HN Explorer

Ask HN: Asking for bonus similar to what's paid to recruiters if hired w/o one

5 points by jtreminio ↗ HN
Recruiters charge at least 15%. Many that I know that are well-regarded (as far as recruiters go) in the PHP community say that 15% isn't enough for them to even consider sending candidates their way.<p>Would it then be incorrect to think that if I find a job without a recruiter with a company that I know uses recruiters that asking for a similar or lesser bonus to what they would have paid out is acceptable?

5 comments

[ 2.6 ms ] story [ 24.1 ms ] thread
[dead] visualcsharp
The answer to this question is: Let the market decide. Ask for a 15% signing bonus and if you don't get it... well, then, either deal with it or look elsewhere. Companies are considering the total cost to them to employ you, not just your base salary or even hiring bonuses. If it's beyond what they are interested in paying, they'll decline.
mingpan
A big point that recruiters emphasize with a client is that they can bring in good candidates who otherwise would not have had interest in a position (and whether they actually fulfill this is not the point here). Since you found and applied for the position on your own, you don't necessarily fit this category, and you might or might not be able to convince them of your argument.
davismwfl
I'd say that depending on the position and company you can try and get a sign-on bonus, even using the fact that you saved them a 20% fee. Depending on your negotiating skills I could see it as a reasonable argument. Market conditions are such in a lot of places right now, solid tech people can make (and get) reasonable demands pretty easily. Worse thing anyone can do is say no, or cancel their offer. And honestly if they cancelled their offer you would be better off in my opinion.
Peroni
As a former agency recruiter and a current inhouse recruiter for a large dev company I can tell you categorically that you would be laughed out the door.

The purpose of paying recruiter fees is to reduce time spent searching and increase the range of candidates available.

If you directly apply for a role with a company that uses agencies then you stand a much higher chance of being interviewed as you will be saving them a significant sum of money if they hire you.

codegeek
In theory, I would love to say "go for it". But it won't work. Companies are too smart for that. You can probably negotiate a higher salary but you cannot use the argument "I am cutting the middleman, so can I get his share ?" The reason clients pay recruiters is because they are lazy and simply don't have time/inclination to go find candidates. Even if finding candidates just mean that the recruiters fish for your profile online somewhere, match a few keywords and reach out to you for the position.