[hopeless]

Love the domain name!

And some of the screenshots reveal an approach to hiring which is sorely lacking. At this stage, every single LinkedIn email and cold outreach email from a recruiter gets marked as spam.

Not a single one seems to understand that hiring should be treating people as… well, people with lives and desires. Not just a resource to plug into a hole; not a fool to be tricked into changing jobs so the recruiter can hit their targets.

Any innovation in this space is welcome and I hope there are enough "decent" companies to make it a successful business.

fwiw, part of the advantage of going freelance was side-stepping all the bullshit hiring assumptions.

[cptskippy]

Recruiters are part of the trend of outsource everything. Most recruiters are just salesmen on par with the kid who knocks on your front door wanting to sell you magazines or AT&T DSL; they'll tell you any lie you want to hear to get the sale.

The sooner everyone starts refusing to deal with recruiters, the better off we'll all be.

[michaelt]

Well, recruiters do produce /some/ value.

For employers, recruiters will do the dirty business the employers don't want to know about. For example, ignoring PII legislation to get a larger pool of contacts. Advertising highly paid nonexistent jobs to harvest CVs. Lying to candidates and pressuring them if they're wavering.

These convert into more hires.

For employees, recruiters will bypass bullshit job applicant websites that make you re-type your CV into their agonisingly long forms. They'll free you from emotionally draining work like customising your CV and writing a thoughtful cover letter - or even to really know what an employer does before applying to them. Often they'll also tell you interview questions in advance, and some will help you cheat on take-home tests.

This converts into less effort needed per job offer.

I'm not saying I like them - clearly, I see big disadvantages - but there are reasons they've lasted as long as they have, as an industry.