When it pays to keep hiring in-house, when an agency wins, and how the costs actually compare.
Both get people through the door. The difference is what you pay for, what you carry, and how fast it moves.
Nobody knows your culture, sites and managers like your own people. For steady, predictable hiring, a capable internal recruiter is cost-effective and builds institutional knowledge an agency never fully matches.
Internal teams struggle with spikes: a season, a new contract, six resignations in a month. Advertising, screening, reference checks and no-shows consume weeks, and every empty seat costs output while the process runs.
Speed and absorption of risk. A labour hire agency holds a vetted bench, so cover arrives in hours rather than weeks; the worker is the agency's employee, so PAYE, ACC, holiday pay and replacement risk sit with the agency; and you pay only for hours worked.
Per hour, agency labour costs more than a direct wage. Per outcome, it is often cheaper once you count advertising, screening time, mis-hires, and the production lost while a role sits empty. Most of our long-term clients run both: internal hiring for the core team, AR Staffing for peaks, cover and urgency.
Want the numbers for your situation? Our indicative rates are published openly, so you can do the comparison before you ever call us.
Last updated: 3 August 2026
Call 0800 277 724, 24 hours, 7 days.
