Scamp

Swings and roundabouts. There's a reason I have vacancies and a reason I have candidates. You'd be surprised how many times you can put a candidate in front of a client and they chuckle to themselves because they did a job with them 5, 10 years ago but never thought about calling them...others are smarter / wiser / know what they want and do all that stuff themselves.


Weasel; I don't understand why you think a recruiter would try and lower the salary the candidate gets offered? I spend my life trying make salaries higher...

weasel central

Simply because you are competing against other recruitment companies who will try offer similarly qualified or experienced candidates for less salary.
I don't think this btw, I see this more often than you'd expect. And in some cases unfortunately its the same candidate.
Unless you have a deal to be the sole recruitment agency for a company? and thats not something I have seen

weasel central

You arent going to see a major difference either way between UAE or Qatar right now, within the company I work for Qatar is usually higher as its a less desirable location but there is no real trend either way. Dubai may be maginally more competitive due to the bad market there but Qatar has not picked up enough to see any salary growth as far as i can see.
A lot of the expected work has yet to come on stream fully.

Scamp

That surprises me...it's not logical.

Fortunately I've done both; worked as a sole supplier but as a stand alone business and as I am now working will multiple clients.

Every experience is so varied, it's why we're all labelled as shit.

Such is.

weasel central

From your clients perspective it is logical, if I have 2 candidates of similar calibre and experience, I am going to choose the one who wants the lower salary. (all other things being equal)

If this is your guy then your agency will get the fee, if its not the the other agency will get the fee.

Your clients will have multiple agencies.

Bahtatboy

Yep, exactly my experience. No disrespect here, Scamp, its just simple economics: if you're the sole agent for a client, you'll endeavour to get the candidate the highest salary (assuming your fee is a percentage of the salary); if you're not the sole agent, you'll consider persuading candidates to accept lower salaries because you know, all other things being equal, that your client wants to pay as little as possible to get a candidate who ticks all the required boxes. Genuinely, I have no disrespect for that approach--its business, and every business is there to (legitimately) maximise its profits (as well as retaining clients and keeping its employees satisfied).

Scamp

I understand what you're saying, but it's the classic argument of getting what you pay for.

If the budget for an engineer is 10,000 per month, I'll stick three guys in at 8,000, 9,000 and 10,000 so the client see's different levels...better candiates don't always cost more but generally do, and generally are worth it.

weasel central

We are going over it a little but the guy you have in at 10,000 maybe is in at 9,000 with another agency.

Scamp

Fortunately I rarely come up against this, but it's interesting to hear what you have seen / experienced.