Re: Dirty tricks: headhunting (fwd)

Ombudsman account for AECOM (ombudsmn@aecom.yu.edu)
Wed, 2 Sep 1998 18:15:26 -0400 (EDT)

In re:
>I have one question for the person who was upset about the, admittedly,
>irregular method used by the headhunter to get his/her technician's phone
>number. Would he/she have given the headhunter the technician's phone
>number if the heqadhunter had called and explained straight on what the
>intention was? I doubt it.
>
Originator's reply to the above:

I suppose this is a fair question - would I have given my tech's number to
this guy? Probably not. Alice has worked for me for well over 5 years. Is
that a justification to start off with Watergate tactics? With a little
bit more effort, though, the hunter could have found the number directly.
(BTW, for any headhunting lurkers out there, Alice was both indignant and
insulted in having been approached that way. Doubtless many would not be,
but just to note that at least one was.)

My main purpose in the original post was to alert others to the tactic if
not already well known (I wasn't sure), and by one reply, I'm happy to see
that that hunter has been co-opted in at least one attempt since.

I have never dealt with a headhunter as the recruitor, but I have received
calls in the past from those who identified themselves directly, hunting
for graduating PhDs, and if I don't have a name to suggest, I usually ask
them to send their card to keep in case someone else comes to mind later.

Parting thought: Not wanting to prolong this, but is this what's now
required in order to fill a slot requiring working knowledge of Edman
chemistry? (Which, BTW, will be 50 years old next year).