Top Echelon Network Policy 9b

Top Echelon Network Policy 9b

Issue: Candidate ownership after a candidate is placed in a permanent position

Date: 11/01/94

After two recruiters have successfully placed a candidate in a permanent position, and the permanent placement fee has been received and split between the two recruiters, and the guarantee period has been satisfied, it is the view of Top Echelon Network that both recruiters should "break the chain of communication" with the candidate and not have any additional contact with that candidate for a period of no less than 18 months. Assuming the "chain of communication" was broken, if that candidate decides on his own to initiate contact with either of the recruiters, that is his or her prerogative. If the candidate initiates contact with the agency who placed him rather than the agency who originally recruited him, this represents a new beginning for future transactions. The job order agency is then free to represent the candidate without owing anything further to the originating agency, assuming the chain of communication was broken. If the chain of communication to the candidate was NOT broken by the job order agency, the placing agency would owe a split placement to the candidate agency on the next placement of that candidate.

Spirit of this Policy
Once a permanent placement is made, and the candidate has become established in his new position, it is Top Echelon Network’s feeling that both recruiters should "break the chain of communication" and leave the candidate alone. Both agencies successfully provided a service to the client and the candidate, and both earned a handsome fee for that service. Both recruiters won, the candidate won, and hopefully, the client won. If both recruiters do "break the chain of communication" and leave the candidate alone, then it is clear that when the candidate someday initiates contact with a recruiter, it is his own choice who he decided to call upon. Sometimes the candidate will call the job order recruiter because that’s who got him his last job, and sometimes he’ll call the agency that recruited him for the last placement. Either way, assuming the "chain of communication" was broken, it is the sole decision of the candidate which recruiter to call for future help. The agency he chose owes nothing further to the other agency from the first transaction.

We recognize that many firms do not agree with the above mentioned paragraph, and will not "break the chain of communication" with a placed candidate. Sometimes they stay in touch with the candidate because they’ve become friends, sometimes because they genuinely care about the candidate’s long-term well being, and sometimes to solicit future information about the client or other employees in the firm. Either way, if the job order agency who "placed" the candidate maintains contact with the candidate, then the communication chain is never really broken. It is Top Echelon Network’s feelings that if the chain of communication was NOT broken, the BUT FOR RULE indicates the recruiter originally supplying the candidate would be entitled to receive a full split placement fee if the job order agency were to place the candidate again.

Sometimes a candidate will initiate communication back to the job order agency very soon after the placement was completed. (e.g., The guarantee period was 90 days, and after five or six months, he’s unhappy with his new situation and calls for someone to get him out.) It is Top Echelon Network’s feeling that even though the job order agency has attempted to discontinue communications with the candidate, the time period is so short that the communication chain has never really been broken. Therefore, we strongly encourage the job order agency to confer with the original candidate recruiter about the situation, and we suggest you both share ownership in the candidate. That is, if either of you place the candidate again, you both agree to equally split whatever dollars your firm earns on that next placement of this candidate. We have seen other recruiters deal with these situations this way, and it appears to work well.

In the example above we used five or six months as the time frame. How long is long enough for the communication chain to have been broken? Although this could be debated for years to come, we suggest that if no contact has been made between the placing agency and the candidate for a period of at least eighteen months, the communication chain has been broken. Again, after that point, the candidate can initiate contact with any recruiter he wants.