# Kinda worried about my interview



## jdunn (May 25, 2018)

I had my first interview this week. We talked the full 10-15 minutes but they didn't really ask any of the behavioral questions I had expected. I'm hoping it was because I am older with a steady, professional work experience. Did anybody else have a similar experience?


----------



## jdunn (May 25, 2018)

Let me add that I'm not some kid off the street. I'm in my 30's and I have a few college degrees (none of them related to construction). They told me they are interviewing over 100 people. That really worried me. I left there sort of feeling like they were blowing me off because I am older and have no professional construction experience. Only because they were making statements like "You know you're going to work in the heat and the cold. You know you will have to work from heights. You know the union doesn't offer steady work. You know the work is dirty."


----------



## joebanana (Dec 21, 2010)

What were you expecting?
"Have you ever pulled the legs off insects"?
"Are you, or have you ever been affiliated with a known terrorist organization"?
"Have you ever had a drink before 8AM"?
"Have you ever "hooked up" in a public restroom"?
Ahhh......that don't care about that sort of stuff, as long as you pay your dues, and show up on time, you're golden.


----------



## jdunn (May 25, 2018)

Of course I didn't expect those questions. But when you are 1 of over 100 that are trying to fill just a few spots, I was expecting questions, at least, regarding work ethic. I went in feeling pretty confident but left feeling let down, like they didn't care about how I am at work. When selecting only a few out of that many people, seems that would be pretty important. I want to hear other people's interview experiences. Because for the past few months all I have heard is "you won't like it and...women don't have a place on a construction site." I need honest opinions and experiences. I understand what you're trying to say. I'm trying to look beyond the bottom line.


----------



## joebanana (Dec 21, 2010)

jdunn said:


> Of course I didn't expect those questions. But when you are 1 of over 100 that are trying to fill just a few spots, I was expecting questions, at least, regarding work ethic. I went in feeling pretty confident but left feeling let down, like they didn't care about how I am at work. When selecting only a few out of that many people, seems that would be pretty important. I want to hear other people's interview experiences. Because for the past few months all I have heard is "you won't like it and...women don't have a place on a construction site." I need honest opinions and experiences. I understand what you're trying to say. I'm trying to look beyond the bottom line.


 My apologies, I .....didn't.......don't.......... so, you're a female?
What local you looking into? 

Basically, prior work experience in the trade is a plus, and is what they're interested in.
The myth that "women don't have a place on a construction site" is just that....a myth.
Construction workers aren't animals like on TV, we have wives, and kids, and mothers, and most of us have manners.
It isn't a cake walk getting into the union, but it can be life changing. Lots of prospects don't make it first try, and the process can be a PITA, and time consuming, but don't give up. You made it this far.
"Work ethic" is best expressed in the field, not verbally, so it's not normally covered in the interview.
A 100 applicant's is a lot for a cycle, try a smaller local.

Non-union apprenticeships are less stringent, but are harder to find.
Have you taken the aptitude test yet?


----------



## jdunn (May 25, 2018)

Yes, I'm a female. I have taken the aptitude test and our local covers 14 counties. There aren't any small locals around here. I guess I'll just keep my fingers crossed. Thank you.


----------



## Martine (Jan 26, 2018)

I don't know about the states, but Canada is REALLY trying to get more women into Construction, and even giving bonuses to employers who will hire them. 

They might just have wanted to get a general vibe of what you're like and to see if you knew what you were getting yourself into. I've had multiple friends ask me about my career choice due to it ''paying well'', although they don't know anything other than that.


----------



## jdunn (May 25, 2018)

Martine said:


> I don't know about the states, but Canada is REALLY trying to get more women into Construction, and even giving bonuses to employers who will hire them.
> 
> They might just have wanted to get a general vibe of what you're like and to see if you knew what you were getting yourself into. I've had multiple friends ask me about my career choice due to it ''paying well'', although they don't know anything other than that.


Those that support me have said, "they'll take you because you're a woman". I really don't want to get in because of that. This is something that I truly want and I want them to hire me because of my work ethic and desire to do the job. I really hope you're right in saying they may have been just trying to get a feel of whether I knew what I was getting into. I was very confident before and during my interview. But I left there feeling a lot of doubt. Not about changing careers, but about whether they would choose me. I think I spent too much time preparing for the behavioral questions and was let down that they didn't ask them. Thank you for giving me your thoughts.


----------



## John Valdes (May 17, 2007)

Welcome to Electrician Talk. 
Thanks for taking the time to fill out your profile.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

If the interview left you with some doubt as to your performance in the interview, I'd say that the interviewer was successful in getting to the root of what he or she wanted to sort out. That would seem pretty normal, to me, and it also tells me that the interviewer was skilled. 

That said, it's quite likely that there was something about your resume, your appearance, your responses, or similar factor that caused the interviewer to try to disqualify you in every way possible related to the realities of a jobsite and union work. Hiring is difficult, and hiring the wrong person is expensive. They have a duty to make sure they're picking people who won't wash out when these realities of trade work begin to show themselves to you. 

You seem a little bummed that they didn't probe work ethic. You promote this as if it's your only stock in trade. Something you're proud of. It is something to be proud of, but clearly that was not the most important thing on the interviewer's mind at the time. Sure, having a good work ethic is important, but so is actually having a reasonable expectation that you'll be able to DO the work and that you'll be a good fit for the job. Time will tell if you passed muster. The only thing anyone's responses here will do is make you feel better (or worse) in the mean time, and has no bearing on the eventual outcome of your interview.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

MDShunk said:


> Hiring is difficult, and hiring the wrong person is expensive. They have a duty to make sure they're picking people who won't wash out when these realities of trade work begin to show themselves to you.


This is why there is such a thing as "overqualified." At first glance it seems silly, what does it matter if someone has more qualifications than needed? The concern is that if that the person that's overqualified is going to quit as soon as they find something better, and they can. 

So even if they believe you can do the work, they might not believe you'll stick around. To put it bluntly they're worried you're a dilettante. I'd be concerned that once you've gotten a kick out of showing you can do this kind of work, the grass is no longer greener, and it's back where you came from with an entertaining story about your time in the IBEW. In the mean time, there's someone who's spot you took who's working at McDonald's for whom it would have been a life changing opportunity.


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

splatz said:


> This is why there is such a thing as "overqualified." At first glance it seems silly, what does it matter if someone has more qualifications than needed? The concern is that if that the person that's overqualified is going to quit as soon as they find something better, and they can.


Indeed. When I was looking not so long ago to ring on someone else's time clock again, I hired a placement coach (that's how she billed herself). She crafted my resume especially for each job prospect, leaving a lot of things out most of the time. I'd say it worked out for me. Best 400 dollars I ever spent.


----------



## Martine (Jan 26, 2018)

jdunn said:


> Those that support me have said, "they'll take you because you're a woman". I really don't want to get in because of that. This is something that I truly want and I want them to hire me because of my work ethic and desire to do the job. I really hope you're right in saying they may have been just trying to get a feel of whether I knew what I was getting into. I was very confident before and during my interview. But I left there feeling a lot of doubt. Not about changing careers, but about whether they would choose me. I think I spent too much time preparing for the behavioral questions and was let down that they didn't ask them. Thank you for giving me your thoughts.


I'm in no way implying someone would be more likely to hire you because you're a woman, but more so that many employers wouldn't try to find a reason to discredit you because you're a woman, and to give you an even chance. 

As others have said, there isn't anything you can do other than hope for the best. In the mean time, keep trying, learn new skills, and see if there's anywhere else you can be hired if that interview doesn't span out. 

I'm currently in full-time school to become an apprentice at the end of next winter, so I'll be having my own employment interviews and whatnot a few months from now.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

After working with numerous people over the years that had no business being in the trade, I'm convinced the only way to adequately hire someone for trade work is with a practical test. This way you can see what they can actually do in a certain amount of time, as well as what kind of tools they have. I would supplement this with a basic NEC and Ohm's law quiz. I'm convinced this method would weed out the vast majority of unqualified candidates.


----------



## flyboy (Jun 13, 2011)

MTW said:


> After working with numerous people over the years that had no business being in the trade, I'm convinced the only way to adequately hire someone for trade work is with a practical test. This way you can see what they can actually do in a certain amount of time, as well as what kind of tools they have. I would supplement this with a basic NEC and Ohm's law quiz. I'm convinced this method would weed out the vast majority of unqualified candidates.


This is basically how we hire. The practical test consists of paying them a flat rate for a day to ride with one of our techs/plumbers/electricians. 

They take a self assessment test and a written test based on common electrical practices as well as a NEC open book test. They are instructed to bring in their copy of the NEC.


----------



## telsa (May 22, 2015)

Women can be disqualified because they are TOO pretty. 

When such a gal is deployed, the fellas drop their own priorities and do her work for her.

I've seen it. The gal had to be canned after only one shift. She was just too attractive.

The other extreme: gals that hate men to such a point that they can't keep a lid on it.

In the case of the OP, she's wildly over-qualified, by her own admission. 

She can't do the grunt work, no woman ever can. It's that brutal. 

[ Feeder pulling days, anyone? ]

It's as easy for a man to give birth as it is for a gal to survive a serious feeder pull. 

( Such a day has men running for the hills... calling in 'sick'... and so forth. )

And, if the OP is a SJW, that's a deal breaker.

And, if the OP left really nice jobs// careers... wow... our trade doesn't pay like Wall Street.

OP: Out my way, our Poco uses women exclusively to set meters, CTs, etc. 

That's an angle you might pursue. 

BTW, in many markets, employers are hiring straight out of jail. Yes, they are interviewing jailbirds. THAT'S how tight the labor market has turned, due to Trump.


----------



## jdunn (May 25, 2018)

MDShunk said:


> If the interview left you with some doubt as to your performance in the interview, I'd say that the interviewer was successful in getting to the root of what he or she wanted to sort out. That would seem pretty normal, to me, and it also tells me that the interviewer was skilled.
> 
> That said, it's quite likely that there was something about your resume, your appearance, your responses, or similar factor that caused the interviewer to try to disqualify you in every way possible related to the realities of a jobsite and union work. Hiring is difficult, and hiring the wrong person is expensive. They have a duty to make sure they're picking people who won't wash out when these realities of trade work begin to show themselves to you.
> 
> You seem a little bummed that they didn't probe work ethic. You promote this as if it's your only stock in trade. Something you're proud of. It is something to be proud of, but clearly that was not the most important thing on the interviewer's mind at the time. Sure, having a good work ethic is important, but so is actually having a reasonable expectation that you'll be able to DO the work and that you'll be a good fit for the job. Time will tell if you passed muster. The only thing anyone's responses here will do is make you feel better (or worse) in the mean time, and has no bearing on the eventual outcome of your interview.


I don't doubt my performance during my interview at all. That was never a concern. 
I know I can physically handle the work. And I honestly feel that work ethic is pretty damned important in the construction trades. I have a lot of family and friends in different trades and work ethic is a big problem. Why waste your money and time training someone when they don't show up for work every day?


----------



## jdunn (May 25, 2018)

telsa said:


> Women can be disqualified because they are TOO pretty.
> 
> When such a gal is deployed, the fellas drop their own priorities and do her work for her.
> 
> ...


I never said that I was overqualified. I might have degrees in goat roping and english literature. I never elaborated on that. And to accuse me of not being able to handle the grunt work is extremely ignorant on your part. I happen to be an attractive, very fit woman that goes to the gym every day to weight lift. Men and women are generally not equal when it comes down to strength, but a lot of women have the endurance to keep going. I could sit here and say that I could take you in an arm wrestling contest. That would be an ignorant and empty statement, not because you're a man, but because I don't know you. Making statements stereotyping women as too pretty or too weak shows that you need to either forward your thinking into present times or you need to move to civilization.

I am around men all the time and I have never encountered a man with such an ignorant mind.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

jdunn said:


> I am around men all the time and I have never encountered a man with such an ignorant mind.


Well if you get in the union you'll meet lots so there's that to look forward to  

Regarding the gym comment - don't assume because you're ferocious in spin class you're going to be able to handle the work. I have seen plenty of gym heroes that are workplace zeroes. I'd take a girl that grew up working on a farm over a supreme yoga queen any day. Endurance in the gym is being able to do something for an hour or two or maybe a half day if you're a triathlete. Endurance on the job is being able to do it 50 hours a week for 40 years. 

As for your degrees - please. Even if you have two degrees in basketweaving and Tibetan literature, there are a million jobs you could eventually get because you have *any* degree. If you have two useless degrees it makes you look even more like a dilettante. 

You're being a bit dense about the interview process. Sure you're right work ethic is super important but asking people about their work ethic is almost useless. It's like sense of humor: everyone THINKS they have a sense of humor, but not everybody does. Here's a test: 

What smells worse than anchovies? 








Anchovy cutns.
See? Not everyone has a sense of humor.


----------



## jdunn (May 25, 2018)

splatz said:


> Well if you get in the union you'll meet lots so there's that to look forward to
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It could have been a funny joke if you had the capacity to put more effort into it.

And I've been around plenty of men that think like you do, but they are not shallow enough to open their mouths. I said nothing about endurance in the gym. I was speaking of strength and endurance in general terms. 

It seems like you are most concerned about whether a woman can physically handle this career. I guess you would rather work with a bunch of men regardless of intelligence, work ethic and anything else that makes the trade better for the community. Heaven forbid they find a woman that can keep up with a man. That would be terrible, since we ALL are the same. Right?

You try to talk a big game, but your approach and words are pretty weak. In my original post, I'm looking for other people's interview experiences. If I wanted to prove how shallow and single-minded people can be, I would have posted a question regarding that. But I'm not on here to run my mouth. I'm here because I want to be a union electrician. If you are on here just to sh!t talk, maybe you should find a hobby.


----------



## splatz (May 23, 2015)

What's shallow about it? To me it's more shallow when people are afraid to say what everyone's thinking because they more afraid of being accused of stereotyping than anything. 

You brought up that you go to the gym as evidence you're fit for the physical demands. I said that's not enough. Then you replied saying you didn't say anything about endurance in the gym. More and more you seem like you'd be a pain in the ass to have around. 

I'm not talking a big game; I am not even getting warmed up. Here's one for you, see if you're hip enough to handle it. People in general tend to want to blame their problems on other people rather than themselves. So if I say something you don't want to hear, you'll build a straw man to knock down by putting words in my mouth. It's easier than admitting you might not be a great candidate and it's not due to sexism. What I am actually saying has more to do with getting past your sense of entitlement than you being a woman. 

You fit the profile of someone who wants to do something for a little while to prove they can do it, then move on to something else. A dilettante. In some areas, that's no problem, you work a while and move on. Others may look for someone that's going to last. 



jdunn said:


> It could have been a funny joke if you had the capacity to put more effort into it.
> 
> And I've been around plenty of men that think like you do, but they are not shallow enough to open their mouths. I said nothing about endurance in the gym. I was speaking of strength and endurance in general terms.
> 
> ...


----------



## jdunn (May 25, 2018)

splatz said:


> What's shallow about it? To me it's more shallow when people are afraid to say what everyone's thinking because they more afraid of being accused of stereotyping than anything.
> 
> You brought up that you go to the gym as evidence you're fit for the physical demands. I said that's not enough. Then you replied saying you didn't say anything about endurance in the gym. More and more you seem like you'd be a pain in the ass to have around.
> 
> ...


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

jdunn said:


> Of course I didn't expect those questions. But when you are 1 of over 100 that are trying to fill just a few spots, I was expecting questions, at least, regarding work ethic. I went in feeling pretty confident but left feeling let down, like they didn't care about how I am at work. When selecting only a few out of that many people, seems that would be pretty important. I want to hear other people's interview experiences. Because for the past few months all I have heard is "you won't like it and...women don't have a place on a construction site." I need honest opinions and experiences. I understand what you're trying to say. I'm trying to look beyond the bottom line.


First off, welcome aboard!

Secondly, with what you said of yourself you leave too many holes in the details of your interview, we aren't getting the whole picture.

What are your degrees in?

Are you working in your field of study?

How long at the same employer?

How many employers since college?

Do you look like a waif little girl that will bail out on the first physical job?

Did you go in dressed in casual attire or all made up in war paint an a dress
and heels?


Put yourself in the place of an interviewer.

The person in front of you is there to sell themselves to you as a person that will show up on time, daily, dressed for the job at hand with a proper attitude to take instruction and work as told as independently as possible with minimum coaching.

If you came off as one that isn't worth investing 4-5 years of training in that's on you.

There is something they saw in you that didn't exude confidence to your ability to fit in and be worth the investment or they wouldn't have been negative. 

*I could be wrong but I highly doubt it.*


----------



## jdunn (May 25, 2018)

MechanicalDVR said:


> First off, welcome aboard!
> 
> Secondly, with what you said of yourself you leave too many holes in the details of your interview, we aren't getting the whole picture.
> 
> ...


They weren't negative with me at all. I just did not feel very confident when I left. I exuded confidence in my interview. And we had a good conversation about what I should expect on a job site. I hope that they did not immediately disqualify me because of my appearance or work experience. 

I have degrees in business, nursing and biochemistry. And I've been working in my field, for the same employer, since I graduated. I am 5'8" 145# and very fit, not skinny. And I dressed casually and made a point to not look too feminine. Because I wanted them to know that I am not a girly girl. 

They said that my personal references were excellent and I'm hoping they are using those to gauge my work ethic and did not just discredit me because they don't think I can physically handle it. 

I simply wanted to know other people's interview experience and whether they were asked the same questions.


----------



## joebanana (Dec 21, 2010)

jdunn said:


> They weren't negative with me at all. I just did not feel very confident when I left. I exuded confidence in my interview. And we had a good conversation about what I should expect on a job site. I hope that they did not immediately disqualify me because of my appearance or work experience.
> 
> I have degrees in business, nursing and biochemistry. And I've been working in my field, for the same employer, since I graduated. I am 5'8" 145# and very fit, not skinny. And I dressed casually and made a point to not look too feminine. Because I wanted them to know that I am not a girly girl.
> 
> ...


 I'm just going to jump back into the fray here, now that more pertinent info. has materialized. 

I have friends on the examining board at my local. We talk. So, I have a pretty good idea of what they look for. (My personal interview blew them away because of previous experience's, so I don't know what a "bad" interview even looks like). But. I've heard.
Specifically, what questions did they ask you?

Biochemistry, nursing, and business, aren't any of the qualifications they seek. At all. In fact, they don't qualify as qualifications for the electrical trade, whatsoever. Maybe, that's the problem.
The main objective is prior electrical experience, not changing dressings, or profit/loss statements, or if Rotifer's can survive harsh conditions. 

They try to ascertain if you're the type that will energize a switch rack when someone is working on it, or if you would even know better. 

(Yes, even those types make it through)
Other peoples lives depend on the people they interview, and they do so accordingly.


----------



## jdunn (May 25, 2018)

joebanana said:


> I'm just going to jump back into the fray here, now that more pertinent info. has materialized.
> 
> I have friends on the examining board at my local. We talk. So, I have a pretty good idea of what they look for. (My personal interview blew them away because of previous experience's, so I don't know what a "bad" interview even looks like). But. I've heard.
> Specifically, what questions did they ask you?
> ...


I would hope that having a career that is not similar to the electrical trade would automatically disqualify an individual. Especially since the minimum qualification is a high school education. If a person is physically capable of safely performing the work, what does it matter?


----------



## joebanana (Dec 21, 2010)

jdunn said:


> I would hope that having a career that is not similar to the electrical trade would automatically disqualify an individual. Especially since the minimum qualification is a high school education. If a person is physically capable of safely performing the work, what does it matter?


 I didn't say it automatically disqualifies a person, but it is a consideration.
If they have 5 slots, and 6 people apply, and 5 have previous trade experience, they will have a "better chance" than a high school graduate, OR a biochemist. Equal opportunity doesn't mean equal qualification.

If only 4 people apply for 5 slots, then all 4 have an equal chance. But, that's rarely the case. They look for the most qualified applicant.

If you were interviewing 2 people for a nursing assistance position, and 1 applicant used to work in a doctor's office, and the other was an electrician, which one would you give more consideration to?


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

jdunn said:


> *They weren't negative with me at all. I just did not feel very confident when I left.* I exuded confidence in my interview. And we had a good conversation about what I should expect on a job site. I hope that they did not immediately disqualify me because of my appearance or work experience.
> 
> I have degrees in business, nursing and biochemistry. And I've been working in my field, for the same employer, since I graduated. I am 5'8" 145# and very fit, not skinny. And I dressed casually and made a point to not look too feminine. Because I wanted them to know that I am not a girly girl.
> 
> ...



I haven't had an interview myself since 2004 but i have interviewed many for jobs.


" I left there sort of feeling like they were *blowing me off* because I am older and have no professional construction experience. Only because *they were making statements like "You know you're going to work in the heat and the cold. You know you will have to work from heights. You know the union doesn't offer steady work. You know the work is dirty*.""

I take all of that as being negative towards you.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

jdunn said:


> I would hope that having a career that is not similar to the electrical trade would automatically disqualify an individual. Especially since the minimum qualification is a high school education. If a person is physically capable of safely performing the work, what does it matter?


The whole thing is if they could see you showing up ready willing and able to do the work. 

While you may not think you are smarter and better educated those that will be your bosses and or supervisors experience says you'd be the exception to the rule of human nature.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

I'm calling it again. Nice troll thread.


----------



## tjb (Feb 12, 2014)

You’re too paranoid.

Have you considered the possibility that they got enough information about your work ethic and other concerns from your “excellent references“?

If I were interviewing somebody who had no experience in the trade, I absolutely would grill them regarding work conditions such as heat and cold and labor. Particularly if they are no longer a spring chicken.

I doubt that you will get the position, however. If they are interviewing as many as you say for as few positions as you say, then they would certainly have the opportunity to choose the cream of the crop, and are sitting in a pretty position to be very picky. This is simply smart hiring, not social injustice.


----------



## jdunn (May 25, 2018)

tjb said:


> You’re too paranoid.
> 
> Have you considered the possibility that they got enough information about your work ethic and other concerns from your “excellent references“?
> 
> ...


I AM probably being to paranoid about it. 
Thank you for your honest opinion.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

jdunn said:


> I had my first interview this week. We talked the full 10-15 minutes but they didn't really ask any of the behavioural questions I had expected. I'm hoping it was because I am older with a steady, professional work experience. Did anybody else have a similar experience?


Our local interviewed over 1200 people.

Due to strict rules about what you can ask prospective employees the real questions they need to ask are forbidden.

But at one time women were given an edge in the process, not sure if that holds true these days.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

Martine said:


> I don't know about the states, but Canada is REALLY trying to get more women into Construction,* and even giving bonuses to employers who will hire them. *
> 
> They might just have wanted to get a general vibe of what you're like and to see if you knew what you were getting yourself into. I've had multiple friends ask me about my career choice due to it ''paying well'', although they don't know anything other than that.


TO ME that is the biggest crock of monkey crap, I have had women working for me with absolutely no issues (well a few losers) they were one of the crew for the most part. But paying bonuses to hire a PROTECTED group is just wrong. 

Hire the best, because they are the best not because you are using tax dollars for BS.


----------



## telsa (May 22, 2015)

Out my way, subsidies exist for contractors that hire felons straight out of prison.

As a result, one C-10 has an almost totally felonious crew. :surprise:

His nominal wage expense looks to be rock bottom, but his labor efficiency suffers greatly. :biggrin:

However, if anyone angers him, he can get them violated on their parole terms, the critical one being that they have a job. :devil3:


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

I think what we have our hands on here is one of the more rare female narcissists. The common theme seems to be, "I know I'm good. They didn't ask the interview questions I wanted them to ask, therefore I have a reason to believe the process may be flawed and I'm worried". 

Based simply on her responses to the replies to her thread here, I can only imagine how the interview process went. I wouldn't hire her if she paid me.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

brian john said:


> Our local interviewed over 1200 people.
> 
> Due to strict rules about what you can ask prospective employees the real questions they need to ask are forbidden.
> 
> *But at one time women were given an edge in the process, not sure if that holds true these days.*


I think it depends on the local and the diversity break downs required in the area of said local.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

brian john said:


> TO ME that is the biggest crock of monkey crap, I have had women working for me with absolutely no issues (well a few losers) they were one of the crew for the most part. But paying bonuses to hire a PROTECTED group is just wrong.
> 
> *Hire the best, because they are the best not because you are using tax dollars for BS.*


*Amen!*


----------



## MDShunk (Jan 7, 2007)

MechanicalDVR said:


> I think it depends on the local and the diversity break downs required in the area of said local.


required? Christ, Almighty.

I'm all for equity of opportunity. I can't really support compelled equity in the actual onboarding decision. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. We've seen this in other demographic groups. I didn't realize that it applied to women also.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

MDShunk said:


> required? Christ, Almighty.
> 
> I'm all for equity of opportunity. I can't really support compelled equity in the actual onboarding decision. I guess I shouldn't be surprised. We've seen this in other demographic groups. I didn't realize that it applied to women also.


In the late 80s when I applied to a poco for a lineman's job I was told flat out I was the wrong gender and color for the slots they had open.

That was a couple years before my cousin became president of the local, he told me then none of the last 20 hires made the 2 year mark.


----------



## joebanana (Dec 21, 2010)

telsa said:


> Out my way, subsidies exist for contractors that hire felons straight out of prison.
> 
> As a result, one C-10 has an almost totally felonious crew. :surprise:
> 
> ...


 I can remember when a job apps. last question was "Have you ever been convicted of a crime"? Which was seen as a negative, not a desired attribute. Times change.....I guess.
I'll bet he doesn't advertise that little factoid.
I know the Sheriff's have recruiters at airports to snag returning Vets (my son-in-law is one). Because they _want_ people who have no scruples about killing fellow human beings. (What a racket)
But recruiting felons to work in peoples homes and businesses is even more troubling, and NOT what I'd be looking for in a contractor.


----------



## Martine (Jan 26, 2018)

brian john said:


> Martine said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know about the states, but Canada is REALLY trying to get more women into Construction,* and even giving bonuses to employers who will hire them. *
> ...




I’m not saying I agree with it, I’d much rather have an employer hire me because of my potential and my wanting to work over 10k of my salary being paid by the government as an incentive to hire me looming over my head. It’s just how it is.


----------



## brian john (Mar 11, 2007)

MTW said:


> *After working with numerous people over the years that had no business being in the trade, I'm convinced the only way to adequately hire someone for trade work is with a practical test*. This way you can see what they can actually do in a certain amount of time, as well as what kind of tools they have. I would supplement this with a basic NEC and Ohm's law quiz. I'm convinced this method would weed out the vast majority of unqualified candidates.


Two things I use to look at for green apprentices, could they master a screw gun, if in a few weeks they were still struggling to screw a box to a metal stud I became worried, the other test is using a screwdriver one handed can they spin it straight keeping the shaft vertical, if they can not manage a screwdriver or screw gun they are not going to make it or at least that is my experience.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

jdunn said:


> Making statements stereotyping women as too pretty or too weak shows that you need to either forward your thinking into present times or you need to move to civilization.


Actually, Telsa's point is 100% valid. A very attractive woman on a jobsite that is 99.9% men would be an extreme distraction and in some cases, downright hazardous. To deny that is to deny basic biology. 

But I can already tell you're a millenial, so that alone disqualifies you from someone I would want to work with or hire.


----------



## MTW (Aug 28, 2013)

brian john said:


> Two things I use to look at for green apprentices, could they master a screw gun, if in a few weeks they were still struggling to screw a box to a metal stud I became worried, the other test is using a screwdriver one handed can they spin it straight keeping the shaft vertical, if they can not manage a screwdriver or screw gun they are not going to make it or at least that is my experience.


I can see that kind of test for a green apprentice. It could and should be tailored for the job. For insance, resi would be wire a few boxes on a fake stud wall. Commercial - do some basic bends around an obstruction. Industrial - wire up a starter or small PLC on a board. 

I think it was Marc Shunk who mentioned that he would have an employment test that consisted of changing a bulb in a wall pack, only he put the wrong bulb in it to see if they would read the label on the ballast, or something along those lines. I think that's pretty genius.


----------



## Martine (Jan 26, 2018)

MTW said:


> Actually, Telsa's point is 100% valid. A very attractive woman on a jobsite that is 99.9% men would be an extreme distraction and in some cases, downright hazardous. To deny that is to deny basic biology.
> 
> But I can already tell you're a millenial, so that alone disqualifies you from someone I would want to work with or hire.


I think that might be lumping quite a few people into one negative perception, and while I'm sure quite a few of them deserve it, we're not all phone addicted, always late little know-it-alls :glasses:


----------



## Martine (Jan 26, 2018)

MTW said:


> I can see that kind of test for a green apprentice. It could and should be tailored for the job. For insance, resi would be wire a few boxes on a fake stud wall. Commercial - do some basic bends around an obstruction. Industrial - wire up a starter or small PLC on a board.
> 
> I think it was Marc Shunk who mentioned that he would have an employment test that consisted of changing a bulb in a wall pack, only he put the wrong bulb in it to see if they would read the label on the ballast, or something along those lines. I think that's pretty genius.


They pull stuff like that on us at our exams at school, I had a teacher put a piece of copper in the bottom of a socket to short it out, the wrong light in the ballast was another one, and they give us transformers and relays that other students have blown to see if we can properly trouble shoot and genuinely understand what we're doing instead of just replicating what we see on a piece of paper.


----------



## jdunn (May 25, 2018)

MTW said:


> Actually, Telsa's point is 100% valid. A very attractive woman on a jobsite that is 99.9% men would be an extreme distraction and in some cases, downright hazardous. To deny that is to deny basic biology.
> 
> But I can already tell you're a millenial, so that alone disqualifies you from someone I would want to work with or hire.


I was born in the late 70's, which excludes me from being a millennial. I am about to turn 40. I work with plenty of spoon-fed, phone-addicted millennials. I am definetly not one of them.


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

jdunn said:


> I was born in the late 70's, which excludes me from being a millennial. I am about to turn 40. I work with plenty of spoon-fed, phone-addicted millennials. I am definetly not one of them.


Forgive him, he's been on an anti-millennial kick the last few days.

It's nothing personal.


----------



## jdunn (May 25, 2018)

MechanicalDVR said:


> Forgive him, he's been on an anti-millennial kick the last few days.
> 
> It's nothing personal.


No harm done


----------



## rdestimating (Jul 16, 2018)

I hope I am not speaking out of place but I have been in the electrical construction industry for over 28 years and I find that talented women in this industry are highly respected. I think because they have more obstacles to overcome to get where they are so once they get there, they are superior in their craft. My daughter is 16 and I have tried to steer her towards the industry because I know the earning potential and respect she would get if she mastered it. She wants no part of it now but that could change....My advise to you would be in your next interview, ask if the Contractor sponsors apprenticeship in ABC or other and ask to get enrolled. They will take that as you are willing to learn and in it for a career. That is what I did and it has paid off in a huge way. Good luck!


----------

