Disclaimer: This article is for entertainment purposes only.
The staffing industry operates in a peculiar space where practices that would get an individual prosecuted for fraud are considered “standard business operations” when done at corporate scale.
Fake job postings? Data mining? Lowballing candidates? Worker misclassification? Tax dodging? Each practice comes with a pre-packaged corporate excuse that’s technically legal, publicly defensible, and completely devoid of ethics.
Let’s break down the most common unethical practices and the excuses agencies use to justify them.
Practice #1: Posting Fake Jobs That Don’t Exist
What They Do:
Post attractive job listings on their websites and job boards with no actual client or position behind them. The goal is to farm resumes and build their candidate database.
Example: “Senior Software Engineer – $150K – Amazing Tech Company!”
You apply. Crickets. Or: “Sorry, that position was just filled.”
Two weeks later, the same job is still posted.
The Excuse:
“We’re building a talent pipeline for future opportunities.”
Translation: We’re collecting your data to have inventory when a real job comes along (which might be never).
“The client changed their requirements.”
Translation: There was no client. We made up the job to attract resumes.
“We’re always looking for great talent.”
Translation: This is an “evergreen” posting. It’s never getting filled because it’s not a real job.
“That particular role filled, but we have similar opportunities!”
Translation: We got what we wanted (your resume), now we’ll lowball you on something else.
Why It’s Legal:
- No law requires job postings to be for actual, active positions
- “Always accepting applications” is considered legitimate recruiting
- Companies can claim they “intended” to hire someday
- Privacy policies (that no one reads) cover data collection
Why It’s Still Bullshit:
You spent time tailoring your resume, writing a cover letter, maybe even prepping for an interview that was never going to happen. Your data is now in their system to be contacted about jobs you never expressed interest in, at rates lower than what attracted you in the first place.
Practice #2: Lowballing Candidates on Salary
What They Do:
Client says: “Our budget is $100/hour for this role” Agency tells candidate: “The job pays $70/hour” Candidate accepts. Agency bills client $100/hour, pays candidate $70/hour, pockets $30/hour (43% margin).
The Excuse:
“We provide market rate compensation.”
Translation: We pay what we can get away with, not what the client is actually paying.
“Our rate includes benefits and administrative overhead.”
Translation: We’re padding our profit margin and calling it “overhead.”
“The client’s budget is confidential.”
Translation: If you knew the real number, you’d negotiate harder, and we’d make less money.
“We negotiated hard to get you this rate.”
Translation: We negotiated with ourselves to maximize our spread.
“You’re free to negotiate.”
Translation: But we’re not telling you the ceiling, so you’re negotiating blind.
Why It’s Legal:
- Agencies aren’t required to disclose client budgets
- Candidates agree to the rate offered
- “Informed consent” doesn’t require full information
- Information asymmetry isn’t fraud if both parties enter willingly
Why It’s Still Bullshit:
The agency knows what both sides will accept and uses that information advantage to extract maximum profit. A truly fair negotiation requires both parties to have similar information. This is the opposite of that.
Practice #3: Misclassifying Employees as Independent Contractors
What They Do:
Call workers “independent contractors” instead of “employees” to avoid:
- Payroll taxes
- Employment insurance
- Workers’ compensation
- 401k contributions
- Health benefits
- Vacation pay
The worker does the same job an employee would do, but bears all the costs and risks.
The Excuse:
“You have the flexibility of being your own boss.”
Translation: We have the flexibility of not paying employer obligations.
“This is the industry standard for contract work.”
Translation: Everyone’s doing it, so it must be okay.
“You can deduct business expenses on your taxes.”
Translation: You pay for your own computer, software, and workspace while we pocket the savings.
“You have multiple clients, so you’re not our employee.”
Translation: We structured it this way specifically to avoid calling you an employee.
“The tax authorities reviewed our classification and we’re compliant.”
Translation: We fought them, settled, paid a fine, and kept doing it.
Why It’s Legal (Sort Of):
- Many agencies argue workers meet “independent contractor” tests
- IRS/CRA enforcement is inconsistent and under-resourced
- Penalties are often just fines, not criminal charges
- Agencies can afford to settle and move on
Why It’s Still Bullshit:
If the agency controls when you work, how you work, and who you work for, you’re an employee. Period. The “independent contractor” label is a fiction to dodge legal obligations.
Multiple agencies have been sued, fined, and forced to reclassify workers—and they keep doing it because the savings outweigh the penalties.
Practice #4: Ghosting Candidates After Initial Contact
What They Do:
Reach out enthusiastically: “We have the PERFECT opportunity for you!”
Conduct phone screen or interview.
Then: silence. No follow-up. No response to emails. No explanation.
The Excuse:
“We’re still reviewing candidates.”
Translation: We found someone cheaper/better and forgot about you.
“The client is slow to make decisions.”
Translation: There is no client, or the client rejected you immediately.
“We have so many applicants, we can’t respond to everyone.”
Translation: You’re not important enough to waste 30 seconds on.
“We’ll keep your resume on file for future opportunities.”
Translation: You’re in our database to be contacted when convenient for us, but we won’t reciprocate.
“The position was put on hold.”
Translation: It never existed, or we’re avoiding telling you that you weren’t selected.
Why It’s Legal:
- No law requires agencies to respond to candidates
- “Professional courtesy” isn’t legally enforceable
- Candidate ghosting is so common it’s accepted practice
Why It’s Still Bullshit:
You rearranged your schedule, took time off work, prepared for interviews, maybe even turned down other opportunities based on their enthusiasm. Basic human decency would involve a two-sentence email. They can’t be bothered.
Practice #5: Farming Candidate Data for Database Building
What They Do:
Collect thousands of resumes with no intention of placing most applicants. The real goal is building a searchable database to:
- Have inventory when future jobs arise
- Sell/share candidate data with other agencies
- Use for “market research” and analytics
- Demonstrate their “reach” to potential clients
The Excuse:
“We maintain a robust talent pool to serve our clients quickly.”
Translation: We’re hoarding your data to have options when someone pays us.
“Your information helps us match you with future opportunities.”
Translation: We’ll spam you with irrelevant jobs at lowball rates whenever we feel like it.
“Our database allows us to respond quickly to client needs.”
Translation: We couldn’t find anyone through our “network,” so we search the database of people who applied to fake jobs.
“You consented to data storage by applying.”
Translation: You didn’t read our 47-page privacy policy, so legally we’re covered.
“We only contact candidates about relevant opportunities.”
Translation: We define “relevant” as “any job we need filled,” regardless of your preferences.
Why It’s Legal:
- Privacy policies (buried in fine print) allow data collection
- You “consented” by submitting your resume
- Data retention policies are self-regulated
- Sharing within corporate networks is usually allowed
Why It’s Still Bullshit:
You applied for a specific job at a specific rate. You didn’t consent to being added to a permanent database, contacted about unrelated positions, or having your information shared/sold. But that’s exactly what happened.
Practice #6: The Delayed Payment Scheme
What They Do:
Structure payment schedules so workers go 3-4 weeks without a paycheck:
- Work Week 1-2
- Submit timesheet
- Wait for client approval
- Wait for agency processing
- Paid on the 15th or month-end
- Effectively: work a month before seeing your first dollar
The Excuse:
“We pay bi-monthly on a standard schedule.”
Translation: We hold your money for weeks to improve our cash flow.
“The client needs to approve timesheets before we can pay.”
Translation: We’re using client approval as an excuse for delayed payment.
“This is standard in contract staffing.”
Translation: Everyone screws contractors this way, so it must be fine.
“You’ll receive regular paychecks once the cycle starts.”
Translation: After you’ve floated us an interest-free loan for a month.
Why It’s Legal:
- Payment schedules are disclosed in contracts
- Workers agree to terms before starting
- As long as they eventually pay, it’s not wage theft
- “Industry standard” provides cover
Why It’s Still Bullshit:
You worked. You should be paid promptly. The agency is using your labor as free financing, holding your money to manage their cash flow while you struggle to pay rent.
Practice #7: The “Exclusive” Bait-and-Switch
What They Do:
Get candidate to sign “Right to Represent” (RtR) agreement, promising:
- They’ll submit you to specific jobs
- You’ll get priority consideration
- They’ll advocate for you
Then: they submit you alongside 50 other candidates, or don’t submit you at all, but you’re contractually blocked from applying directly or through other agencies.
The Excuse:
“The RtR protects your interests and ours.”
Translation: It protects our commission if you get hired, even if we did nothing.
“We submitted you but the client chose another candidate.”
Translation: We sent your resume in a batch of 50 and did zero actual advocacy.
“Exclusive representation ensures there’s no confusion with the client.”
Translation: We want to block you from going around us directly.
“The agreement is standard in our industry.”
Translation: Everyone does it, and candidates don’t read contracts anyway.
Why It’s Legal:
- You signed the agreement
- Contract law allows restrictive agreements
- As long as the terms are disclosed (however buried), it’s enforceable
Why It’s Still Bullshit:
You’re locked in, but they have zero obligation to actually work hard for you. You can’t pursue the opportunity through other channels, but they’re not incentivized to push your candidacy either. You’re stuck and they don’t care.
Practice #8: The Bait Job, Real Lowball
What They Do:
Advertise premium job: “Senior Role – $120K – Top Company!”
Get you on the phone.
“Oh, that one just filled, BUT I have this OTHER opportunity that’s perfect for you!”
The other opportunity: Junior role, $65K, questionable company.
The Excuse:
“The original position filled quickly—these great roles go fast!”
Translation: The original job was bait; this lowball is what we’re actually trying to fill.
“This role is actually better suited to your background.”
Translation: We lied about the requirements for the bait job to get you on the phone.
“The other role has more growth potential.”
Translation: It pays less, but we’re spinning it.
“We want to build a relationship with you for future opportunities.”
Translation: We want you in our database and willing to accept lower rates.
Why It’s Legal:
- Jobs can legitimately fill quickly
- Agencies can suggest alternative roles
- No law against “upselling” different opportunities
- Fraud requires proving intent to deceive (hard to do)
Why It’s Still Bullshit:
The premium job was designed to attract talent they couldn’t get for the real (lower-paying) role. They used deception to get your attention, then switched you to what they actually wanted to fill. Classic bait-and-switch.
Practice #9: Taking Credit for Direct Applications
What They Do:
You apply directly to a company’s career page.
The company uses multiple staffing agencies.
One agency sees your name in the client’s system, claims they “sourced” you, and tries to claim their commission.
Or: they contact you about the same job, get you to confirm interest, then submit you and claim they “represented” you.
The Excuse:
“We had you in our database first, so we have the right to represent you.”
Translation: We want commission for work we didn’t do.
“You confirmed interest when we contacted you, establishing representation.”
Translation: We tricked you into letting us take credit for your own application.
“Our client agreement specifies we get credit for any candidate we’ve sourced.”
Translation: We wrote contracts that allow us to claim anyone we’ve ever talked to.
“We invested time screening you, so we deserve compensation.”
Translation: We did a 10-minute phone call and want $20,000.
Why It’s Legal:
- Agency contracts with clients often have broad “sourcing” clauses
- Hard to prove who “sourced” a candidate first
- Civil matter between agencies and clients (candidate isn’t involved)
Why It’s Still Bullshit:
You applied directly. The agency did nothing. They’re parasitically trying to insert themselves into a transaction they weren’t part of to extract a fee.
Practice #10: The Markup Opacity
What They Do:
Refuse to disclose their markup percentage or the client’s actual budget. Operate in complete opacity while demanding transparency from candidates (salary history, current comp, expectations).
The Excuse:
“Our pricing is confidential and proprietary.”
Translation: If you knew our margins, you’d be furious.
“We can’t disclose client budget information.”
Translation: If you knew what they’re paying, you’d negotiate for more.
“Focus on whether the rate works for you, not our margin.”
Translation: Don’t think about how much we’re making off you.
“Our margins cover risk, benefits, and operational costs.”
Translation: We’re making 40%+ and don’t want to admit it.
“Different roles have different markup structures.”
Translation: We charge whatever we can get away with.
Why It’s Legal:
- No requirement to disclose markup or client budgets
- Pricing is considered proprietary business information
- Candidates agree to rates without full information
- “Willing buyer, willing seller” covers information asymmetry
Why It’s Still Bullshit:
They demand complete transparency from you (salary history, current comp, what you’re willing to accept) while giving you zero information about what they’re actually charging or what the client is willing to pay. Asymmetric information = asymmetric power = they win, you lose.
The Pattern: Legal ≠ Ethical
Notice the pattern in all these excuses:
- Appeal to industry norms (“Everyone does it”)
- Claim legal compliance (“It’s not illegal”)
- Shift responsibility (“You agreed to it”)
- Hide behind complexity (“Industry standard practices”)
- Invoke contracts (“You signed the agreement”)
Every excuse is technically defensible. Many are even legally sound.
But legality isn’t ethics.
Just because you CAN doesn’t mean you SHOULD.
Why They Get Away With It
The Power Imbalance
Agencies have:
- Lawyers
- Industry associations
- Lobbying power
- Corporate shields
- Deep pockets for settlements
Candidates have:
- Nothing
- No collective bargaining
- No political representation
- Desperate need for income
- No resources to fight
Result: Agencies do whatever maximizes profit, candidates accept it because they have no choice.
The Enforcement Gap
What SHOULD happen:
- Fake job postings prosecuted as fraud
- Worker misclassification heavily penalized
- Wage theft aggressively enforced
- Data harvesting regulated
- Markup disclosure mandated
What ACTUALLY happens:
- Complaints go nowhere
- Enforcement agencies underfunded
- Fines too small to deter
- Self-regulation doesn’t work
- Politicians don’t care
The Normalization
When an entire industry operates this way, the practices become “normal”:
- “That’s just how staffing works”
- “All agencies do this”
- “It’s standard procedure”
Normalizing exploitation doesn’t make it less exploitative. It just makes people stop questioning it.
The Alternative: How Honest Recruiting Actually Works
Real recruiters—the ones with integrity—operate completely differently:
No fake job postings. If it’s not a real role with a real client, it’s not posted.
Transparent negotiations. “The client’s budget is $X. I take Y%. You should ask for $Z.”
Proper classification. Employees are employees. Contractors are contractors. No games.
Professional communication. If you’re not selected, you get told. If plans change, you get updated. Basic human decency.
Honest data practices. “I’m adding you to my network. I’ll only contact you about roles matching your criteria. You can opt out anytime.”
Fair payment. You work, you get paid promptly. No month-long delays.
Real exclusivity. If you sign RtR, they actually advocate for you, not just block you from other options.
Actual job opportunities. The job advertised is the job they’re filling. No bait-and-switch.
Respect for direct applications. If you applied directly, they don’t try to claim credit.
Transparent pricing. “My standard fee is X%. Here’s what that means for you.”
This isn’t fantasy. This is how boutique recruiters, executive search firms, and ethical independents operate.
The difference: They build reputations on trust, not volume. They make money through value, not exploitation.
What You Can Do
For Job Seekers:
Ask direct questions:
- “Is this job posted with a specific client, or are you building a database?”
- “What’s your markup percentage?”
- “What’s the client’s budget for this role?”
- “Will you disclose if you’re misclassifying me as a contractor?”
When they give bullshit excuses, walk away.
Document everything:
- Save all emails and messages
- Screenshot job postings before they disappear
- Note promises made vs. delivered
- Report worker misclassification to tax authorities
Demand transparency:
- “I need to know the client’s budget before proceeding.”
- “I won’t sign an RtR without clear deliverables on your end.”
- “I need payment terms in writing before starting.”
Go direct when possible:
- Apply directly to companies
- Use LinkedIn to connect with hiring managers
- Network your way in rather than through agencies
- Cut out the middleman when you can
For Employers:
Demand accountability:
- “Show me proof this job is getting actively recruited.”
- “What’s your candidate-to-placement ratio?”
- “How long do your postings stay active?”
- “Are you farming resumes or filling my role?”
Require transparency:
- “Disclose your markup percentage.”
- “Show me your screening process.”
- “Prove you’re not just scraping job boards.”
Measure results:
- Track time-to-fill
- Monitor retention rates
- Compare agency vs. direct hires
- Fire agencies that underperform
Consider alternatives:
- Internal recruiters (often cheaper long-term)
- Direct sourcing through LinkedIn Recruiter
- Employee referral bonuses
- Boutique firms with ethical reputations
The Bottom Line
Every unethical practice in the staffing industry comes with a pre-packaged excuse:
- It’s legal
- It’s standard
- Everyone does it
- You agreed to it
- That’s just how the industry works
But legal doesn’t mean right.
The fact that an entire industry has normalized practices that would be considered fraud if done individually doesn’t make those practices ethical. It just means the industry has successfully rigged the system in its favor.
Staffing agencies justify exploitation by hiding behind contracts, industry standards, and legal technicalities.
But at the end of the day, they’re:
- Lying about job availability
- Stealing from workers through lowballing
- Dodging taxes through misclassification
- Ghosting people who trusted them
- Farming data without real consent
- Delaying payments to boost cash flow
- Blocking opportunities through restrictive contracts
- Using bait-and-switch tactics
- Claiming credit for work they didn’t do
- Operating in complete opacity
And they have an excuse for all of it.
The question isn’t whether their excuses are legally defensible.
The question is: Why are we accepting an industry built on excuses?
No responses yet