Be cautious if considering a contract position through Hansel Tierney. Throughout the recruitment process, the wage never changed. I went through two interviews with the client and was extended an offer—only to find the pay was significantly lower than what was originally advertised and discussed. When I asked for clarification and expressed hesitation, they came back with a second offer. Before sending it, they called me (they prefer not to put explanations in writing) and claimed the wage had been changed after I entered the recruitment process and that the new range was “X–Y.” However, the original offer wasn’t even within that supposed new range, and at no point during interviews or recruitment was I informed of a pay decrease. I initially accepted, but something didn’t sit right. I bypassed the agency and spoke directly with the hiring manager. After I explained the situation, she said, “It seems like you’re being taken advantage of.” She clarified that the client pays Hansel Tierney a set amount that already covers both the contractor’s wage and their commission—and that the contractor rate the client approved was the originally advertised rate. This strongly suggested the agency was attempting to increase their cut beyond the agreed commission. An hour later, the account lead called me—unaware I had already spoken with the client—and tried to claim the advertised rate was “too high” and that past candidates had been rejected asking for that. That directly contradicted what the client told me. At that point, I rescinded my acceptance on the call. I won’t work with an agency that misrepresents pay and provides conflicting, misleading explanations. Add to that, it violates Washington State’s EPAO laws about representing pay.