ECN Forum Forums General Topics of the Trade Business Related Discussion How do you find a good employee?

Years ago I headed a job for a contractor who refused to run an ad to hire more guys. I needed the help on my job and he just didn't see it as his problem. So, I ran the ad and did the interviews. The interviews were actually worse than not having enough help.

I need to get past that, but my experience provides more questions than answers.

I was interviewed for a job at a lumber mill. One run of questions was clearly taken from an IQ test. During a break, I asked an old union rep how the IQ testing was working out for them. The answer was striking:

He said "Not very well. Not worth a s**t, in fact."

One of the work questions they had was: If you are going for a coffee break and see oil leaked on the floor from a fork lift, do you
a) continue to coffee and clean it up after,
b) mark the spill and continue to coffee and clean it up after, or
c) clean it up and miss your coffee.

Everyone knows the best answer is c, but the real solution that no one will talk about is:
d) pretend you didn't see it and go for coffee.

Maybe you guys can suggest some helpful questions.

Well ... let's look at it this way ...

It's said you can take the boy out of the country, but you can't take the country out of the boy. I take that to mean you can teach someone most anything, if they want to learn.

OTOH, to call up another adage, a leopard can't change his spots. I take that to mean a man isn't likely to change his basic nature.

So ... how do find the ones who are worth developing? Wouldn't it be nice if there was a 'good guy' card you could ask for, some document that would suggest a person was almost certain to be a responsible person, of good character, belonged to a group that almost never misbehaved?

Actually, such credentials already exist. Alas, I doubt many employers would welcome learning whether you had them. Does anyone care to guess what these credentials are?

Since I'm not an active member of any group, I may as well say, now, that you are absolutely wrong.

Reno....

It'd be racist to hire boyscouts.

twh...

The correct answer is D: Tell the foreman. Wiping the floor merely hides the fact that the equipment is failing. Only a technical specialist can repair hydraulic leaks. On all our jobs such repairs are built in to the rental contract -- which stipulates that the rental firm be contacted upon first notice -- so that catastrophic failures do not happen.

Beyond that, janitorial work is a violation of craft rules.



Duh.

Having hired and fired more people than I can remember...

For blue collar trades only the most rudimentary screening is required.

I always start off with a candidate's tools. They are telling.

Weight extremes are telling, too: too light/ wired indicates drug issues/ chronic heavy drinking... too heavy indicates sloth.

(I had an eighteen-year old first day hire simply squat on his can. He was seventy pounds overweight. His physical sloth was matched by his mental retardation. He couldn't even repeat a PVC floor box glue up to match the one that he, himself, had just assembled. We're talking about a handful of elbows for power and data. They were sitting side by side on the slab!)

All new hires are solely employed in structured efforts so that their performance tempo and quality are obvious.

One must discount praise and trash talk from the established crew members. High quality talent will inspire trash talk more often than slow work. Good old boys will be praised because of non-work related matters.

Terminated employees, regarless of reason, will have blame heaped upon them from those that made the very errors that are of issue.

Lastly, new employees figure that it's a liars win all contest. That's what the absurd qualifications lists do -- the ones you see on CraigsList and in the classifieds.

The one thing that's hard to detect -- but critical -- is how reckless a man is. High speed iron is the only tell that I know of. I do note that CraigsList adverts request driving records of new applicants. Such traits are carried onto the job.

I'm told that when the interviewer asks about conflict the interviewee should never say they have conflict with their boss.

In fact, those are the conflicts that I want to hear about.

If the conflict is that he wanted to do it one way and the employer another way. I want to know all the details so I can determine who I think was right and whether the resolution was reasonable. If both people were looking after the best interest of the company instead of their egos, maybe it was a good conflict.

I'm also aware that, on average, an employee needs to lose about half the disagreements. If he always wins it might be a sign of either a dumb boss or an impossible employee. Or, if he always loses he must be doing something else wrong.

Wow...

In all my days, I've NEVER met a boss who was willing to lose ground to a foreman.

The idea that you can second guess the social dynamics -- based upon what only one party is telling you -- who's trying to get a job...

That's gossip at best.

I can't imagine hiring an employee who figures that he's entitled to win half the arguments.

Whenever I ran across such players -- they had to be canned/ laid off/ put on reserve status.

We're in the pipe and wire installation business. It's not a debate club. It's not supposed to be a soap opera.

Boy, do we have different management styles. Too often, I've worked with guys who did things wrong because they could blame the foreman.

I think it was Rommel (tank commander) who said that you should use the battle plans of your generals because they carry them out more enthusiastically. So, I encouraged input from my guys and used their ideas that were workable.

If they refused to lose, then they must go. If they did things that they knew are wrong, they also must go. Usually, when someone thought I made a mistake, it was because they didn't understand the instructions. So, I looked at the results and asked if what they did made sense. If the answer was 'no', then they were reprimanded.

I'm a team player and my charges are on my team. We succeed or fail as a team.

It seemed like a good management style until I met a guy who insisted on running a conduit where I suggested BX. When he couldn't make the conduit work, instead of installing the BX, he said the job couldn't be done. What an idiot!

I value problem-solvers. Those people are the generals on my team. I expect my generals to keep me safe. When my employers made me the general, I also kept them safe. The last employer quit supervising me. He said that I worried about the company more than he did.

When I started with him, he had a used minivan. When I left, he was doing millions per year. He was a good businessman and electrician and let me look after him. When I left, he quit taking holidays.

Tesla, you would have fired me.

OK, I know you're wondering ... what "creds" are the best indicator that someone has their act together, and hardly ever misbehave?

Two come to mind: Conceald carry permit, and Nevada "Hooker" card.

CCW holders have a long history of being the best among us, even in matters that have absolutely nothing to do with crime or firearms. If nothing else, you can be sure that a CCW holder is neither felon not lunatic- however "eccentric" the media portrays them as.

To become a licensed prostitute in Nevada, there are but two requirements: No felonies and no drugs. Lots of 'respectable' folks can't pass those tests.

Yet, for some reason, employers don't want to hear about these documents.

I don't think my hooker card is relevant, but thanks for bringing it up.

A bank manager had a suggestion about job titles. He said when he hired a secretary, she sat at the desk because that's what secretaries do. He found office assistants would do a secretary's job and take out the garbage, because assistants do everything.