you and take a share of a negotiated salary. Have they inserted themselves into an already compromised situation with Architects and their small salaries?
I know that all the employees that came to my office through aerotek (four of them) don't work here anymore. They were laid off because of the downturn (read poor performance). I don't know what it says about the staffing companies or our luck of the draw. I believe they oversold us on underqualified people. It was a waste of company money.
My advice to all in the profession is to look for jobs yourself and don't let these bloodsuckers get an penny of your already small paycheck.
I worked for one staffing company (non-arch) and it was okay. I didn't have a problem with the staffing company-- they were pretty cool. It was the job that I absolutely hated. But I actually made more than the real employees that I was sitting next to.
As far as insertion goes (giggle), a staffing agency charges what a normal employee costs the employer per hour. Your taxes, benefits (if they exist) et cetera are paid by your staffing agency. Since staffing agencies tend to be rather large companies, most perks or costs associated with employment are substantially cheaper.
You'll make less than you would in a traditional job but not by much. And you have the added satisfaction of job security-- if a firm fires you, it is up to your staffing company to actually terminate you. Depending on what you bring to the table, they'll just transfer you into another job rather than you to the curb.
I advise caution -- working through a placement firm might hinder your ability to secure meaningful employment.
As an employer, I receive 5-6 unsolicited resumes a day on average ... I'm already covered up with well qualified candidates. I expect that I would be overwhelmed with excellent candidates if I placed a simple job posting here or on AIA.org.
If I needed to fill a vacancy, I would have zero problem doing this on my own. Given the current state of our profession, I can't understand why any employer would need, or want, to fill a vacancy through a staffing agency right now.
You must remember that staffing agencies charge the employer a hefty fee -- typically on the order of 25% to 33% of the employee's initial annual compensation. With the overabundance of qualified candidates available today and the poor economics of professional practice, you have to ask yourself why any firm would incur such a needless expense?
An architect friend of mine and I, use to be contacted at least twice a year from one of those agencies trying to get us. Their intrusion and aggressive tone was a total turn off. We didn’t want or need their services and they just didn’t stop insisting to a point that I had to finish that call and ask to remove my phone from their call list.
I had the impression that they used phone books, listings etc to call architects around trying to get us to work for them, to "fill out some positions out there".
I personally don't see a need to use those middleman services to hire or to get employment, especially in architecture, during bad or good times. Some firms might see some advantages in doing so, but in my view is bad news.
I thought hires from staffing agencies were like contract hires. Only around for a certain job/busy time. The firm would pay a higher hourly rate w/no benefits and could let the person go anytime without recourse.
Knew a couple guys that did "contract" work like this in the late 90's. At the time their hourly rate, after agency fees, was still significantly higher than what I was working at salaried entry level. They didn't get any benefits but that wasn't of concern to people in their mid-20's w/no family. Remember the hourly wage delta being over $5 after taxes and fees. Then again, they were all gone in a year or less onto the next firm.
This type of work is very common in IT and I'm not sure why it wouldn't be popular in architecture given our current depressed situation. A firm can land a big contract and need to staff up but w/out prospective work beyond that one job why take on the expenses of hiring staff that may be redundant in a year or less?
: there seems to be some confusion about what we're discussing here -- presumably arising from your use of the somewhat ambiguous phrase "Staffing / Placement agencies"
If you're asking about signing up with a "temporary staffing agency" who might place you in a series of temporary positions, then I think aquapura's post is spot on. If you're talking about getting hooked up with a "recruiter" to place you in a permanent position, then I stand by my earlier post.
Reading your OP again several times, I confess to being confused about what you really are asking.
Both options, really. I followed up with the link announcing a partnership between AIA / Aerotek. I'm wondering whether or not it's a good thing for the One organization that depends on dues to survive (AIA) should align itself with a Staffing organization which, frankly, thrives on unemployed Architects. It seems like the one who benefits least is the architect / employee. Yes, he/she has a job, but are they being pimped? Just opening up the door for discussion, I agree I could have been clearer. A partnership between both organizations seems like a bureaucracy in the making....AIA, NCARB, Staffing....and then there's the Architect at the bottom of the food chain. Similar to an investment manager, etc....perhaps more like the Remora Eel who gets pulled around the sea by a larger fish allowing water to pass through it's gills. Bloodsucker, parasite...there are alot of names for it.
I suppose then the issue is really who has the better business infrastructure?
It seems like the AIA is using Aerotek as an employment office. I think this might be more in the benefit of the individual than the AIA or Aerotek.
Obviously, if the AIA can get people employed, they have a better chance of maintaining their membership. And if Aerotek is allowed access to what might be tens of thousands of people, they can line their temp roster with higher quality candidates and charge higher rates.
I was going to ask if Geertrude was British. I know in some areas of the UK, it is a common practice to have placing agencies. They're like the old time (now mostly defunct) employment offices here in the US. I know that Florida, for instance, did away with their publicly run employment offices-- that is, there's no longer an actual way to get a job through a non-interested (i.e., performance paid) intermediary. Basically, if you want a job in Florida... you actually have to basically drive to every single place you can in a day and beg for a job.
Typically the way these outfits work is that the government usually pays (or gives tax breaks) for the employee to work in a placed job for a specific time period. If the situation works out, the employee is hired. If it doesn't work out, the employer really took on little risk because the testing period was largely subsidized.
But, in either event, these operations require substantial amounts of infrastructure (offices, contacts, equipment, employees, access to employers) to operate.
The reason to use one of these agencies (albeit profit driven) is to be bothered by one or two people instead of dozens or hundreds. Also, your productive time is often more valuable than a placing agency time. So, if you're a boss and you read resumes everyday... your costing your company money that could be spent on other things.
I was picked up by a recruiter from aerotek and had an interview for an arch related position doing cd's/detailing/etc. During the interview, I brought my portfolio to show the aerotek recruiter and he told me that he was not interested in looking at it, wtf. I didn't understand that and still proceeded with the interview. He asked what I wanted as an hourly rate and then he was to talk to his client and go from there. A few days later, I interviewed at the clients office and they reviewed my portfolio and liked my background/etc. I was then hired in but then the recruiter ended up low-balling me on my hourly rate by $5. I was pissed off and told him that is what we agreed on but then he said if I wanted the job or not.
The client ended up hiring 2 people to work on a 4-6month contract/hourly rate. After about a week, the other person that was hired in was making $8 more an hour than I was just because he had 6month prior experience in the field that we were working in, but yet lacked the talent/knowledge that was needed to perform. I was a bit upset over this but kept my job for the end of the contract.
During the original meeting with the client, they showed me the resume that was sent to him from aerotek. It was not the same resume that I gave aerotek in the beginning and now realized why they wanted a resume in 'word' format. They tweeked the resume to make it more convincing so they could fill the seat.
After the contract was up, the recruiter kept calling me about other work/etc, but I mentioned how he low-balled me after the fact. He then decided to get ryled up and I told him to stop contacting me since I will no longer work for/recruit by aerotek.
I would avoid staffing agencies and just have your secretary/other workers put out the word and see what they come up with. Not all agencies are bad, but I guess it's a matter of turn-over rate and/or their client base possibly.
Like ALOT of archinecters, I'm in DIRE need of a job and just to widen my options, I think I need to submit my resume to a staffing firm. Having read the the experience of others is getting me worried though =|
I don't know with some of you, but I'm willing to take a job - temp or perm, hourly or salaried, good pay bad pay.I don't think Im currently at the position to complain (+- 6 years experience OUTSIDE the U.S - ZERO local experience. Foreign degree) I just need to get my foot on the water. Shucks. Job hunting is always a frustrating. =|
Like ALOT of archinecters, I'm in DIRE need of a job and just to widen my options, I think I need to submit my resume to a staffing firm. Having read the the experience of others is getting me worried though =|
I don't know with some of you, but I'm willing to take a job - temp or perm, hourly or salaried, good pay bad pay.I don't think Im currently at the position to complain (+- 6 years experience OUTSIDE the U.S - ZERO local experience. Foreign degree) I just need to get my foot on the water. Shucks. Job hunting is always a frustrating. =|
Apr 13, 10 5:48 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Staffing Agencies......
Interested in hearing opinions / first hand experiences with Staffing / Placement agencies. I am not with an agency, nor do I know exactly how it works, but it seems they place / sell / pimp you and take a share of a negotiated salary. Have they inserted themselves into an already compromised situation with Architects and their small salaries?
Specifically: http://www.aerotek.com/About-Us/Press-Release-139.news
I know that all the employees that came to my office through aerotek (four of them) don't work here anymore. They were laid off because of the downturn (read poor performance). I don't know what it says about the staffing companies or our luck of the draw. I believe they oversold us on underqualified people. It was a waste of company money.
My advice to all in the profession is to look for jobs yourself and don't let these bloodsuckers get an penny of your already small paycheck.
Isn't Aerotek the "only" AEC staffing agency?
I worked for one staffing company (non-arch) and it was okay. I didn't have a problem with the staffing company-- they were pretty cool. It was the job that I absolutely hated. But I actually made more than the real employees that I was sitting next to.
As far as insertion goes (giggle), a staffing agency charges what a normal employee costs the employer per hour. Your taxes, benefits (if they exist) et cetera are paid by your staffing agency. Since staffing agencies tend to be rather large companies, most perks or costs associated with employment are substantially cheaper.
You'll make less than you would in a traditional job but not by much. And you have the added satisfaction of job security-- if a firm fires you, it is up to your staffing company to actually terminate you. Depending on what you bring to the table, they'll just transfer you into another job rather than you to the curb.
I advise caution -- working through a placement firm might hinder your ability to secure meaningful employment.
As an employer, I receive 5-6 unsolicited resumes a day on average ... I'm already covered up with well qualified candidates. I expect that I would be overwhelmed with excellent candidates if I placed a simple job posting here or on AIA.org.
If I needed to fill a vacancy, I would have zero problem doing this on my own. Given the current state of our profession, I can't understand why any employer would need, or want, to fill a vacancy through a staffing agency right now.
You must remember that staffing agencies charge the employer a hefty fee -- typically on the order of 25% to 33% of the employee's initial annual compensation. With the overabundance of qualified candidates available today and the poor economics of professional practice, you have to ask yourself why any firm would incur such a needless expense?
An architect friend of mine and I, use to be contacted at least twice a year from one of those agencies trying to get us. Their intrusion and aggressive tone was a total turn off. We didn’t want or need their services and they just didn’t stop insisting to a point that I had to finish that call and ask to remove my phone from their call list.
I had the impression that they used phone books, listings etc to call architects around trying to get us to work for them, to "fill out some positions out there".
I personally don't see a need to use those middleman services to hire or to get employment, especially in architecture, during bad or good times. Some firms might see some advantages in doing so, but in my view is bad news.
I thought hires from staffing agencies were like contract hires. Only around for a certain job/busy time. The firm would pay a higher hourly rate w/no benefits and could let the person go anytime without recourse.
Knew a couple guys that did "contract" work like this in the late 90's. At the time their hourly rate, after agency fees, was still significantly higher than what I was working at salaried entry level. They didn't get any benefits but that wasn't of concern to people in their mid-20's w/no family. Remember the hourly wage delta being over $5 after taxes and fees. Then again, they were all gone in a year or less onto the next firm.
This type of work is very common in IT and I'm not sure why it wouldn't be popular in architecture given our current depressed situation. A firm can land a big contract and need to staff up but w/out prospective work beyond that one job why take on the expenses of hiring staff that may be redundant in a year or less?
: there seems to be some confusion about what we're discussing here -- presumably arising from your use of the somewhat ambiguous phrase "Staffing / Placement agencies"
If you're asking about signing up with a "temporary staffing agency" who might place you in a series of temporary positions, then I think aquapura's post is spot on. If you're talking about getting hooked up with a "recruiter" to place you in a permanent position, then I stand by my earlier post.
Reading your OP again several times, I confess to being confused about what you really are asking.
Both options, really. I followed up with the link announcing a partnership between AIA / Aerotek. I'm wondering whether or not it's a good thing for the One organization that depends on dues to survive (AIA) should align itself with a Staffing organization which, frankly, thrives on unemployed Architects. It seems like the one who benefits least is the architect / employee. Yes, he/she has a job, but are they being pimped? Just opening up the door for discussion, I agree I could have been clearer. A partnership between both organizations seems like a bureaucracy in the making....AIA, NCARB, Staffing....and then there's the Architect at the bottom of the food chain. Similar to an investment manager, etc....perhaps more like the Remora Eel who gets pulled around the sea by a larger fish allowing water to pass through it's gills. Bloodsucker, parasite...there are alot of names for it.
I suppose then the issue is really who has the better business infrastructure?
It seems like the AIA is using Aerotek as an employment office. I think this might be more in the benefit of the individual than the AIA or Aerotek.
Obviously, if the AIA can get people employed, they have a better chance of maintaining their membership. And if Aerotek is allowed access to what might be tens of thousands of people, they can line their temp roster with higher quality candidates and charge higher rates.
I was going to ask if Geertrude was British. I know in some areas of the UK, it is a common practice to have placing agencies. They're like the old time (now mostly defunct) employment offices here in the US. I know that Florida, for instance, did away with their publicly run employment offices-- that is, there's no longer an actual way to get a job through a non-interested (i.e., performance paid) intermediary. Basically, if you want a job in Florida... you actually have to basically drive to every single place you can in a day and beg for a job.
Typically the way these outfits work is that the government usually pays (or gives tax breaks) for the employee to work in a placed job for a specific time period. If the situation works out, the employee is hired. If it doesn't work out, the employer really took on little risk because the testing period was largely subsidized.
But, in either event, these operations require substantial amounts of infrastructure (offices, contacts, equipment, employees, access to employers) to operate.
The reason to use one of these agencies (albeit profit driven) is to be bothered by one or two people instead of dozens or hundreds. Also, your productive time is often more valuable than a placing agency time. So, if you're a boss and you read resumes everyday... your costing your company money that could be spent on other things.
avoid aerotek.... I'll give you my story..
I was picked up by a recruiter from aerotek and had an interview for an arch related position doing cd's/detailing/etc. During the interview, I brought my portfolio to show the aerotek recruiter and he told me that he was not interested in looking at it, wtf. I didn't understand that and still proceeded with the interview. He asked what I wanted as an hourly rate and then he was to talk to his client and go from there. A few days later, I interviewed at the clients office and they reviewed my portfolio and liked my background/etc. I was then hired in but then the recruiter ended up low-balling me on my hourly rate by $5. I was pissed off and told him that is what we agreed on but then he said if I wanted the job or not.
The client ended up hiring 2 people to work on a 4-6month contract/hourly rate. After about a week, the other person that was hired in was making $8 more an hour than I was just because he had 6month prior experience in the field that we were working in, but yet lacked the talent/knowledge that was needed to perform. I was a bit upset over this but kept my job for the end of the contract.
During the original meeting with the client, they showed me the resume that was sent to him from aerotek. It was not the same resume that I gave aerotek in the beginning and now realized why they wanted a resume in 'word' format. They tweeked the resume to make it more convincing so they could fill the seat.
After the contract was up, the recruiter kept calling me about other work/etc, but I mentioned how he low-balled me after the fact. He then decided to get ryled up and I told him to stop contacting me since I will no longer work for/recruit by aerotek.
I would avoid staffing agencies and just have your secretary/other workers put out the word and see what they come up with. Not all agencies are bad, but I guess it's a matter of turn-over rate and/or their client base possibly.
Like ALOT of archinecters, I'm in DIRE need of a job and just to widen my options, I think I need to submit my resume to a staffing firm. Having read the the experience of others is getting me worried though =|
I don't know with some of you, but I'm willing to take a job - temp or perm, hourly or salaried, good pay bad pay.I don't think Im currently at the position to complain (+- 6 years experience OUTSIDE the U.S - ZERO local experience. Foreign degree) I just need to get my foot on the water. Shucks. Job hunting is always a frustrating. =|
Like ALOT of archinecters, I'm in DIRE need of a job and just to widen my options, I think I need to submit my resume to a staffing firm. Having read the the experience of others is getting me worried though =|
I don't know with some of you, but I'm willing to take a job - temp or perm, hourly or salaried, good pay bad pay.I don't think Im currently at the position to complain (+- 6 years experience OUTSIDE the U.S - ZERO local experience. Foreign degree) I just need to get my foot on the water. Shucks. Job hunting is always a frustrating. =|
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.