why cant recruitment agencies just get to the point ?
 

Dont know about you , but why dont the contract agencies just say when they advertise where the damn job is going to be offered. Instead of places like " central" of " favourable" why not just say " India" or " China"
, to simply stop wasting the time of those who are not interested in working in some of the area's they remain ellusive about. Just a thought guys and gals , just say it the way it is and save us all a lot of time.

They are probably all ex estate agents!

They don't want all the other agencies reading their ads, working out who the employer is, calling them, and placing their own guys in there. The recruiter is making between 15% and 30% of your pay, so why give away all the details of a juicy deal by saying exactly where the job is?

Perhaps PPRuNe should set up a 'Situations Wanted' area where experienced pilots looking for work can post their details, then the agencies (or even airlines) could contact them. It might even be more efficient as I seem to remember an EasyChap at a recruitment day bemoaning the fact that they had 10 000 + on the on-line database with the vast majority not meeting minimum requirements. Just a thought.

Good idea - and we could be just a vague......

A 'front of transport' operative with favourable licences from a main ICAO region has an interesting and in-demand type rating. Backed up by a wealth of hours in a number of training and operational aircraft. Seeking substantial renumeration package, numerous benefits and location close to major economic centres. Send £50 with each application to [email protected]

Hahaha! This is a great idea! I'll stop working and just milk cash from "application" fees! :ok:

It is true that locations are often concealed in attempt to eliminate the opposition but the suggestion that an agency revenues 30% of the salary ..... well I wish :)

Recently had a 'comedian' apply, has the wrong licence, wrong passport, indeed very wrong attitude, stating that the final decision on the position would be his.

Very wrong 'sunshine', the final decision lay with the airline based on the licence, the passport and indeed the attitude :)

Phileas
 

Perhaps he was tongue in cheek and was attempting to start attacking just what this thread bemoaned.
Just like joining a secret society you seem to be expected to lay yourself bare to some website or send your life to a fax number for this info to be hawked around for a job in a place you don't know for a company you don't know, sometimes for Ts and Cs you aren't told about!!!

You have it good, only $50 for United. QANTAS of Australia is $150 for the first interview, plus make your way there on short notice, plus you pay for the sim ride, and have to make you own way back to Sydney for that a few week later, then they want their own doctors to do a medical on you, and oh yes, you pay for that too, even though you have a class one.

In the last few years, 70%+ of their hiring has been done through their Jetstar brand and so you are then on a Jet star contract, then you have to pay them approx $40k and you don’t even get paid during your initial training. And they reckon there is a pilot shortage in oz, yeah right !

But the dash-8 is only $15k. And they never pay you back.

F:mad:K off QF

Simple answer to Quaintass and others recruitment philosophy is don't apply. They'll work it out once they run out of applicants and start parking their aircraft.

I put the recruitment agencies and corporate aircraft management
companies in the same boat as lawyers and real estate agents.
They are PARASITES on humanity and serve only themselves.
They just prove that airlines/aircraft owners would pay more,
but simply can't be bothered dealing directly with pilots.
Try to bypass these fleas, and talk directly to airlines/owners.

This is not necessarily true. Working on a leasing contract via an agency saves the airline the money required for National Insurance and taxation contribution. The margin that the agencies make is usually less than this.
Also, if an airline just needs some contract pilots for 3 months for example, it is easier and less costly in terms of legalities and manhours to get the pilots from an agency.
In addition to that, the current payscales of a carrier for pilots working directly with them might not be attractive enough to get the extra pilots needed. The airline would be willing to pay more for a contractor for a few months rather than incurring the long term costs of recruiting someone directly (including compensation for terminating a contract). This way they avoid increasing salaries across the board in order to keep everyone else happy.

Pissed myself reading these posts
 

Read them all and I hope you are all joking, I had to change my shorts after reading some of them. Granted there are some bad recruitment firms but, there are also some good ones. I have found that the smaller ones are more reputable than the larger. The biggies are the tail and the airlines are the dog, so guess who gets wagged - right down to us, the flea on the tail. The big firms do nothing more than drive the wages down.