The Guardian’s apparent move onto recruitment agency turf by representing candidates who have applied for jobs online has been characterised as “the wrong service, at the wrong time”.

The newspaper and online group acknowledged last week in a media statement that from last February, candidates could ‘opt in’ to receiving calls from Guardian Jobs People, its test venture into candidate representation. “So although I’ve paid to attract the candidate, they are now not only replying to me but also to a competitor,” said John Reilly, managing director of media recruitment firm Reilly People.

“Effectively, you are … opening our mail and using its contents against us,” Reilly wrote in a 5 June letter to Adam Freeman, The Guardian commercial director and general manager- digital, Guardian News and Media.

“Opening people’s post has never been acceptable. You did not inform me you intended to use CVs in the way you now are and I have never agreed to it. For this reason I wish you to refund all the monies I’ve paid from the point you made this change.”

Other industry players questioned the media group’s judgement in introducing the service, given the current state of the marketplace and The Guardian’s pre-eminence as a well-regarded, socially conscious recruitment advertising vehicle.

“Selling candidates is a bit of a saturated marketplace,” Andrew Wilkinson, chief executive of recruitment marketing company TMP, told Recruiter. “It strikes me as the wrong service, at the wrong time.”

Another online service was quick to distance themselves from The Guardian’s strategy. “Our strategy is to totally empower the agencies - 80-90% of our jobs come in from agencies. They’re our friend,” Jobsite CEO Keith Potts told Recruiter. “We do resourcing of candidates; we don’t do selection. We will never do the selection. It would be suicidal for us.”

Media recruiter PFJ CEO, Paul Farrer, told Recruiter that he shared some of Reilly’s concerns, but was “not so bothered” because a Guardian commercial representative had advised him that the media sector would not be a focus of their activity.

“The Guardian has a right to run its business the way it sees fit,” Farrer said. “I trust them to tell me if they move into areas we operate in.”
Charity recruiter Harris Hill and education recruiter Protocol Education were among the recruiters advertising on Guardian Jobs last week.

When contacted for comment about the candidate representation, Harris Hill managing director Aled Morris said: “My immediate reaction is, I’m not going to be over the moon about it.”

Protocol marketing manager Scott Owen spoke of the agency’s “long and successful relationship” with Guardian Jobs and said its candidate representation was “not something that worries us unduly. However, if for whatever reason the flow of candidates from the site was to change appreciably, we’d review the situation”.

The controversy ignited considerable web debate last week. Recruitment blogger Stephen Fowler, UK sales manager for software firm Arithon, said he felt that the new move was “simply a trial business model made by an ethical publication that hasn’t quite worked out the implications”.

The Guardian’s Freeman told Recruiter: “The majority (of recruiters) clearly understand that we are not chasing their candidates… If we give them candidates they are happy.”