TRANCHED: Life after CDOs, Week 10

Just when I thought I had seen every dirty trick in the murky world of recruitment, it seems we have now begun to plunge to new depths. A lot of this is supposition and I can't verify a word of it, but if my suspicions are correct then we have entered a very dark period indeed.

If you are sitting comfortably, then I will begin. Our story revolves around one of the headhunting firms that has displayed a number of high-profile roles through their own website and elsewhere. My involvement with the firm came through an ex-colleague, who gave me the name of a headhunter she recommended at this firm. I made the call, sent over my CV and gave a brief introduction to the consultant who had been recommended.

Over a period of a number of weeks I chased the consultant I'd sent my details to and heard nothing. Given how busy headhunters are, this has become a common occurrence, part of the new reality that I have come to accept and deal with. This week, out of the blue, two consultants from the firm, who I hadn't spoken to before, called and left urgent messages for me to contact them.

I made the call and expected the usual polite invitation to come into their offices, walk through my CV and discuss roles they have on at the moment - putting a name to the face. Instead, I got a barrage of questions as to where I'd been interviewing and the names of the hiring managers I'd spoken to at these firms.

Their excuse was that they needed to ensure that I don't get my CV sent through to the same people from multiple headhunters. This is normally a sound policy and one that protects against embarrassing overlap.

I may be being intensely paranoid (redundancy can have strange effects on one's psyche), but I am almost convinced that this group of crooks are using potential candidates to scope out potential recruiters. The heavy insistence on knowing the names of the people who are recruiting, combined with an apparent lack of desire to get me into their own offices to outline my position, are very suspicious.

Unless I am much mistaken, the recruitment model works as follows: headhunter retained by employer to find suitable candidates, suitable candidates approach headhunter and ultimately headhunter matches candidate with employer to earn a fee. The idea that headhunters are now using candidates to find recruiters breaks this simple paradigm.

I appreciate that for many of you hardened bankers this will come as no surprise and may even prompt a smirk as just another demonstration of the dog eat dog nature of the financial sector. However, even as someone who until recently sold CDOs for a living, I think this behaviour shows a level of morality on a parallel with that of stealing gold teeth from corpses.

Driven by my long-held natural cynicism about the headhunting profession, I made up a few names and sent them through, and if my suspicions are correct these consultants will waste a few precious hours trying to track down non-existent hedge funds and people at bulge-bracket banks with mildly comic names.

What if I am wrong about this? I have been wrong before, and after this extended rant (even by my own standards) a large amount of hat eating would be required. On balance, though, my instinct tells me that shady practices are afoot and that the motto of the City, caveat emptor, now applies in spades to the field of recruitment.

On a slightly more positive note, friends and contacts have been brilliant this week - nuggets of hope are beginning to appear amongst the sediment left by the credit crunch. More about these next week. Until then, I urge vigilance.