TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: My experience with a recruiter From:"Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com> To:"Pageologist" <pageology -at- gmail -dot- com> Date:Fri, 4 Aug 2006 12:20:48 -0700
Yes, many recruiting firms have divisions for search and contract,
and some do both within the same business unit. And there are
clients who want to have their cake and eat it too (contract-to-hire
at direct employee rates). You have to be firm on what your terms
are and be prepared to pass on "opportunities" to be paid rates
or salaries that don't make a job worth the effort.
----- Original Message -----
I've seen a lot of agencies that blur this line. They hire for short term contracts as well as "contract-to-hire" positions where it looks like the employer just wants to try you on for size. I just don't see a clear distinction in the market lately. One thing that's bugged me in my latest go-around for a position this year is the number of companies that want to hire on contract, but are only willing to pay, at best, rates equivalent to middle-of-the-road salaries for captive employees. This is becoming common enough in my area that it's getting a lot harder to find anyone that offers rates high enough above "captive" rates to make it worthwhile to be a contractor. A few agencies are still trying to do this, but they appear to be having an increasingly difficult time competing.