When I use a typical Job Search facility on the Internet , why is it
for computer jobs that 99% of these types of jobs go through
Recruitment agencies?
(If you do not believe me ,please check www.jobserve.com and then take
a sample of the IT jobs to see how many are placed directly by the
Employer and how many are placed by agencies)
As recruitment agencies charge a huge fee to the employer , one would
think it would be more beneficial for the employers to advertise
directly.
Also I do not buy the claim , that employers do not have the time to "weed out"
unsuitable candidates. 
All the major job search sites will allow employers to have their own
application form where they can eliminate candidates who do not fall
within their criteria.
Comments from people who recruit/have recruited directly for employers
and also for people work/have worked for recruitment agencies would be
most welcome.
Very Kind regards

Mongolia

Hi Mongolia,
I saw your question many hours ago, but didn't want to "muddy the
water" if a researcher was interested.

1)  jobserve.com may be site for agencies.  It seems that in areas
other than IT every position was posted by an agency.  This is not the
case on Monster's site.

2)  Employers use agencies to maintain anonymity.  For some positions,
the description could obviously be that of one that is presently
filled (not wanting that person to know the co. was searching); or the
co. could well want to avoid having other employees applying; or it is
a new position, maybe suggesting expansion in a new field, and the co.
doesn't want the competition to know this.

3)  Using an agency is a form of outsourcing.  They are professionals
at reviewing CVs and certificates of employment, which personnel dept.
staff and managers are not, as I know from my own experience.  And
they may be inundated by hundreds of applications for a position. 
They work for the money to sort through these.  And they serve as a
buffer on the previous point.  A company does not want to rejected
applicants in its own name, bad PR, having all those persons
complaining to all their friends that XXX rejected them, plus their
"sour grapes" about how it is really a ... company.

4)  The "huge fee".   I don't know about other countries, but in
Germany Executive Recruiters  ("headhunters") charge 30% of the annual
salary for the position plus expenses (traveling advertising, etc.). 
That may sound "huge" and people in the business can do very well,
but, as I have mentioned above, they not only have a lot of work, they
also provide anonymity.  Executive recruiters don't have to sort
through piles of applicants, but do have to actively seek out qualifed
persons for the position, which is a more delicate task. (At this
level, the co. may have a couple of persons in mind, but cannot just
ask them, whereas a recruiter can approach them discretely.
The 30% fee is due in instalments:  1/3 when the contract with the
recruiter is signed, another third when the short list for persons to
be interviewed by the company is presented, and the last third when
the job contract is signed, and if it doesn't get that far, the
recruiter has to start all over again to get that last third, but his
expenses for the search are being paid.
(Base on personal discussions with a successful friend in the business)

I hope that was a help.
Sincerely, Myouarin

Hello mongolia-ga,

http://www.iccweb.com/CareerAdviceArticles/showarticle.asp?ID=58
WHY DO SO MANY COMPANIES USE EMPLOYMENT RECRUITERS?

This is an excellent article that gives a brief review of the reasons
why employers use outside recruiters. If further explains at length
how job candidates can maximize their chances by working with
recruiters. You can extrapolate from this discussion the reasons why
employers sometimes prefer to have an intermediary to handle
preliminary contacts with job candidates instead of dealing with them
directly.

I'm not posting and answer because I'm not clear on what you would
really like to know about the recruiting process. I have the sense
that you're looking for something more than why companies use
recruiters.

~ czh ~

In the IT industry, there are several ways that I know of that
agencies operate.  First, they develop a client base of hiring
managers at firms.  When a manager wants to hire, he picks up the
phone, calls one or more agencies and explains what the job
requirements are, etc.  The agencies submit a stack of pre-screened
applicants.  Fees come to the agency based on starting salary usually.

Another way is for a company to hire an "in-house recruiter" on an
hourly basis.  This person is a contract worker and handles all the
hiring needs for a specific list of positions for a specific period of
time.

A third, and previously undiscussed role is where the agency has no
formal relationship with the company that is hiring.  They will gather
resumes off of popular search engines then approach the hiring company
hoping to present a list of potential candidates in the hopes of
negotiating a fee.

I've been in the job market in good times and bad and my experience
tells me that the proportion of agencies in each of these three
positions varies with the strength of the market.  When approached by
a head hunter, I always ask what their relationship is with the
company that is hiring.  I never like to deal with an agency  who is
in the third position I discussed above.