Critique of Recruitment Agencies Part 2: Contracting
Companies not never, but very nearly almost never, advertise contract work on their web-sites, and as such, recruitment agencies are the only way in which to apply for contract work.

I may be wrong, but I think we now run the realtor problem described in Freakonomics.

In Freakonomics, the authors found that realtors took much longer to sell their own properties, and by that sold at significantly higher prices, that they did for their clients.

The explanation for this is that a realtor is paid a percentage of the sale price, and they can only manage so many properties at any one time, and so it is in fact in their best interest to sell as quickly as possible, rather than waiting what may be some time, for a fractionally better offer (which the client would in fact like very much).

To my eye, recruitment agents are in much the same position, because I think they are absolutely flooded with no-hope candidates (typically 25 or more for every even bare-minimum candidate), and so not only is it in their interest to fill the role as soon as possible, to maximize income, it is also very costly for them, in terms of effort, to keep chewing through dozens no-chance CVs per day, and that's per open contract.

If we imagine there exists a range of quality in candidates, from say 1 to 10, when the higher scores are better and rarer, then it is obvious on the whole we need to wait a certain amount of time, to reliably find a high quality candidate.

So what in fact happens is that the first candidate who can possibly fill the role is sent over to the client - usually the day after the contract is advertised.

Given that weaker candidates are more common, then on the whole, this method tends toward finding the weakest possible contractor for the role, that the client will accept.

Furthermore, I think there is an additional problem with agencies which in fact leads them to actively block high quality contractors.

When an exceptional contractor applies and in a timely manner but is not perceived by the agency, and then the client re-advertises the role a week or two later, because the CVs they did receive, all being barely viable candidates, were rejected - the agency is now in a tricky position; if they forward the exceptional CV they already have, the company will find out that contractor did apply and in a timely manner, and was not presented.

The upshot of this is that the recruitment agency will now block that contractor and this works as contracts typically go out to only one agency.

Finally, recruitment agencies typically are flatly impossible to contact in any way, shape or form, and so it is impossible to ask any questions about a contract - and it is not uncommon for recruitment agencies to omit the most basic, fundamental, necessary information from contract advertisements, such as duration or pay rate.

Sometimes the problems are indicative of incompetence, with email addresses bouncing and phone numbers being actually invalid, but I think are actually systemic; agencies actively look to block all communication except for applications, and these only via whatever prescribed route is provided, such as LinkedIn.

Moreover, there is no time to ask questions anyway; any CV after the first 50 or so will be ignored, as the one or two minimally-viable candidates by then received will have been forwarded, as quickly as possible, so the agency no longer has to process incoming CVs for that position.

You could be God, applying for a role; it just wouldn't matter.

I may be wrong, but there is only one solution to this problem; make your own web-site, advertise your services, and have clients come to you. It will take time, but this alternative, contracting through agencies, it's a game you lose by playing.