«

In article <924gr2->, thing2 <> wrote:
>Question,
>
>If an agency declines to put you forward for a job because they say the
>client wants Suse linux, yet the job description supplied by the client
>says must have Linux, nice to have Suse but not essential....should you
>feel obliged not to put yourself forward directly to the client?

Feel obliged to insist they send off your application or to get another
agent and do it yourself.

>I guess there might be a legal issue / chase from the agency demanding a
>fee if no moral one.

They might try that ... but if they wouldn't send your application off, then
surely logic says they are entitled to nothing.

Bruce

----------------------------------------
I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are the good
people and the bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and
only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides.

Lord Vetinari in Guards ! Guards ! - Terry Pratchett

Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups
(if there were any)

Question,

If an agency declines to put you forward for a job because they say the
client wants Suse linux, yet the job description supplied by the client
says must have Linux, nice to have Suse but not essential....should you
feel obliged not to put yourself forward directly to the client?

I guess there might be a legal issue / chase from the agency demanding a
fee if no moral one.

Thoughts?

regards

Thing

In article <pk7gr2->, thing2 <> wrote:
>Bruce Sinclair wrote:
>> In article <924gr2->, thing2 <>
> wrote:
>>>Question,
>>>
>>>If an agency declines to put you forward for a job because they say the
>>>client wants Suse linux, yet the job description supplied by the client
>>>says must have Linux, nice to have Suse but not essential....should you
>>>feel obliged not to put yourself forward directly to the client?

>> Feel obliged to insist they send off your application or to get another
>> agent and do it yourself.

>>>I guess there might be a legal issue / chase from the agency demanding a
>>>fee if no moral one.

>> They might try that ... but if they wouldn't send your application off, then
>> surely logic says they are entitled to nothing.

>Logic and law/contracts dont seem to meet very often.....

... and this too is true
Who would usually pay the agent fee ?
I see previously that someone advised you to send it to the employer
yourself noting that you have an agent. Probably the best idea.


Bruce

----------------------------------------
I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are the good
people and the bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and
only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides.

Lord Vetinari in Guards ! Guards ! - Terry Pratchett

Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups
(if there were any)

thing2 wrote:
> Question,
>
> If an agency declines to put you forward for a job because they say the
> client wants Suse linux, yet the job description supplied by the client
> says must have Linux, nice to have Suse but not essential....should you
> feel obliged not to put yourself forward directly to the client?
>
> I guess there might be a legal issue / chase from the agency demanding a
> fee if no moral one.
>
> Thoughts?

You can get into nasty messes with prospective employers and the
agencies heading down that track. You don't want to be the meat in that
sandwich, as the employer will more than likely go off you very quickly.

Saying that, if you approach it the right way, a prospective employer
can be entertained in such a way that you keep both sides happy. If you
can sell yourself in direct to the employer, but fully divulging your
relationship with the agency, this can be seen as a positive. I have
employed people who have done this the right way, and still paid the
agency fee based on the qualities of the candidate.

The "nice to have Suse.." comment intimates that anyone who has Suse
experience will get first look in. You'll have to do a great self-sell
job to prove why you are better. It does work some times.

Regards,
Mark Remfrey

Bruce Sinclair wrote:
> In article <924gr2->, thing2 <> wrote:
>
>>Question,
>>
>>If an agency declines to put you forward for a job because they say the
>>client wants Suse linux, yet the job description supplied by the client
>>says must have Linux, nice to have Suse but not essential....should you
>>feel obliged not to put yourself forward directly to the client?
>
>
> Feel obliged to insist they send off your application or to get another
> agent and do it yourself.
>
>
>>I guess there might be a legal issue / chase from the agency demanding a
>>fee if no moral one.
>
>
> They might try that ... but if they wouldn't send your application off, then
> surely logic says they are entitled to nothing.
>
> Bruce
>
> ----------------------------------------
> I believe you find life such a problem because you think there are the good
> people and the bad people. You're wrong, of course. There are, always and
> only, the bad people, but some of them are on opposite sides.
>
> Lord Vetinari in Guards ! Guards ! - Terry Pratchett
>
> Caution ===== followups may have been changed to relevant groups
> (if there were any)
>


Logic and law/contracts dont seem to meet very often.....

regards

thing

Mark Remfrey wrote:
> thing2 wrote:
>
>> Question,
>>
>> If an agency declines to put you forward for a job because they say
>> the client wants Suse linux, yet the job description supplied by the
>> client says must have Linux, nice to have Suse but not
>> essential....should you feel obliged not to put yourself forward
>> directly to the client?
>>
>> I guess there might be a legal issue / chase from the agency demanding
>> a fee if no moral one.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>
>
> You can get into nasty messes with prospective employers and the
> agencies heading down that track. You don't want to be the meat in that
> sandwich, as the employer will more than likely go off you very quickly.
>
> Saying that, if you approach it the right way, a prospective employer
> can be entertained in such a way that you keep both sides happy. If you
> can sell yourself in direct to the employer, but fully divulging your
> relationship with the agency, this can be seen as a positive. I have
> employed people who have done this the right way, and still paid the
> agency fee based on the qualities of the candidate.
>
> The "nice to have Suse.." comment intimates that anyone who has Suse
> experience will get first look in. You'll have to do a great self-sell
> job to prove why you are better. It does work some times.
>
> Regards,
> Mark Remfrey

Enterprise level Suse admins are probably not that common in Wellington
/ NZ. Redhat is probably far more common.

I'm kinda thinking along the lines of keeping an eye open for an
independant advert, and if that happens put myself forward. I think I
will also mention that the agency did not put me forward and why dispite
the job description, then it is up to the employer whether they
interview me or not.

This is not the first time either myself or other friends have come
across the agencies not putting us forward. Yet actually getting
employed via a different agency and the employer being happy with our
skill set.

regards

Thing

"thing2" <> wrote in message
news:924gr2-...
> Question,
>
> If an agency declines to put you forward for a job because they say the
> client wants Suse linux, yet the job description supplied by the client
> says must have Linux, nice to have Suse but not essential....should you
> feel obliged not to put yourself forward directly to the client?
>
> I guess there might be a legal issue / chase from the agency demanding a
> fee if no moral one.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> regards
>
> Thing
>
agents are scum of the earth and they will screw you for everything they
can.

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 10:01:13 +1200, thing2 <>
spoke these fine words:

>Question,
>
>If an agency declines to put you forward for a job because they say the
>client wants Suse linux, yet the job description supplied by the client
>says must have Linux, nice to have Suse but not essential....should you
>feel obliged not to put yourself forward directly to the client?
>
>I guess there might be a legal issue / chase from the agency demanding a
>fee if no moral one.
>
>Thoughts?

It is up to the agency to put forward the people *they* feel are most
suited to the job. In this case, it appears that this isn't you.

Don't approach the employer directly. All that will result from that
is that the agency will put you at the bottom of the list for any
future jobs.

Agencies do more than just put people forward. The employer has asked
the agency to vet applicants, and will most likely not be interested
in your advances, unless you did an exceptional job of selling
yourself.

"H.O.G" <> wrote in message
news:...
> On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 10:01:13 +1200, thing2 <>
> spoke these fine words:
>
>>Question,
>>
>>If an agency declines to put you forward for a job because they say the
>>client wants Suse linux, yet the job description supplied by the client
>>says must have Linux, nice to have Suse but not essential....should you
>>feel obliged not to put yourself forward directly to the client?
>>
>>I guess there might be a legal issue / chase from the agency demanding a
>>fee if no moral one.
>>
>>Thoughts?
>
> It is up to the agency to put forward the people *they* feel are most
> suited to the job. In this case, it appears that this isn't you.
>
> Don't approach the employer directly. All that will result from that
> is that the agency will put you at the bottom of the list for any
> future jobs.
>
> Agencies do more than just put people forward. The employer has asked
> the agency to vet applicants, and will most likely not be interested
> in your advances, unless you did an exceptional job of selling
> yourself.

You give too much credit to the agencies.... But they do stupid things.

One time I negotiated a contract rate verbally - then, they sent me the
contract with a higher rate than negotiated and with double rate overtime
allowances (also not negotiated).

Agents are mindless pattern matching bots who wouldn't have a clue
about the portability of your skills. This is so typical.

If you know who the prospective employer is then you should just write
them a letter explaining that the recruiter refused to put you in fornt
of them but that your skills are portable into their environment, and
offer to come in for an interview. If they like you then it's up to
them to sort out the agents.