Sick of seeing "Singaporeans and PRs need only apply"!

[irvine]

Ok just called the recruiter to ask her why Word. :p

She mentioned about their process of using a profile template when presenting the candidate for their client. In this case, with an additional summary of the candidate. She assured me it will be an honest representation. I did request for that summary they'd send to the client in the event an interview is scheduled.

Moral of the story: Give the person benefit of the doubt.
2nd Moral of the story: It is good to still clarify when in doubt.
3rd Moral of the story: Be in the know. And still be prepared for any unknown.

[beppi]

Headhunters often present their clients with an anomymised list of candidates and their CVs, so the client cannot contact the candidate directly, circumventing the headhunter (and possibly saving the fees involved).
Of course, converting a CV is also possible from PDF format, but it's more work and potentially requires additional software (which is not free).
Therefore, them insisting on a Word CV shows:
- lack of trust into their clients
- lazyness (or stinginess)
- lack of professionalism and willingness to see the candidate as a customer to be served
Unfortunately, this is the standard of the headhunting industry in Singapore.

[sundaymorningstaple]

Headhunters often present their clients with an anomymised list of candidates and their CVs, so the client cannot contact the candidate directly, circumventing the headhunter (and possibly saving the fees involved).
Of course, converting a CV is also possible from PDF format, but it's more work and potentially requires additional software (which is not free).
Therefore, them insisting on a Word CV shows:
- lack of trust into their clients

Or their database is an older database and not able to search PDF files.

- lazyness (or stinginess)

Just the opposite actually, it allowed editing to remove most of the punctuation and spelling errors - believe me!

- lack of professionalism and willingness to see the candidate as a customer to be served

Not quite sure where you are coming from on this one - doesn't really make sense, but in a real sense, the candidate is not a customer, he is inventory. The customer is the one who pay the fees - in Singapore, by law, it is the End User or Company hiring.

Unfortunately, this is the standard of the headhunting industry in Singapore.

But a lot of the unprofessionalism found in the industry here is a direct result of the raw deal that they get from their clients who shop their requirements to a number of recruiters/headhunters at the same time, and also will not give exclusives/retainers to headhunters. They also practice the first past the post normally and local HR's in local SME are famous for "claiming" they also received the CV's directly from the candidate. These things I have seen from all three side of the fence, employee, headhunter & HR Manager. It also doesn't help when candidates shop their CV's to all the boards in Singapore (who can blame them). Then it's speed is of the essence and having to complete retype a CV because they don't have the software to reconvert PDF files to text files and then reformat everything in order to send a "safe" copy so the client cannot stab the recruiter in the back.....

Tail wagging the dog?.......

[Saint]

I know that Singapore does not owe us anything but does anybody else have issues with jobs asking you to be BILINGUAL?

Some jobs I can understand but others...

...lets just say you need to read between the lines.

Does anyone else have problems with this?

I have to be trlingual in my job, I must be fluent in English, Australian and talking complete and utter bollox!

Some would say the last 2 were virtuallly the same but there are subtle differences

[irvine]

Thanks for the insights, SMS and Beppi.

[beppi]

Not quite sure where you are coming from on this one - doesn't really make sense, but in a real sense, the candidate is not a customer, he is inventory. The customer is the one who pay the fees - in Singapore, by law, it is the End User or Company hiring.

In headhunting, same as other service industries that broker a deal between two parties (e.g. property agency, etc.), those parties are both customers that need to be served (and to be happy with it), regardless of the details of who pays the fees involved. Otherwise it's not much different from non-service industries like goods trading.
I personally dislike to be treated as inventory!

[nakatago]

I personally dislike to be treated as inventory!

Work six years for a brown-nosing, non-empathic, high-flying subcontractor for a Japanese company and you'll get used to it...if you haven't quit by then.

[sundaymorningstaple]

I personally dislike to be treated as inventory!

Work six years for a brown-nosing, non-empathic, high-flying subcontractor for a Japanese company and you'll get used to it...if you haven't quit by then.

Now you know where the term Human Capital came from. The are assets to be used until their useful life is done and then trashed. The catchphrase isn't from the headhunters but the HR departments of companies all over the world. If headhunters were meant to be brokers (in Singapore) then they should be paid a percentage by both parties. Otherwise, if they were trying to get the best for the potential employee, the paying client could dispute the bill by claiming the HH wasn't acting in the best interest of the client. Guess you could call it a two way street yeah?

[nakatago]

I personally dislike to be treated as inventory!

Work six years for a brown-nosing, non-empathic, high-flying subcontractor for a Japanese company and you'll get used to it...if you haven't quit by then.

Now you know where the term Human Capital came from. The are assets to be used until their useful life is done and then trashed. The catchphrase isn't from the headhunters but the HR departments of companies all over the world. If headhunters were meant to be brokers (in Singapore) then they should be paid a percentage by both parties. Otherwise, if they were trying to get the best for the potential employee, the paying client could dispute the bill by claiming the HH wasn't acting in the best interest of the client. Guess you could call it a two way street yeah?