Temporary measure or a kick in the teeth? 4

[Knoxij]

I am a relatively young engineer (3 years experience) working for a company in the chemical industry. I am one of 2 degreed electrical engineers at this facility, although we have several electrical designers/pseudo-engineers. I was originally hired as part of a succession plan to replace my boss (the other degreed EE) as he moved up the ladder.

Recently my boss was promoted to oversee the entire engineering department, leaving his job overseeing the electrical staff vacant. The company advertised his old group leader job locally, and on the corporate website. Although I was somewhat under qualified, I applied for the job. The specialized work we do at this facility makes it unlikely that anyone from outside the company would have all of the needed skills/experience which led me to believe that I had a chance to overcome my lack of experience by possessing the correct skill set.

Nothing seemed to happen for a long while, and I was led to believe that they hadn’t even gotten around to interviewing anybody for the job. I was informed a week or two ago that our HR department, my boss and his director had decided that rather than try to hire somebody directly and permanently, they would prefer to just hire a contract employee on a temporary basis. That seemed reasonable at that time because I know our workload can fluctuate greatly, and we have a history of bringing in external designers and drafters so they don’t have to lay off permanent employees.

I found out today that the company had been interviewing people for the job that I applied for, and even offered it to at least one person who declined it because he would have taken a pay cut by accepting. I’m highly annoyed by all of this. I realize I was slightly under qualified for the job, but the fact that I wasn’t even interviewed or talked to about it bothers me greatly. I don’t know what to do.

Some people have suggested that hiring a contract employee temporarily is a way for the company to allow me to gain the experience that I need until they feel I am ready to take over the job. Other people have told me that I just got shafted by my management. Does anybody have any opinions or suggestions on any of this?

Thanks,
Knox

 

[ctopher]

As I see it, it is currently another messed up trend. I don't have an answer how to get around it. I have been thru the same where I am now. Good luck.

Chris
Sr. Mechanical Designer, CAD
SolidWorks 05 SP3.1 / PDMWorks 05
ctopher's home site

FAQ559-1100
FAQ559-716

 

[MadMango]

Some people have suggested that hiring a contract employee temporarily is a way for the company to allow me to gain the experience that I need until they feel I am ready to take over the job. Other people have told me that I just got shafted by my management.

I suspect the first part to be more true than the latter. As for what you should do, it seems that you have already inquired as to why you were passed for the position. If you haven't done this, then you should talk with your boss. 3yrs is a drop in the bucket, your company probably wants a solid 5yrs as a minimum.

[green]"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers."[/green]
Thomas Watson, chairman of IBM, 1943.
Have you read faq731-376 to make the best use of Eng-Tips Forums?

 

[IRstuff]

As an alternate approach, to avoid a direct confrontation, ask your supervisor what parts of your CV need to beefed up to be considered a viable candidate for that position.

TTFN

 

[EngJW]

I can offer one possible explanation. You are already there and doing a job, probably doing it well. You are in a slot and invisible to the company, but the vacancy is real. It is too complicated for management to fill one vacancy by creating another.

Management also forgets that their own people have accumulated knowledge and experience. They are too easily impressed by consultants that come in and hand them a line of bs. (Not to offend anyone out there who is a consultant, I might only know the bad ones.)

 

[mshimko]

I agree with IR's recommendation in the previous posting, but I offer an additional observation.

WHile I don't believe there is a legal obligation on your company's part, I do think there is a "professional curtesy" obligation to either (a) interview you, or (b) tell you why you didn't measure up to even take the time to interview. In my company, even if you were grossly underqualified, we'd probably give you a "token" interview just to see what you offer in the interview, while being up-front that we thought you were underqualified. This has many benefits; (a) you know you were considered, (b) you gain experience through the interview, (c) we learn more about you and what you want to do.

Frankly, I'd be thinking about the "character" of the company that didn't interview you and provided zero feedback to you.

 

[haggis]

I agree with MadMango. The first part is probably true and as IRstuff suggests, be diplomatic. Beware of people who tell you that management are shafting you and getting you worked up maybe to the point where you will make a faux pas on your approach to this and possibly negate any future chance of advancement.

 

[SB63]

Start looking for another job immediately. Sorry but 3 years is plenty of time to know the operation and the people. You are on track to keep getting shafted in the future.

 

[sms]

Time to move on. There are other chemical companies looking for electrical engineers....

 

[BJC]

I agree with SB63 and sms. If the company didn't know you and you were submitted by a temp agency they would probably hire you. It's either a case of they have crainal rectosis or familarity breeding contemp. Either way it's a sign to look for a more enlightened organization.

 

[Knoxij]

I can offer one possible explanation. You are already there and doing a job, probably doing it well. You are in a slot and invisible to the company, but the vacancy is real. It is too complicated for management to fill one vacancy by creating another.

This is almost exactly what most of the operators/tradespeople here have mentioned.

it seems that you have already inquired as to why you were passed for the position. If you haven't done this, then you should talk with your boss. 3yrs is a drop in the bucket, your company probably wants a solid 5yrs as a minimum.

Until this morning, I was under the impression that they decided there wasn't enough need to justify hiring anybody for the position rather than I had been "passed over" for it.

The job posting did ask for 5 years of experience in several fairly specialized areas which are all commonplace at this facility. I realize there is a great difference between 3 years and 5 years, but I thought that my exposure to the specific areas of expertise they were looking for might be enough to make up the difference.

I do think there is a "professional curtesy" obligation to either (a) interview you, or (b) tell you why you didn't measure up to even take the time to interview. In my company, even if you were grossly underqualified, we'd probably give you a "token" interview just to see what you offer in the interview, while being up-front that we thought you were underqualified.

This is what I would have expected to happen. I just feel like they went behind my back to try to hire outside of the company while I was busy working my tail off on a large project.

Beware of people who tell you that management are shafting you and getting you worked up maybe to the point where you will make a faux pas on your approach to this and possibly negate any future chance of advancement.

Thank you for that. I really was starting to get a bit worked up about all of this.


Thank you to everyone who has replied so far. I appreciate any and all of your insight on this.

 

[jmw]

It ought to be a good sign for a company that its incumbent employees are ready willing and able to take on more responsibility and some companies have a policy of prefering to promote from within and then recruit to the lesse position, especially as it is easier to find suitable recruits for these positions than for more senior positions.

However, there is a big gap between "ought to be" and what is.
The chances are thsat even if they did offer you the opportunity to interview and you got the job, they will do o because (a) they save on employment agency fees (b) they know what they are paying you now and will probably pay you only a notional amount more and certainly what they'd have to pay an external employee.

Of course, the fallacy in all this is that some companies spend far more on "temporary" or "contract" staff than the job is worth and rarely get their moneys worth in a short term employment. It is surprising how many companies have contract staff that have longer service than permanent staff so you begin to wonder if management have mush for brains. I think Dilbert had some very pertinent observations on this.

Of course, one reason you didn't get interviewed might be that it is your supervisor who was asked by HR if you could do the job and he may not have wanted to disrupt his team. I would guess that your upline maneger/supervisor is often the most relauctant to let you go, especially if you are good at your job. So do speak to him and even ask him if HR mentioned your application (I wouldn't like to comment on whether it would have been a good idea to get him onside when you first made the application, that is so much a question of who your supervisor is as a person, and if you get no joy, speak to HR directly; diplomatically, polietly and with care not to burn bridges but if you don't ask you will never know.

Then, once you have all the information you can get you can decide if you need to go job hunting. It's a pretty fair observation to say that you should always be looking at the options; you never know what is out there. You might feel that once rebuffed or rejected that this is what will colour their opinions in future.

If, like me, you are a real cynic you may decide that if they don't even talk to you that they've already pigeon-holed you and that if you stay on regardless they may see you as utterly dependable i.e. they can overlook you for promotions, pay rises and anything else you might want.

This is especially relevant as you say you were originally recruited as part of a sucession plan. Now you aren't part of that sucession.

It's a tough a call but once you've thrown your hat into the ring, you may have to make a tough decision or forever be the guy who never gets promoted.

You know the ocmpany and the people, in the end it's your call.

One last word of warning, never trust their promises unless in writing.... and they won't be. Most HR and business managers are as teflon coated as a frying pan and they have to be. Don't confuse any loyalty or integrity you may have as being reciprocated.

JMW

http://www.ViscoAnalyser.com

 

[EngJW]

I don't see the difference between 3 years and 5 years. Any new person could take 1 or 2 years to learn the system and the product. You already know that so you would be able to apply your efforts to learning what the new position requires.

You really can't fight them. If you are a young person, don't be afraid to move on. A new company will always see more value in you than your current company. You just have to be willing to relocate, but do it now as a time will come when it will not be worth the disruption and expense.

 

[71corvette]

The fact that they didn't even speak to you about your application for this position (whether they thought you were qualified or not), seems to indicate a lack of good managment practice and common courtesy on their part. At the very least, your company owed you a response to your application. The fact that they didn't even give you one seems to indicate their callous indifference for you and your fellow employees.

 

[GregLocock]

Just another perspective on this. With 3 years of experience you might be as young as 25. I don't know of many engineering supervisors who are just 25. That's not to say it would be a bad thing, just unusual.







Cheers

Greg Locock

Please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.

 

[ivymike]

you do need to "look like a manager" before you get considered for the job, in many cases...

If I were you, I'd focus on resume-building pursuits until you can land a really nice job elsewhere. I've never tried the alternate route, but I've had good luck with the "4 to 7 years and switch" approach. People mature in their careers at different rates, and yrs-of-experience guidelines are often based on the assumption of low-average performance. If you can build an impressive resume, AND land the right interview, you might find yourself moving upward at a more rapid pace than your peers. Don't be afraid to step outside your comfort zone from time to time - but also don't forget where the food comes from.

 

[svanels]

you do need to "look like a manager" before you get considered for the job

1) What were the responsibilities of your boss?
2) In 3 years I suppose you have gained mostly technical experience, what about supervisory experience?
3) Can you look one of the pseudo engineers in the eyes, give him a task, and he accepts that without questioning although he has 30 years experience?
4) If they (the rest of the staff) still see you as wet behind the ears, this could be a big problem.
5) Are you ready to take the blame if your subordinates screw up. You will be responsible for coaching, training etc.. Every place has this @#% guy, when asked why he did something, the standard answer is: boss send me
6) HR is in most cases the last one to know about vacancies. The lobby work is done by line management. HR has to verify pay scales, benefits, job descriptions, education etc. The day-to-day headache is with line management if a psychopat enters the company.
7) You don't fill a hole with another one.

In my company if you are not interviewed you get a standard letter from HR thanking you for the interest but, not have been considered. The decisions are taken by line management.

 

[johnwiss]

Please don't take this the wrong way but your boss was evidently one step away from a job that has the whole department reporting to him. You are a newbie by anyone's standards. Do you think you can run the whole department in another three years? If so then leave. If not, ask to participate in the interview process so you will get someone you can learn a lot from--then leave or hope he gets the next job up and you will be promoted.

 

[Knoxij]

UPDATE:

After talking to my boss, I was, in essence, told that the upper management were concerned about the idea of putting a 25 year old "kid" in charge of the entire Electrical group here. I was also told that the company had decided not to hire anybody permanently, and so I shouldn't be concerned about not hearing anything formally (interview, rejection letter, etc.)

I accepted that explanation and although I was still annoyed with what I perceived as a poorly handled situation, I decided to forget about it and carry on.

The company ran the same job ad in the local paper this past Sunday however, and I now know that there have been people offered full-time employment here. (They have all declined so far over compensation disagreements (which amuses me greatly))

I am even more bothered by this now than I was before. Any advice or ideas on how to proceed?

Just another perspective on this. With 3 years of experience you might be as young as 25. I don't know of many engineering supervisors who are just 25. That's not to say it would be a bad thing, just unusual.

I'm not too upset that I didn't get the job. I realize that I'm still relatively young to be put in a "management" position. I'm mostly disturbed by what I perceive as being lied to regarding the process and my status in the whole thing.

Thanks again to everyone for all the input.

 

[EngJW]

Not necessarily being lied to. The person who takes care of placing the ad may not have been told that someone else decided not to hire anyone.

Don't be too concerned about the age thing. No matter how good or smart you are, sometimes you just have to pay some dues for a while. There is a lot to be learned yet about life and how people work. When you turn 40 and they bring in some 25 year old kid to be your boss, you will understand.