---
slug: hr-recruiting-high-volume-phone-screening
title: "Staffing Agency Screens 400+ Candidates/Week at $4/Screen — Down from $45"
industry: HR & Recruiting
useCase: Phone Screening
companySize: 35 internal employees, 2,000+ placements/year
location: Multi-office, US
metaTitle: "High-Volume Phone Screening Case Study | QuickVoice"
metaDescription: "A light industrial staffing agency used QuickVoice AI to screen 400+ candidates/week at $4/screen (down from $45), cutting time-to-screen by 85%."
canonical: https://quickvoice.co/case-studies/hr-recruiting-high-volume-phone-screening
ogImage: ""
heroStat: "$4"
heroStatLabel: "Cost per screen (from $45)"
tags: [HR, Recruiting, Staffing, Phone Screening, Bullhorn ATS]
---

# Staffing Agency Screens 400+ Candidates/Week at $4/Screen — Down from $45

In light industrial staffing, speed is everything. The best forklift operators, warehouse associates, and production line workers are off the market within 48 hours of applying. For a growing staffing agency operating three offices across the Sun Belt, the math was punishing: more applicants than their recruiters could possibly call, and by the time they reached the best ones, those candidates had already accepted positions elsewhere. This is the story of how they used QuickVoice AI voice agents to screen every applicant within hours, collapse their cost per screen from $45 to $4, and fundamentally transform recruiter productivity.

---

## 1. Company Profile

| Detail | Description |
|---|---|
| **Company Type** | Light industrial staffing agency |
| **Offices** | 3 locations (Texas, Georgia, North Carolina) |
| **Internal Employees** | 35 (recruiters, account managers, operations, admin) |
| **Annual Placements** | 2,000+ temporary and temp-to-hire |
| **Primary Verticals** | Warehousing, manufacturing, distribution, food processing |
| **ATS** | Bullhorn |
| **Job Boards** | Indeed, ZipRecruiter, internal career portal |

The agency had built a strong reputation over 12 years by focusing exclusively on light industrial placements. Their clients — regional distribution centers, food processing plants, and third-party logistics providers — relied on them to fill positions quickly with reliable workers. Eleven recruiters across three offices handled sourcing, screening, interviewing, and placing candidates. The screening step — a 15-to-20-minute phone call covering availability, shift preference, transportation, experience, and certifications — was the single biggest time sink and where the most candidates were lost.

---

## 2. The Challenge

The agency's VP of Operations, Derek Haynes, had been tracking recruiter productivity for over a year. The data told a troubling story.

### Recruiters Could Only Screen 50 Candidates per Week

Each recruiter spent approximately 30 hours per week on phone screens. At 15 to 20 minutes per completed screen (factoring in dial attempts, voicemails, and callbacks), a recruiter could complete about 50 screens per week. With 200+ applications arriving weekly per recruiter, roughly 75% of applicants never received a screen at all.

### Top Candidates Were Gone Before the First Call

Average time from application to first contact was 3 to 7 business days. Bullhorn data showed that 34% of qualified candidates had already accepted a position elsewhere by the time a recruiter reached them.

### Cost per Screen Was Unsustainable

The fully loaded cost of a recruiter-performed screen — salary, benefits, phone system, ATS licensing, failed dial attempts — came to $45 per completed screen. For an agency placing candidates at margins of $3 to $5 per hour worked, scaling up by hiring more recruiters was not viable.

### Recruiter Burnout Was Accelerating

Two recruiters had resigned in the past year, citing the monotony of back-to-back screening calls. Replacing each cost approximately $18,000 in recruiting, training, and lost productivity.

---

## 3. Why QuickVoice

Derek evaluated an offshore screening service, a text-based chatbot, and QuickVoice. Four requirements drove the decision.

**Speed to Contact.** QuickVoice's event-triggered architecture initiated a screening call the moment a new application hit Bullhorn. The offshore service used batch processing with 24-hour turnaround. The chatbot required the candidate to initiate.

**Voice-First Interaction.** Light industrial candidates answered phone calls at 3x the rate of text messages. A voice-based AI agent matched how these candidates actually communicated.

**Bullhorn ATS Integration.** QuickVoice wrote screening results, scores, and disposition codes directly into candidate records in real time, eliminating manual data transfer.

**Customizable Screening Logic.** Different clients had different requirements. QuickVoice allowed client-specific scripts with branching logic, weighted scoring, and automatic qualification thresholds — all configurable without engineering support.

> "We tried the chatbot first. Response rates were abysmal. Our candidates want to talk to someone, even if that someone is an AI. The moment we switched to QuickVoice voice calls, our contact rate went from 22% to 68%. That alone made the decision obvious."
> — Derek Haynes, VP of Operations

---

## 4. The Solution

QuickVoice deployed a fully automated application-to-screening pipeline integrated with the agency's Bullhorn ATS.

### Automated Screening — Triggered on Application

The moment a candidate record was created in Bullhorn, QuickVoice initiated a screening call — typically within 30 minutes. The AI agent ran a structured 5-minute conversation covering five areas:

- **Availability:** Start date, days and shifts available, scheduling constraints
- **Shift Preference:** First, second, or third shift willingness; weekend availability
- **Transportation:** Reliable transportation; commute distance
- **Experience:** Relevant warehouse, manufacturing, or production experience
- **Certifications:** Forklift (sit-down, stand-up, reach), food handler, OSHA 10/30

### Scoring and Disposition

Responses were scored against a configurable rubric and candidates categorized into three tiers:

- **Qualified (80+):** Auto-advanced to interview scheduling with available slots booked during the same call
- **Conditional (50-79):** Flagged for recruiter review with transcript and score summary
- **Not Qualified (below 50):** Auto-dispositioned in Bullhorn with reason code

All data — scores, transcripts, and recordings — was written directly to the Bullhorn candidate record.

---

## 5. Implementation

The full deployment took two weeks from contract signing to live calls.

### Week 1: Integration, Script Design, and Testing

The QuickVoice team connected to Bullhorn and mapped candidate record creation as the call trigger. Three screening scripts were built — general light industrial, warehouse/distribution, and food processing — each with tailored questions and scoring rubrics. Test calls validated the full pipeline against 50 dummy records.

### Week 2: Soft Launch and Full Rollout

The system went live Tuesday with the Texas office. By Wednesday, two minor script adjustments were made. By Thursday, Georgia and North Carolina were live. By Friday, the system had screened 187 candidates across all offices without a single escalation.

---

## 6. Results

After 60 days of full operation, the results were transformative.

| Metric | Before QuickVoice | After QuickVoice | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| **Screens per week per recruiter** | 50 | 400+ | **+700%** |
| **Cost per screen** | $45 | $4 | **-91%** |
| **Time from apply to screen** | 3-7 days | Same day | **-85%** |
| **Offer decline rate** | 18% | 9% | **-50%** |
| **Recruiter hours on screening** | 30 hrs/week | 4 hrs/week | **-87%** |
| **Candidate satisfaction** | 3.6/5.0 | 4.1/5.0 | **+14%** |
| **Revenue per recruiter** | $180K/year | $310K/year | **+72%** |

Because every applicant was screened within hours, recruiters shifted from repetitive phone work to high-value activities: building candidate relationships, conducting in-depth interviews, and developing new business. Revenue per recruiter jumped 72% without adding headcount.

The 50% reduction in offer decline rate was directly attributable to speed. Candidates screened within 4 hours of applying accepted offers at a 91% rate, compared to 64% for those screened after 3+ days. Candidate satisfaction improved from 3.6 to 4.1 — comments like "I just applied and they already called me" appeared repeatedly in feedback.

> "I used to dread Monday mornings — 40 voicemails to return and a stack of applications I would never get to. Now I walk in, check the dashboard, and my qualified candidates are already scheduled. I spend my time on the part of recruiting I actually love."
> — Jessica Morales, Senior Recruiter

---

## 7. What's Next

The agency is planning two additional QuickVoice deployments.

### Redeployment and Re-Engagement Campaigns

Many placed candidates finish assignments after 60 to 90 days. QuickVoice will automate end-of-assignment outreach — calling candidates 5 days before their assignment ends to assess interest in a new placement and capture any new certifications. The goal is to increase the redeployment rate from 38% to 60%.

### Client Satisfaction Calls

QuickVoice will handle outbound calls to client hiring managers after each placement to confirm the placed candidate showed up, assess initial performance, and identify additional staffing needs — improving client retention and surfacing upsell opportunities.

---

## 8. Key Takeaways

- **Speed kills the competition, not cost.** Reducing time-to-screen from days to hours was the single highest-impact change. The best candidates are simply unavailable after 48 hours.
- **Voice outperforms text for frontline workers.** Light industrial candidates answered phone calls at 3x the rate of text messages, driving a 68% contact rate that no chatbot could replicate.
- **Recruiter liberation drives revenue growth.** Freeing recruiters from 26 hours per week of screening allowed them to focus on relationships and revenue. Revenue per recruiter increased 72% without adding headcount.
- **ATS integration is not optional.** Writing results directly into Bullhorn eliminated double entry and gave every stakeholder a single source of truth.

> "We were skeptical that an AI could handle the nuance of a screening call — the accent variations, the background noise, the candidates who ramble. QuickVoice handled all of it. After two months, I cannot find a single screening it got materially wrong."
> — Derek Haynes, VP of Operations
