Thursday, 09 February 2012

Construction cartel recruiters face REC questioning

Fri, 22 Jan 2010

The construction recruiters fined £39.27m by the OFT last September could be quizzed for bringing the industry into disrepute.

Tom Hadley, external relations director at the Recruitment and Employment Confederation (REC), told Recruiter that the firms, who were fined for operating a cartel, could be questioned by the REC.

Hadley told Recruiterthat the trade association’s professional standards committee would meet within a few weeks: “One of the issues likely to be discussed is whether the firms could have brought the recruitment industry into disrepute.”

The REC members named by the OFT were: Beresford Blake Thomas (£0), CDI AndersElite (£7.6m), Eden Brown (£1.07m), Fusion People (£125,021), Hays Specialist Recruitment (£30.4m), Henry Recruitment (£108,043) and Hill McGlynn & Associates (£0).

Beresford Blake Thomas and Hill McGlynn & Associates were granted immunity from fines in return for exposing the cartel.


In December, Alistair Cox, Hays’ chief executive, told Recruiter that the company had already taken action to strengthen its internal emphasis on compliance and legal awareness.

The REC’s professional standards committee is made up of industry peers, the CBI and the TUC, and is chaired by Phil Westwood 

Tom Hadley

Hadley says the agencies concerned will have the option of attending the meeting. He says the committee will also ask the companies what they have done to ensure that it doesn’t happen again.

Hadley says this is important “because it reflects not just on those businesses but the industry as a whole”.

While the REC does not have the power to fine the companies concerned, Hadley says it does have the power to suspend members, or in exceptional circumstances to throw them out. He adds: “The facts are pretty much out there. We hope they will be clear about what they are going to do to make sure it doesn’t happen again.”

Readers' comments (12)

  • Sharon Seville | Fri, 22 Jan 2010 2:25 pm

    If 'the facts are pretty much out there', surely suspension or expulsion are the ONLY options?? Of course they have brought my industry into disrepute! How could they possibly not have?!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • J Lee | Sat, 23 Jan 2010 11:57 am

    The punishment should fit the crime and I imagine the REC would take a very hard line in usual circumstances but will they for these large conglomerates??

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Steve Critchlow | Sun, 24 Jan 2010 11:58 pm

    Well better late than never. The OFT took months investigating before finding the offenders guilty and issuing fines. Why is the 'voice of the industry' so slow? What is there to discuss? Have the offenders taken steps? Of course they'll say they have, take it as read and get on with it.

    £40m in fines should be enough evidence coupled with the outcry from the recruitment industry, ridicule in the press and awkward questions from clients.

    Or are the subscriptions from these companies too much to miss out on?

    Can the REC be bought?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Ian Harding | Mon, 25 Jan 2010 10:09 am

    Surely this proves that REC is a pathetic spineless club set up to support the big players in the recruitment industry to mask their underhanded deceptive business ethics? If this happened to smaller operators, there would be moves to shut them down or at least change their names... to say in the case of BBT, Ranstad for instance!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Jay | Tue, 26 Jan 2010 8:36 pm

    Have they not been punished enough? If not, are we saying we don't trust the OFT to do their job? When the contractors were fined in Sep 09 the OFT clearly messaged that they had received their punishment and that their clients should not punish them further. This was not the case with the agencies so they have experienced further problems!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Steve Blueprint | Wed, 27 Jan 2010 1:52 pm

    Jay, you're missing the point. All the minnows want to use this as an opportunity to have a pop at the big boys for making a load of money. Clearly none of the above contributors have a clue of what's going on or read the OFT findings, but they still want to jump up and down. It's a bit like the corner shop having a go a Tesco's.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Steve | Sat, 30 Jan 2010 9:13 am

    Interesting to see comments from Jay and Steve Blueprint. Steve's right - the point is being missed. The REC considers itself the 'voice of the industry', so to say nothing implies that it condones illegal behaviour. The suspicion is that as the 'big boys' contribute more in subscriptions the REC will treat them differently to the 'minnows'.

    The REC is proud to say it has Standards & Ethics - it's now time to show that these are not just empty words.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Jimmy M | Mon, 1 Feb 2010 1:31 pm

    If the REC had standards and ethics it would ensure its members upheld them.... alas, it doesn't therefore large agencies continue to flout the rules in pursuit of profit.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Steve O'Gara | Wed, 3 Feb 2010 10:17 am

    I like the fact that these organisations are "training" their executives in corporate and legal awareness all of a sudden, I wonder what these captains of industries qualifications are in the first place to hold the positions they occupy! Interesting that the main instigators have all kept their jobs in return for bringing the industy into disrepute be they "whistle blowers or not " !!!!

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Ray | Wed, 17 Feb 2010 8:39 am

    I could be wrong, but didn't Hays just get caught doing the exact same thing again in Japan a couple weeks ago?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 per page | 20 per page

Have your say

Mandatory
Mandatory
Mandatory

Related images

Most popular

Most commented

Most emailed