it's actually easier on installations than service work. on a larger installation, you (or your chosen foreman) can provide better quality inspections than you can on a guy running 4 service type jobs a day.
opinions are fine and dandy, but when they are not based on facts, but rather fly in the face of them, what good are they. if you can't explain your opinions with a reasonable argument, they are useless.
BTW- iwire actually explained his opinion with the reluctance to take a chance reasoning.
there will always be guys who rush through work - whether hourly or piecework. However, if a guy knows that he will be coming back on his own time to fix the screwups....and if he still screws up, what difference will paying him an hourly rate make. he's still gonna be a screwup. it's just gonna lose you more money quicker.
I understand where iwire is coming from. And if someone is adverse to risk taking, that is fine. I think the whole idea behind RR's questioning is that for every one Iwire, there are 10 nowires- or budget burners- so to speak.
this industry is changing. margins are getting tighter (guys are afraid to actually understand their costs and charge accordingly) material prices are more volitile than they have been in a long time.
But the extra work, coupled with the low margins, leads to a plethora of useless workers.
So, the big question- What is the answer?
is it to pay someone OT because he is slow and screws up on regular time? But you can't fire him because you need the body.
Do you put everyone on piecework and give them incentive?
