People Direct: "We're not listening, la la la la la"

[denny]

In response to my advert on jobs.perl.org, I have been corresponding with a clueless recruitment conslutant.


Mail the first, dated 9th Jan (the day after the advert went live):

From: 	Hailstones, Susan <Susan.Hailstones@People-Direct.com>
To: 	denny@onlinegalleries.com
Subject: 	Perl Developers 
Date: 	Tue, 9 Jan 2007 18:18:47 -0000

Dear Sir / Madame,

I understand you are currently looking for Perl developers. I work for a specialist 
IT Recruitment Consultancy based in the UK. I have worked with companies across 
various market places and industry sectors; from blue chip global organisations 
through to small start up companies and I have successfully placed developers and 
programmers in various Perl related roles. The candidates I represent vary from 
very Junior positions through to roles which are of a very high level or seniority. 

I am currently working with candidates who have scored over the global average in a 
Perl test which they currently sat. There skill sets cover a broad range including 
Perl, Mod_Perl, Ruby, C#, SOAP, Linux, MYsql etc

I look forward to speaking with you soon

Kind regards 

Susan Hailstones 
Recruitment Executive 
People Direct 

I'll spare you the rest of her .sig file. It was lengthy, and included helpful hints on saving the environment (by not printing off emails).

My reply:

From: Denny de la Haye [mailto:denny@onlinegalleries.com] 
Sent: 09 January 2007 18:35
To: Hailstones, Susan
Subject: Re: Perl Developers

On Tue, 2007-01-09 at 18:18 +0000, Hailstones, Susan wrote:
> Dear Sir / Madame,
> 
> I understand you are currently looking for Perl developers. I work for
> a specialist IT Recruitment Consultancy based in the UK.  [...]

"We are currently looking for direct applicants only - no agencies,
thank you." *

Regards,
Denny

* this is a quote from the original advert

From: 	Hailstones, Susan <susan.hailstones@people-direct.com>
To: 	Denny de la Haye <denny@onlinegalleries.com>
Subject: 	RE: Perl Developers
Date: 	Tue, 9 Jan 2007 18:37:15 -0000

Hi Denny,

My intension was to see if your requirement had been filled as yet? 

I appreciate you are not looking to use an agency at this time; should
this change please keep my contact details and get in touch.

Kind regards

Susan Hailstones 
Recruitment Executive 
People Direct 

I ignored this with the dignity it deserved. Until:

From: 	Hailstones, Susan <Susan.Hailstones@People-Direct.com>
Subject: 	Perl Developers
Date: 	Tue, 23 Jan 2007 09:38:17 -0000

Dear Sir / Madame,

I understand you are currently looking for Perl developers.

HOLY FORM LETTERS BATMAN! You may be able to guess what the rest of this one looked like, so I'll cut it off there.

My reply:

From: Denny de la Haye [mailto:denny@onlinegalleries.com] 
Sent: 23 January 2007 15:41
To: Hailstones, Susan;
Cc: City (People Direct); New Croydon (People Direct) *
Subject: Re: Perl Developers

On Tue, 2007-01-23 at 09:38 +0000, Hailstones, Susan wrote:
> I understand you are currently looking for Perl developers.  [...]

http://jobs.perl.org/job/5152 clearly states:

"UK residents only please, and direct applicants only.  That means NO
AGENCIES, thank you." **

I even changed NO AGENCIES to be in capitals, after you failed to read
it the first time.

Please stop emailing me.

Denny

* yes, I cc'ed both London offices of her company
** this is a direct quote from the second incarnation of the advert

The third incarnation of the advert is probably worth a glance at this point:
http://jobs.perl.org/job/5152

Note the end of the job description. Clearly Susan didn't, or at least, she didn't mention it in her reply to me a minute ago:

From: 	Hailstones, Susan <Susan.Hailstones@People-Direct.com>
To: 	Denny de la Haye <denny@onlinegalleries.com>
Subject: 	RE: Perl Developers
Date: 	Tue, 23 Jan 2007 15:55:28 -0000

Denny,

Yes I noticed that, I was simply enquiring as to whether or not your
situation had changed; clearly it has not.

I am simply doing my job, I wouldn't be very good at it if I didn't
check these things out now would I?

Kind regards

Susan Hailstones 
Recruitment Executive 
People Direct 

I don't think a lack of checking things out is precisely her problem, but hey, I'm not a recruitment consultant - what would I know?

Comments

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

Annoying me doesn't seem like the most efficient way to get me paying for their service. Quite the opposite in fact - I've spent an hour or so today telling various people who work in a tech management capacity about how annoying this agency are, so now there are any number of people who are predisposed to think poorly of their company.

[easternpromise.livejournal.com]

They don't work on efficiency though. :) Agencies basically work on a bulk thing. If you get on the phone for 8 hours a day and call enough people and bend enough ears, you'll get a sale. If you get on the email for a few hours a day and send enough toe-in-the-waters and badger enough people, you'll get a sale. That's the general principle anyway, and it takes a pretty one-track-minded kind of person to do it effectively. They are irritating. Very irritating. And I know, I've been one. :)

[kaz-pixie.livejournal.com]

Not to mention the various stats they pile onto you at training courses - 1 in 10 people say yes after call one, one in 6 people after second call etc etc etc. I know we make 8 calls before archiving someone - but again it's a different industry and a different approach, I deal with healthcare temp workers where need is different day on day and you get a different person on the other end of the line each time you call.

[kaz-pixie.livejournal.com]

Reason number gazillion why my sirname at work is officially "frompulsenursing"