In Barclays Settlement, Is Client Relationship Preserved?

Uncategorized

May 24, 2010

The British bank Barclays has agreed to settle a lawsuit with Singapore-based recruiter Pagoda Partners for allegedly failing to pay for a banker it hired from Merrill Lynch. Financial terms were not disclosed.

John Koh, a managing director at WMRC Pte. in Singapore, a finance industry recruitment firm, said it is “always better to settle than pursue the legal route with big clients” because “relationships matter a lot in this industry and it’s wiser to try and preserve them.”

But does this always matter, especially if a recruiting firm has (allegedly) missed out on its fee? While it seems doubtful that Barclays is likely to use Pagoda again, or perhaps vice-versa, what do you think will happen?

Would you have settled in a similar scenario in order to avoid burned bridges in our relationship-intense industry?

Get articles like this

in your inbox

The longest running and most trusted source of information serving talent acquisition professionals.

Get articles like this

in your inbox

The longest running and most trusted source of information serving talent acquisition professionals.

Why Do Women Bully Women at Work?

Jim Stroud | Apr 1, 2025

12 Key Takeaways from the 2024 Candidate Experience Benchmark Research

Kevin Grossman | Jan 23, 2025

The Sourcing Role is not Dead. Its evolving… again.

Jim Stroud | Jan 16, 2025

Finding Purple Squirrels in Unusual Places

Ginnette Jamerson | Dec 13, 2024

Does Your Company Trust Its Ability to Hire?

Mark Murphy | Oct 21, 2024