Discover your dream Career
For Recruiters

Are City recruitment firms thinking about redundancies?

It is, perhaps, early days to be suggesting this, but with most investment banks making redundancies, are recruitment firms servicing the City also likely to reduce headcount?

Certainly, the precedent is there. During the height of the financial crisis, large financial services contingency recruiters were quick to make redundancies and in some instances staff numbers only recovered towards the middle of this year.

Banking cuts were, of course, deeper in 2008 and (despite comparisons) sentiment decidedly more downbeat than now. However, some financial services recruiters - notably Michael Page, Robert Walters and Hays - were increasing headcount relatively aggressively late last year.

Concerns over banks' hiring freezes, which could be in place for the rest of the year, could prompt some recruiters to take pre-emptive action and trim headcount.

So far, though, there's little evidence of this happening. Gabby Gerra, director of recruitment to recruitment firm Orint, says redundancies haven't been mentioned at large City-focused contingency recruiters, but any new hiring is now very selective.

"The fact is, nine months ago recruitment firms were struggling to find sufficient supplies of talent and, having let people go during the financial crisis, are conscious of how difficult it is to replenish numbers when they need to," she says. "Any new hires now are only for people who can bring in a new revenue stream. Firms have no appetite to recruit people just to manage accounts."

By their nature, contingency recruitment firms chase volume hiring areas. While the lack of investment banking hiring will, of course, hit hard there are still growth areas - notably support functions, back office areas, compliance, change management and, to some extent, IT.

"It's been a bad couple of months, but we could continue to operate at the current levels and still look to expand our business," claims one director of a financial services recruitment firm. "It's generally a transient industry anyway - most people stay here a couple of years, then get a better offer, don't make the grade or decide recruitment isn't for them. We could reduce headcount just by not replacing people, without the need for redundancies."

Perhaps boutique headhunters focused on niche areas of investment banking are in more danger of losing people, or just shutting entirely. Last year, for instance, there were a number of start-ups focusing on the then-buoyant FICC space, which has subsequently taken a beating.

In the current climate, clients look for "trust and longevity of relationships", says Jonathan Evans, chairman at headhunters Sammons Associates.

"The second half of the year will be a litmus test for any firms established on weak foundations. Headhunters recently set up to pursue short-term demand will struggle," he says.

author-card-avatar
AUTHORPaul Clarke
  • Be
    Bernanke
    5 September 2011

    'whilst there might be some storm clouds ahead which require even tighter ongoing control of our P&L'

    HA! Your going to need more than control of your PnL. How about some bullion and a luger? And as for,

    'Banking cuts were, of course, deeper in 2008 and (despite comparisons) sentiment decidedly more downbeat than now.'

    HA! again. Look at some numbers guys. Macroeconomic sh*tstorms are brewing.

  • Bu
    Bud
    2 September 2011

    EZ, I agree with you to a large extent (I also work at search firm). Good candidates work with head hunters more so than doing their own direct appraoch. Not only do consultants provide a portal to the international market but also take away personal relationships in small markets as a third party is able to intermediate the process. We are also able to engineer and make things happens.

    Banker dont underestimate the value recruiters can add, especially at the top end of the market, they are not necessary all young chaps with spikey gelled hair carrying black files. Far from it, many of the people at my search firm are ex industry and making more in search than naking..for eaxmple one member of my team last year earned 700,000k

  • EZ
    EZ
    2 September 2011

    @Bateman - Would disagree that it's rare for the good candidates to not get jobs through a headhunter. The fact is that the absolute best of the bunch are generally well known across their chosen market by reputation alone. These people rarely, if ever, need to deal with headhunters as the serious call will have a higher probability of coming in direct from the client, prior to the mandate even being considered for search. Otherwise I would have to agree that you are largely on point with your comments.

    Also, I work for one of the larger search firms (top 5 ranking on executive grapevine, if that counts for anything). You're right (for me at least) in that we do not look on here all that often, being too busy with our mud soup and charcoal arugula most of the time. On a Friday afternoon in silly summer holiday season in the middle of a major market slow down however, I think it's forgiveable :)

  • Ba
    Banker
    2 September 2011

    @ Bateman - Man, you are so stupid that you can only be a recruiter. "The people aggressive about recruiters are angry for one reason... They are useless. Confirmed by the fact that they only dont like recruiters because they failed to get a job through one. Truth be known, if they were the best candidate, the job would have been theirs." This statement of yours demonstrates how brainless you are. I got all my jobs through recruiters but I still hate all of them simply because they are all SCUM.

  • Ba
    Bateman10
    2 September 2011

    There are two things that need to be noted here, due to the fact that typically, the people that post comments on this site are bottom dwellers. Good bankers and good headhunters do not have the time for this rubbish, therefore the opinions matter very little. I am writing this because it was emailed to me, and I found it amusing.

    1. The people aggressive about recruiters are angry for one reason... They are useless. Confirmed by the fact that they only dont like recruiters because they failed to get a job through one. Truth be known, if they were the best candidate, the job would have been theirs.
    A good candidate, WILL get a job either though a recruiters or by them self. The latter is rare, yet does happen. The flip side of that is, good candidates are spoken to by the best SEARCH firms, not contingent number game players.

    2. A good headhunter works for a good search firm, and will rarely come on this site, if ever, as they do not advertsise, they do not search online databases, and they certainly do not want nor need to self promote themselves on an online forum. They know their markets and HEADHUNT people. Sadly there are alot more sheep on the earth than there are wolv

Sign up to Morning Coffee!

Coffee mug

The essential daily roundup of news and analysis read by everyone from senior bankers and traders to new recruits.

Sign up to Morning Coffee!

Coffee mug

The essential daily roundup of news and analysis read by everyone from senior bankers and traders to new recruits.