Welcome to The Fordyce Letter:

The Fordyce Letter

Straight Talk for the Recruiting Profession


Articles tagged 'ethics'

Editor's Corner

Oh, Those Unethical Recruiters!

by on Sep. 22, 2010


ethics

Recently, I read a discussion where people were sharing accounts of what they deemed unethical practices of third-party recruiters whom they had encountered. Just a few of the examples given included:

  • Beefing up salaries to include the maximum possible bonus that almost no one is capable of achieving.
  • Advertising non-existing jobs to build up a resume database.
  • Blasting jobs in LinkedIn groups and other online communities.
  • Recruiting candidates from current or former clients.
  • Requiring candidates to pay for their services.
  • “Doctoring” candidates’ resumes to make them more suitable for a position.
  • Sending a candidate on an interview as a “slot-filler” when they don’t really have a shot at the job.

(reminder: these were examples given by real people & are simply their opinions)

There are two schools of thought here:

Keep reading »
5 Comments

Uncategorized

Military Recruiters Who Lie

by on Aug. 5, 2008


fordyce-default

A lot is being written lately regarding the military recruiter in Texas who told a recruit who had changed his mind about joining the service that he was “going to jail” if he did not report for basic training. That’s sad, because it perpetuates the age-old stereotype of the military recruiter who will say and do anything in order to meet a quota.

As there are bad apples in any field, there are military recruiters who lie. They are a very small minority. As a former Marine Corps officer who has worked with all the services over the years, I am very familiar with military recruiting programs, policies, and recruiter tactics.

Keep reading »
6 Comments

TFL archives

Truth Or Consequences

by on Nov. 1, 2005


fordyce-default

Recently, several different recruiters have contacted me, each of them dealing with the consequences of candidates and clients not telling the truth. Although no one told an outright lie, in each instance, certain elements of the truth were not communicated to the recruiter. These were sins of omission versus sins of commission.

On the candidate side, sins of omission included an undisclosed business bankruptcy, several DWIs, a felony conviction, and recent jail time for failure to pay court ordered child support. On the client side, sins of omission included a product liability lawsuit (which they lost), a wrongful termination lawsuit (which they lost), a sexual harassment settlement, and a record of late payments to vendors. Between the candidates and clients, the non-telling of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth had the consequences of at least six lost placements.

Although properly conducted, behaviorally based, in-depth reference checks on both the candidates and clients may very well have uncovered the nondisclosures, the standard references completed by the recruiters did not identify these significant omissions. However, after discussing the individual situations with each recruiter, it became obvious that if they had asked the candidates and clients the right questions at the beginning of the process, they may have been in a position to prevent the ultimate consequences.

Remember

With some who decide to lie, mask the truth, or withhold information, it may be all but impossible through the use of standard processes to discover the truth before you suffer the consequences. Keep in mind that few of these people will provide answers to unasked questions.

Therefore, keeping in mind the potential problems to be encountered when working on behalf of your client, be thorough with your questions. In addition to your standard formats, consider adding direct questions similar to the following:

“What else should I know about you, your company and this position that we have not as yet discussed?”

And

“As I proceed with this project, what will I hear industry people saying about your company?”

Or

“True or false, fact or fiction, positive or negative, what will I hear about your company as I execute my processes on your behalf?”

Or

“Considering it’s in everyone’s best interest not to have any negative twelfth hour surprises, is there anything else we should be discussing that may impact the outcome of this project?”

And

“If anything of an unexpected and potentially negative nature arises during the course of the project, I will not proceed further until or unless we discuss it and reach a resolution on how it should be handled. Does that seem reasonable to you?”

Considering the potential problems that could arise on the candidate/recruit side of the process, you may want to add the following questions to your evaluation process.

“As a standard practice, we conduct comprehensive background and reference checks on all individuals we select for presentation to our clients. Therefore, before we begin that process, is there anything else about you that we should be discussing?”

And

“True or false, fact or fiction, positive or negative, what am I going to learn about you as we conduct our comprehensive reference and background checks?”

Or

“Now is the time, prior to beginning our comprehensive background and reference checks for you to be completely candid and forthright. This is an opportunity to tell your side of the story. Is there anything in your background or experience that could be viewed as a negative by a potential employer?”

Or

“Mutual trust is the foundation for all my relationships, most importantly, the relationships I have with my clients and candidates. I promise you full disclosure of all information pertinent to your involvement with this project. In return, I expect complete candor and honesty from you. With that in mind, is there anything that you need to share with me before we begin our comprehensive background and reference checks?”

And

“I work on a ‘no surprises’ basis. It is only in this manner that I can maintain the trust of my clients and those I represent to them. Therefore, to insure we have not missed anything, what else should we discuss that may have an impact on the outcome of this process?”

Some of these questions may seem rather direct. They are meant to be!

If someone is going to lie to you, there is very little that you can do about it. However, most people will be open to telling the “whole truth” if you are direct with your questions and if you frame those questions in a professional manner, particularly if you ask for the information more than once during your evaluation process.

Both our clients and candidates need to know we will be thorough with our processes. They have a right to have this expectation, and as professionals, we have an obligation to make that expectation a reality. Remember, “No surprises!” After all, you either deal with the truth or you will no doubt suffer the consequences.

As always, your questions and comments are most welcome.

Keep reading »
No comments

TFL archives

Competitive Intelligence Specialist Or Corporate Spy?

by on Sep. 1, 2004


fordyce-default

The Case for Ethical Competitive Intelligence (CI)

In early June my partner and I were preparing for a presentation to a prestigious group of senior-level corporate recruiting officers. The subject was how CI, conducted ethically and professionally, could provide an advantage to the corporate HR and recruiting functions by unlocking the competitive intelligence in their workforce.

I took a break from the presentation and picked up the June issue of The Fordyce Letter. You can imagine how my interest was piqued when I read Paul Hawkinson’s “Publisher’s Corner” on page six:

“Do you know what a ‘competitive intelligence specialist’ is? Try ‘corporate spy’ on for size. There is a rather large group of these folks working surreptitiously for many of the Fortune 500 biggies. What you probably don’t know is that frequently they conceal their activities by cloaking themselves as ‘headhunters.’ Maybe that’s one of the reasons our reputation remains dicey to many.”

I am both a headhunter and a CI professional. In fact, I just completed a three-year term on the Board of Directors of our own professional society, The Society of Competitive Intelligence Professionals (SCIP), headquartered in Alexandria, VA (www.scip.org)

My unique and small niche is helping large corporations staff their CI functions with the most competent and ethical specialists available. It’s been an interesting life. I can use the skills I learned as a Russian-speaking Naval Intelligence officer followed by 23 years in the business world to help companies avoid being blindsided by their competition.

So after I finished reading that short paragraph from the June TFL, I called Paul immediately. We had a very interesting discussion.

His first reaction was, “I guess I’ve always known there was someone like you out there, and now I’ve met him.”

The biggest point I wanted to clarify was that Paul was not referring to CI staffers at Fortune 500 companies, like the people I place. He confirmed this. What he was talking about were outsourced collection firms who are apparently hired by Fortune 500 companies to gather information from external sources in the marketplace. There are many varieties of these types of firms, but the common thread is they conduct third-party research on behalf of corporate clients. Some of them use the ruse of being executive recruiters, which indeed gives us all a bad name.

Let me state my personal opinion categorically.

First, this behavior, as described, is certainly unethical if it isn’t illegal. If any of these collection firms that are using the “executive recruiter ruse” happen to be members of SCIP, they are violating the Ethics Code of the professional society. The key problem is that there is no real position for which the recruiter is attempting to find candidates. Candidates are simply being “milked” for information, which absolutely sullies our reputation as recruiters.

Second, I believe the companies that hire such collection firms on an outsourced basis have an obligation to ask their vendors about their own ethics policies. How do they identify and represent themselves during interviews with sources? The SCIP Ethics Code for CI Professionals backs me up on this point.

The Ethics Code has the virtue of not being complicated and is spelled out below:

(1) To continually strive to increase respect and recognition for the profession.

(2) To comply with all applicable laws, domestic and international.

(3) To accurately disclose all relevant information, including one’s identity and organization, prior to all interviews.

(4) To fully respect all requests for confidentiality of information.

(5) To avoid conflicts of interest in fulfilling one’s duties.

(6) To provide honest and realistic recommendations and conclusions in the execution of one’s duties.

(7) To promote this code of ethics within one’s company, with third-party contractors and within the entire profession.

(8) To faithfully adhere to and abide by one’s company policies, objectives, and guidelines.

If third-party collection firms are using the “executive recruiter ruse” to gather intelligence on behalf of their corporate clients, they are clearly violating bullet point # 3 above.

If a company who hires these firms knows or even suspects that its vendor or vendors are using the “executive recruiter ruse,” or any other ruse for that matter, then that company is clearly violating bullet points # 1, possibly # 8, and certainly # 7 above. If the company is unwittingly ignorant of the fact that one of its third-party collection firms is rusing, then it is violating bullet point # 8 by not doing a thorough enough job of promoting these ethical standards with third party contractors.

Are any TFL readers aware of either third-party collection firms or client companies that may be violating the SCIP Ethics Code for CI Professionals? If so, in my opinion, they should be brought to the attention of the SCIP board of directors for its consideration and possible action. SCIP is an individual membership organization. One of the terms and conditions of membership is that individual members must agree that they will abide by the Ethics Code in order to remain a member in good standing.

Now that I have condemned the behavior that Paul discussed in the June issue and suggested a potential remedy, I would also like to state that I believe there is absolutely nothing wrong with CI “per se.” When done ethically by trained professionals, CI is a necessary corporate function that contributes enormously to the attaining and sustaining of competitive advantage.

Unlike many other specialties in the business world, executive search consultants seem to understand CI intuitively. It doesn’t need to be explained to us because we tend to be competitive by nature, we know the value of search research, and we often try to fill positions for our clients by seeking out talent from their competitors. In short, we know how to gather and analyze competitive information in order to be good at what we do.

But make no mistake, there is plenty of opportunity to do a better job of CI in the corporate world, especially on the recruiting side of HR. Want proof?

When my partner and I gave the presentation to which I referred earlier to that group of about 50 senior-level corporate recruiting officers, we did a survey to determine the CI savvy and practices exhibited by these recruiting officers.

Remember they are the same corporate recruiting officers who hire us to conduct searches for them. Therefore, TFL readers may be interested in the results, which strongly suggest room for improvement in terms of workforce CI.

Do you have a formal process in your company that routinely captures the marketplace knowledge that resides within your internal recruiting staff?

YES: ………………………. 14 %

NO: ………………………… 86 %

Do you have a formal process in your company that identifies, contacts and interviews newly-hired employees who have come from critical positions at competitors?

YES: ………………………. 31 %

NO: ………………………… 69 %

Do you have a formal process in your company that maintains an up-to-date talent inventory of critical positions at your competitors?

YES: …………………………. 3 %

NO: ………………………… 97 %

Do you KNOW that you have a Competitive Intelligence (CI) unit at your firm?

YES: ………………………. 53 %

NO: ………………………… 47 %

Of those who said YES to the above question, have you ever worked with or coordinated with this CI unit in any way?

YES: ………………………. 58 %

NO: ………………………… 42 %

Keep reading »
1 comment

TFL archives

Ten Ethical Standards Every Recruiter Should Abide By

by on Mar. 1, 2003


fordyce-default

There are a number of courses that recruiters can attend to increase their prowess in finding candidates, establishing new clients, closing candidates, or managing their time. But unfortunately, there isn’t a great deal of training available in the area of ethics.Before you jump to the assumption that recruiters will do what is best for their clients or that an education in ethics is unnecessary, consider the following questions asked by some recruiters unsure of the proper steps to take to remain ethical:

  • “Does ‘will not recruit from’ include client candidates that contact us directly in response to an advertisement or client candidates who are actively looking to leave?”
  • “Is the researcher job ethical? Is it right to impersonate staff and lie to get information? Is it legal?”
  • “Does anyone know of a recruiter who has had a ‘sub rosa’ request from a client to recruit one of its own employees? How should they handle such a request?”
  • “What’s the deal when clients contact the ‘reference person,’ then interview and hire them without telling me? Is that still covered in my contract? Is that my candidate (although I never even knew that he was looking)?”

When reading the above questions posed by inquisitive recruiters, one should keep in mind that these individuals are seeking out the right direction. They are questioning the steps to take, as they are unsure. Their motivation is to do what is right.Now think about those individuals who would not stop to question their actions. They simply plow ahead at full steam leaving a body count behind them. These are the individuals that worry me most.Ethics, unfortunately, are not standardized for our industry. A set of rules or a statement of purpose for all recruiters to follow does not exist. I think it should!So here are my top ten standards or ethics to which I wish and hope all recruiters would adhere.1. If the actions you contemplate taking are those you would feel embarrassed about if known, don’t take them!We’re often tempted to cut corners or act in an unethical manner when no one is watching. Sometimes our temptations can fall into the area of little white lies. “They won’t hurt anybody, so why not?”Why not? Because it opens the door for larger and larger “little white lies,” until they’re no longer little and no longer white.So how do we act when these temptations arise? We act as we have told ourselves previously. We shouldn’t wait until we are in the heat of the battle to make a decision. Making a decision during the heat of the battle is likely to result in a wrong decision. The decision to act ethically should be made when things are calm. Many of you probably don’t have children, but I think you will understand this analogy. If you asked your sixteen-year-old daughter what she would do if on her date her boyfriend started to get a little too fresh, how many of you would be satisfied with this answer? “Oh, I don’t know, I guess I’ll just deal with that issue when it happens.”Decisions about how one should and will act should be made before the heat of the battle. Making the conscience decision to act ethically and committing to it when there is no temptation will prepare us to deal with temptation when it arises.2. We should all swear to some form of the “Recruiters Hippocratic Oath,” with the main emphasis focused on “doing no harm.” (I’ve included a link to the Hippocratic Oath for those with inquiring minds: classics.mit.edu/Hippocrates/hippooath.html)All too often I have witnessed recruiters act in a way that would negatively affect someone they feel has wronged them. Many times this has been done with malice aforethought. Acting in a way that would harm someone is never justified, regardless of what they have done. We have the right to refuse to assist their efforts, but we do not have the right to sabotage those efforts.I know, I know, there are some people who have gone behind our backs once told the identity of our client, others who have told employers that we promised them X number of dollars more than what has been offered; some have lied, cheated, mislead, omitted, and committed any number of offences with malice aforethought adversely affecting our businesses. They may indeed deserve a just payment, but it is not our responsibility to mete it out.We can vent in chat rooms or on the forum, but we should never treat anyone adversely. We should remain objective and professional regardless of the actions of others.3. Treat your managers or hiring authorities with respect, and over-communicate to them without them you would be out of a job.Hiring authorities, whether you are an internal corporate recruiter or an external agency recruiter, want to be kept informed. Managers and hiring authorities want to know where they stand, when they can expect relief, and how your search is going. This is a fine line to walk. We all like to deliver good news, but delivering bad news correctly can do you more good than trying to stall their expectations.There are many reasons that hiring authorities want to know where a search stands. They may have deadlines they are trying to meet; they may be relying on the information we provide when they are making or correcting these deadlines.Providing a hiring authority with accurate information is the best thing you can do. Telling a hiring authority, “I have five in the pipeline that I will talk to tonight,” will do little to further your career. Talking about potential candidates and their likelihood of their being a fit is best left to Clio and her entourage of psychics.State simply and concisely where you stand, without apology. If you have candidates (individuals you have spoken with and who are qualified) then accurately state your assessment of each. If you have performed your search and have come up short, state it unapologetically and without cowering. You have done nothing from which to cower. All of us, at one time or another have performed to the best of our ability and not met someone’s expectations.4. Treat candidates with respect and over-communicate to them without them you would also be out of a job.“They called me in at a moments notice, I interviewed with them, and I haven’t heard from them in weeks!” “They never gave me any feedback after my interview.” “I’ve called at least five times and they haven’t called me back!”Sound familiar? We have all been guilty of letting a candidate slip through the cracks at one time or another when things get extremely busy. But that doesn’t mean that we should. Whether corporate or agency, individuals who utilize our services in finding their next employment opportunity deserve respect. They deserve to be treated as we would wish to be treated.I find that the majority of the time the miscommunication occurs at the initial meeting. If we as recruiters take a few extra minutes to inform our candidates of what they can and cannot expect from us, these types of complaints greatly diminish. Don’t be afraid to tell a candidate that you are a headhunter. Tell them that you work exclusively for your clients and that you are not a placement counselor. If they are a fit for this position you will call them; if not you will hold their resume in confidence until the next opportunity arises. Be direct! They will respect your giving them the ground rules and will abide by them.5. Follow through! Do what you say, and say what you will do.Recently I contracted to a client where vendor management was one of my responsibilities. I sent out explicit instructions for submitting candidates to those agencies that inquired. The requirements I posed were not burdensome; they were simple in nature and easy to fulfill. These requirements were meant to expedite the hiring process.I received inquiries from well over 20 different agencies. Of the 20 that inquired, only two agencies followed the instructions. This resulted in my having to make numerous unnecessary calls to facilitate assisting the agencies. These agencies soon fell by the wayside. With only two left fulfilling the requirements, we soon found our candidate. I wondered, “Why did these other agencies go through all of the hassle of finding candidates only to lose the chance of placing them because they didn’t follow the simplest of instructions?”More frustration arises from the things you say you will do, but don’t, then any other thing I can think of.6. Corporations and corporate recruiters should play fair!If a candidate is brought to the table by an agency or an independent recruiter, and your interviewing and hiring that candidate is a direct result of the agency recruiter’s efforts, you owe a fee! The fact that the candidate may have applied to your company at some time in the past and is sitting in your database means someone internally dropped the ball. You hired the individual due to the efforts of the agency or independent recruiter. Quit splitting hairs!7. Agency and independent recruiters should earn their fees.If your client has a subscription to one of the major boards, don’t spend all your time looking for candidates from them. The client is paying you to supply them with a candidate that they would most likely not find.Here’s an idea: actually source and recruit! If all you do is continually forward the resumes of candidates from the same boards your client subscribes to, please explain to me the service you provide, because I don’t see it! Most likely, neither will your client.If you think that your clients won’t catch on, you have underestimated the in-house staff. While on the corporate side of the recruiting industry, I was contacted on a number of occasions by agency recruiters selling their abilities to find and provide untapped talent, only to see the candidates they presented on the major boards. It was clear: all they did was search the same boards I had access to. I quit using these agencies.8. When working with recruiters in a split scenario, don’t begrudge the split. it affords you a placement. Pay it on time and with a smile!Ever notice how many recruiters get suspicious when they work on a split arrangement? I think this is because too many times recruiters begrudge paying the split when payday arrives. They rationalize, “I worked my tail off establishing that client. All this recruiter did was pull a candidate resume from his database. I did all the work! They don’t deserve their half of the fee.”Once again, this is the wrong attitude. Without that candidate the placement would not have happened! If after you make a split placement you feel you did all the work, ask yourself why. Most likely it is a matter of not laying the groundwork for how the relationship should have worked.Lay it out! If you want them to check references, tell them. Whatever you need to facilitate the placement, let them know. Likewise, if you are the agency submitting the candidate, be prepared. There are certain things you know the submitting agency will need: salary expectations, reason for leaving, availability, etc. Don’t wait until they ask for it. Have it before it is needed. Anticipate the next step and prepare for it. You will find that when payday comes you will receive it with an open hand and a smile of appreciation.9. A guarantee period is just that: a period of time that you “guarantee” some action. Don’t try to back out or take advantage of a technicality when things go awry. You agreed to a set of circumstances. Follow through and do so cheerfully!I have witnessed a number of occasions when a recruiter has tried to back out of a guarantee at the expense of a long-term relationship. Not wanting to lose a fee is understandable. But it should not be the driving motivation for your actions. “Fees” should be the driving motivation for your actions, not a fee!”Fees” are acquired from long-term relationships with clients. One fee will matter little over the period of five years especially if that fee was attained at a client where you made only one placement. Fees should be the goal. Fees keep the motor of an agency running. Spending all of your time developing relationships with clients where you will make only one placement will not result in a growing, robust company or client base. Consistently performing and producing for a few continual clients would always be preferred.Therefore, honor your guarantees. If you offer a 90-day full refund guarantee, then refund the full amount as you said you would, and do so with a smile even for the one-off placement clients!10. Develop a consistent work ethic.Work hard for your employer, whether you work for a corporation, an agency, or as an independent. Develop a solid work ethic and perform your responsibilities to the best of your abilities.Above all else, maintain integrity. I’ve said it before but it is worth mentioning again. All you take with you from employer to employer is your ability to perform and your reputation. As recruiters, we do not sell a product; we provide a service.If you sacrifice your service and integrity in the pursuit of a quick dollar you may indeed win the battle but you will lose the war!

Keep reading »
4 Comments

TFL archives

Corporate Recruiting Ethics: An Ongoing Threat

by on Feb. 1, 2003


fordyce-default

Major corporations are adopting and monitoring codes of ethics with increasing frequency. In a Business Roundtable Special Report entitled “Corporate Ethics: A Prime Business Asset” it was noted that one of the major areas of concern is “attention to values and ethics in recruiting and hiring”.You don’t need a Recruiter’s Roundtable to know employers are tightening the clamps. PSA’s (placement service agreements) almost always contain some ambiguous, generic, flag-waving words about “openness” and “honesty” in recruiting practices. Some even expressly prohibit “soliciting” employees of “competitors.”Most recruiters sign them with a smile. But most recruiters would be cutting their phone cords if they tried to live with them. Cold-calling, motivating, and arranging interviews for happily employed people just aren’t mentioned in annual reports.Jeffrey Lant noted in Tricks of The Trade:

One of the reasons why organizations hire advisors is because the client decision maker needs a scapegoat for a decision that has already been made and that he needs to camouflage. This is reality and if you walk into this situation knowing what needs to be done, and accept the challenge of the assignment, you should be prepared for what follows.

These self-imposed codes are almost always initiated by top management. The typical large corporation CEO is highly paid, highly visible and highly vulnerable to attack from management, the government, consumers and the public. The typical CEO also has a history of tough, street-wise exploitation.In Realistic Leadership, Madeline Daniels profiled the classic mindset of those who reach the top:

Even when the original belief is false, people make it come true. People prefer that other people behave as they expect them to, and they will modify or distort reality until it conforms to their expectations.

Whether motivated by guilt feelings, noble desire, public relations or fear, top brass wants the organization to “be ethical.” Nobody argues with them. But nobody believes them either.There are two primary ways internal codes of ethics are affecting the placement industry:1. RETAINED SEARCHES ARE BEING CURTAILED“Retained search” sounds good and enhances your credibility. But the chances are you never received a retainer from any employer.Some may disagree, but some credible trackers estimated during 2000 that less than 20% of our industry has received some form of payment prior to beginning a search. Most of the time this was only a phone or travel expense advance or a small engagement fee. Today, any prepayment probably occurs even less frequently.So many employers and recruiters were burned by “search assignments” that weren’t completed, the retained concept proved unworkable. The “free market” of contingency search results in placements. It’s accepted because it works.Now, the ethics fad is making it even harder to get a retainer from major corporations. They don’t want to be considered “clients.” They don’t want you to legally be their “agent.” That way they can disavow any knowledge that you were violating their great-sounding codes. In fact, they can even deny that the “job order” was an “order” at all — the hiring authority merely “mentioned” the “possibility” of a “future” opening. Whenever they can, they distance themselves from what we do and how we do it.”The consistently successful placers are contingency-fee ones anyway. They need the ability to market candidates and recruit for employers who want to play, not just leave their chips on the “pass line.” They don’t want to be bound by corporate doubletalk and abstract philosophy. The stakes are high, but so are the takes.Lant also noted:

We live in an age where more and more people want less and less to be identified with the decisions they make… Bringing in an outside advisor can well be used to appease individuals who really want to provoke change when the decision maker himself is resolutely opposed to it.

…Not only do senior executives need a candid friend. They also need old-fashioned structure. The higher any executive moves in any organization, the less structure there is and the greater the opportunity to get lost and fail to achieve further success. Thus the need for an independent goal-oriented advisor.

2. PROPRIETARY RIGHTS ARE BEING ENFORCEDCorporations have become extremely nervous about losing key employees. However, unless there is a premeditated corporate raid by a single competitor and its actual hiring of a group of individuals in a particular section, there is no way to restrain a recruit.So corporate lawyers have attempted to use their internal policies as a way of limiting their employees from considering other opportunities. They usually charge employees with breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and conversion (theft). In doing so, they are including recruiters under the theories of inducing breach of contract, interference with contractual relations, interference with prospective economic advantage, solicitation and conspiracy. We’re not talking here about a PSA that you sign. We’re talking about an internal code of ethics that the employee signs.No sophisticated corporation would expressly limit its entire workforce from considering other jobs. So they couch their codes in terms of prohibiting “outside interests,” “conflicts of interest,” “disclosure of confidential information,” “misuse of proprietary information,” “misuse of trade secrets,” “unfair competition,” “activities which tend to impair effectiveness on the job,” etc.There is no limit to the ways these words can be used to frighten and bludgeon an employee. For example, one major corporation considers the names and titles of its employees a “trade secret.” Another requires the submission of detailed reports of any outside calls to employees within one business day of their receipt. Switchboard operators, mail and copy room employees, receptionists, secretaries and other gatekeepers are encouraged to report any “suspicious” conduct. Emails are monitored. The result is often a full- scale undercover investigation by corporate security offices. Increasingly, temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions are being sought.Codes of ethics are internal corporate “laws.” Employees are bound by them because they consented — either expressly (by signing them) or impliedly (just by working for the company). The legal issues don’t usually revolve around consent. They revolve around whether the wording is specific enough to be enforceable, whether communication with the recruiter is included, and whether the act itself is something the employer can limit.Internally, ethics boards, security officers or staff attorneys monitor compliance. In the words of the Business Roundtable Report:

The process . . . involves a serious and continuous attention of line managers at all levels and the employees of every division. Wide-ranging activities and methods are used, focusing on the values of the company and their applicability in specific locations . . . The theme that employees not only should report violations but also should feel it is their duty to do so comes through loud and clear in well-developed programs. . . Some programs include honors for employees with exemplary performance.

Externally, courts are asked to enforce the employer’s rights based upon the codes being considered legally-binding contracts. You are considered an indispensable party (solicitor and co-conspirator) to the breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty or conversion (theft). These intentional tort theories invoke punitive (punishment) and exemplary (to make an example) damages in an unlimited amount. At present, the corporation has to prove you had actual knowledge of the codes. However, intentional conduct (meaning you intended to recruit) would probably be sufficient if you participated in a wholesale raid.We can’t tell you how to absolutely defend yourself unless we know the allegations. However, the following items should be considered to cause a retreat in a recruiter revolt:

  1. No recruiter can “steal” someone who doesn’t want to be “stolen.” (We know — you like to think you can, but human beings aren’t that cooperative.)
  2. The employer should be using its management time in positive ways to reduce employee turnover. This includes motivating and engendering loyalty in its employees. Erecting fences only makes the grass look greener on the other side.
  3. The morale of employees suffers when they are shackled. That’s why the lowest productivity exists in countries with the least personal freedom.
  4. Send the employer a copy of a U.S. Chamber of Commerce survey that will reveal employees want (in usual order of importance):
    1. Job security.
    2. Competitive wages.
    3. Appreciation.
    4. Inclusion in decisions affecting
    5. Interesting work.
    6. Pleasant office surroundings.
    7. Promotion and development potential within the company.
    8. Tactful discipline.
    9. Sympathetic understanding.
    10. Loyalty.
  5. Ask the employer whether it’s willing to take an anonymous survey asking whether employees think their supervisors:
    1. Ignore their achievements.
    2. Criticize them too often.
    3. Fail to do their share of the work.
    4. Review, give raises, and promote equitably.
    5. Discipline firmly, fairly and consistently.
    6. Set a good example.
    7. Assign, delegate and monitor work realistically.
    8. Encourage them.
    9. Support them.
  6. Tell the employer you intend to cross-complain for an outplacement fee! (That’s right — you helped the employer remove undiscovered malcontents. How much is that worth?)
  7. Would the source employer prefer that you place a very specific ad in a local newspaper or billboard? How about leaving flyers at local restaurants? Almost any generally-distributed information is perfectly legal (and reaches everyone).

The placement industry is concerned about ethics too. It shouldn’t be a fad either — self-regulation elevates all of us. That’s why every profession monitors itself.Those ambiguous, generic, flag-waving words in a PSA are funny. The more a recruiter touts their own ethical behavior in brochures or on the phone, the more comical they sound to an employer. Recruiters are supposed to find the right candidate as quickly and quietly as possible. Those “ethical” employers pay for results, not rhetoric.No questions asked.

Keep reading »
1 comment