This may be stupid but..
andy at tigerteam.net
Sun Nov 9 18:08:40 UTC 2003
Okay, I was kinda waiting a single alternative opinion of recruiters, but
since I haven't seen one, I will offer one. True, most recruiters, like
the middle part of any bell curve, tend to be...average. And as usual,
with sweeping generalizations, you could be missing out on something. In
fact, as I understand it, recruiting is one of the first steps of paying
dues when walking up the HR ladder.
There is certainly an echelon of well connected, knowledgable and trusted
recruiters that place high quality candidates into the right jobs at the
best companies. In fact, I know a few recruiters that used to be
engineers. They tend to work with people that can demand a certain minimum
salary, have years of industry experience and are currently employed.
Recruiters are just as sick of misrepresented technical folks that don't
have a clue wasting their time trying to tap jobs. Their creditabilty is
on the line with every placement. Again, as with most things, there tends
to be two ends to the spectrum.
PGP Key Available at http://www.tigerteam.net/andy/pgp
On Sun, 9 Nov 2003, Eric Brunner-Williams in Portland Maine wrote:
> recruiters will make sure that you only see resumes with some acronym begining
> with "CC", and/or "MS".
> this is not useful if you are not attempting to staff to replicate those
> notions of what an *sp that uses nanog needs.
> two of my best hires (at sri, .5k hosts, circa 1987) were simply trainable.
> an english major (f) from reed, and a cs major (m) from a school that taught
> cobol as a modern language -- i hired him for his night job skills, managing
> an auto body shop, managing ordinary joes holding tools.
> i'm recruiter-proof. i'm not sure i'd want anyone who wasn't.
More information about the NANOG