Showing results for ""

We bestow the honor of Recruiter of the Week on all types of recruiters, but we especially like to highlight those who are enjoying success in the Network with relatively little fanfare.

These are the recruiters who work the system day in and day out, who have bought into the Top Echelon split placement philosophy, and who represent model Network members. Sometimes these recruiters are top producers, and sometimes they’re not.

Catherine Reynolds of OnBoard Recruitment Advisers

Catherine Reynolds

That’s not really important. What IS important is that we’re glad they’re Top Echelon Network members and that they’re committed to making split placements with other recruiters AND that they’re committed to The Four Pillars of the Network.

(Once again, The Four Pillars are Quality, Communication, Trust, and Active Participation.)

The Recruiter of the Week for this issue of The Pinnacle Newsletter Blog fits all of these qualifications perfectly. That recruiter is Catherine Reynolds of OnBoard Recruitment Advisers!

However, there are even more reasons why Catherine is Recruiter of the Week:

#1—She took a “split placement selfie” with trading partner Sean Napoles, CPC of Career Brokers, Inc.

#2—She won the Largest Split Fee of the Month Award in May of this year.

#3—She has been complimented by her trading partners for a job well done on split placements made.

And to top it all off, she’s currently #12 in the Network in terms of “cash-in” during the past 12 months. She’s definitely within striking distance of the top 10, and she could certainly make it there before the end of the year.

Catherine joined Top Echelon Network nearly three years ago. Even though she joined in October of 2012, she still made her first split before the end of the year. Then she made four split placements in 2013 and six in 2014. In addition, she’s made three splits so far in 2015, and all three have come with sizeable fees.

So congratulations to Catherine Reynolds from everybody here at Top Echelon! We’d like to thank her for her hard work and commitment as a Preferred Member recruiter in the Network, and we hope there are many more split placements in her future!

AND “split placement selfies”!

The vast majority of case studies that we highlight in The Pinnacle Newsletter Blog involve direct-hire placements. However, Network recruiters DO make contract placements, and in the case of the case study below, they make temp-to-direct placements.

What exactly is a temp-to-hire placement? Click here for a complete explanation, but sometimes a company that hires a worker on a contact basis intitially then hires that person a full-time basis.

One of the reasons that a temp-to-direct hire placement is beneficial for the recruiter is that they typically get paid twice for the same placement. This is how:

  1. They’re paid for the initial contract placement with the client.
  2. They’re then paid again (with what is called a conversion fee) when the contract worker becomes a full-time employee.

Of course, you must make sure that you have a conversion fee included in your contract with clients. If you don’t, then you won’t get the conversion fee. (And you want the conversion fee!)

Click here for more information about conversion fees.

As for your firm, if you’re not offering contract staffing to your clients (including temp-to-direct placements), then you’re most likely “leaving money on the table.” How so?

The chances that your clients are hiring contract workers are probably near 100%. If you’re not providing those contract workers, then your clients are getting them somewhere else. That somewhere else could be another recruiting firm.

You don’t really want THAT, do you?

Click here to get started with contract staffing!

— — —

Tim Hughes of Hughes and Associates

Tim Hughes

Mike Duke, CPC of Career Development Partners

Mike Duke, CPC

“Mike Duke found the perfect candidate. [The client] had a hiring freeze, but they needed [the candidate] badly, so they hired him on contract . . . he is now a direct employee, so we can bill for the remainder of the full fee. Mike has been VERY patient . . . I haven’t been.”

Submitted by Tim Hughes of Hughes & Associates regarding his Network split placement with Mike Duke of firm name here


Fee Percentage—Flat

(Editor’s note: This is the first Network split placement that Hughes and Duke have made together in Top Echelon.)

Okay, we’ve already discussed the Top Echelon Network Pillar of Quality in this issue of The Pinnacle Newsletter Blog. So now we’re going to discuss the Pillar of Trust.

Why is that? Because when Network recruiters trust one another, THAT is when they start to make serious money in Top Echelon.

It’s been proven over and over and over again. Network recruiters have trusted each other to the point where they give each other the names of their clients and actually have their trading partners communicate with their clients while they are on vacation!

That’s serious trust, people. And has that level of trust ever come back to burn a Network recruiter? As far as we know, it has not. The only thing it has resulted in is more and more split placements.

In this installment of “‘Comments’ and Compliments,” a recruiter thanks another for “having faith” in both them and their client. Having faith is a form of having trust, and as you can see, that faith and that trust resulted in a placement fee . . . even though the placement was “a year in the making.”

Which of your trading partners do YOU trust implicitly? How many splits have you made with those partners? Which of your partners could you trust?

If you’re ready to take your trading partner relationships to the next level, contact Director of Network Operations Drea Codispoti, CPC/CERS at 330.455.1433, x156 or via email at

— — —

Lois Rupkey of Byrnes and Rupkey, Inc.

Lois Rupkey

Greg Downs, CPC of Downs Associates

Greg Downs, CPC

“This placement was a year in the making. Thank you, Greg, for having faith in me and my client!”

Submitted by Lois Rupkey of Byrnes & Rupkey, Inc. regarding her Network split placement with Greg Downs, CPC of Downs Associates


Fee Percentage—20%

(Editor’s note: This is the first Network split placement that Rupkey and Downs have made together in Top Echelon.)

— — —

Nancy Phillips of Phillips Staffing Solutions, LLC

Nancy Phillips

“Nancy is a great partner. Thanks for a stellar candidate and your good work!”

Submitted by Steve Moore of J.D. Cotter Search, Inc. regarding his Network split placement with Nancy Phillips of Phillips Staffing Solutions, LLC


Fee Percentage—25%

(Editor’s note: This is the first split placement that Moore and Phillips have made together in Top Echelon.)

— — —

Bill Kubena of Kubena and Associates

Bill Kubena

Trey Cameron of the Cameron Craig Group

Trey Cameron

“Thanks, Trey. It’s nice to put someone in our client so quickly after the fall-off. I really appreciate your help on this one.”

Submitted by Bill Kubena of Kubena & Associates regarding his Network split placement with Trey Cameron of the Cameron Craig Group


Fee Percentage—25%

(Editor’s note: This is the ninth split placement that Kubena and Cameron have made together in Top Echelon.)

As we have mentioned on numerous occasions in this newsletter, Quality is one of the Four Pillars of Top Echelon Network. And guess what? We’re going to mention it again!

That’s because we wanted to know what you think . . . of each other. Yes, we posted a poll in the Members’ Area for the sole purpose of uncovering that information.

That poll contained the following question:

How would you grade the overall quality of Network recruiters you’ve encountered in TE?


The choice of answers that were provided is listed below, along with the percentage of Network recruiters that selected each one:

  • A — 24.8%
  • B — 41.0%
  • C — 25.7%
  • D — 7.6%
  • F — 0.0%
  • Is there a grade lower than F? — 1.0%


Okay, we knew that Network recruiters were NOT going to receive all-As. However, they didn’t do too badly.

The most popular answer: “B” at 41.0% of the vote. Unfortunately, “A” was not the second-most popular answer at 24.8%. “C” just edged it out at 25.7%.

The good news is that only 7.6% of poll participants chose “D” as their answer, and nobody chose “F.” (However, one person did choose “Is there a grade lower than F?”)

Is that considered a passing grade? Absolutely. Is there room for improvement? There is absolutely always more room for improvement.


Here’s the interesting aspect of this poll: it’s entirely subjective. However, a person’s perception of reality IS reality for that person . . . even if the actual reality is something else entirely.

Personalities and personal preferences play a huge role when it comes to the inner workings of Top Echelon Network. Two different recruiters could grade another recruiter in two widely different ways. For example, Recruiter #1 could give Recruiter #2 a grade of “B,” while Recruiter #3 could give Recruiter #2 a grade of “D.” What one recruiter sees as quality . . . another recruiter could see as a lack of quality.

Yes, the quality of Network recruiters is based on a subjective assessment. However, that assessment does present a perception of reality, which in turn, becomes reality for the person who accepts both the assessment and the perception.

The bottom line: all personalities, personal preferences, and perceptiosn aside, improving the overall quality of Network recruiters in Top Echelon is a top priority for us. And it always will be.

Regardless of what perception currently prevails.