Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: The Military Contractor Hiring Process

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member 120mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wonderland
    Posts
    1,284

    Default The Military Contractor Hiring Process

    I cannot help but think that the process of getting hired on as a contractor is at least part of the problem, when it comes to getting quality people.

    Sometimes, the problem appears to be "get a warm body in there", where they just hire someone sight unseen, with little regard to qualifications or suitability. Two of my contracting gigs were cold calls, to me, asking to come work for a company. I have no idea where they got my name, and once I accepted the job, it became apparent that they didn't care if I knew how to do the job or not.

    But even more corrosive, I think, is the long, drawn-out process of COR approval, when the military is trying to appear to be getting the most qualified person possible. (emphasis on "appear") I have personally witnessed several extremely qualified individuals drop out of the process out of frustration at this point. I can't help but think that this is a phoney, "appearance of due diligence" move by the COR.

    I know we have a few contractors on the board, and I'm wondering what you think about the hiring process. Not that I'm motivated by personal frustration, myself....

  2. #2
    Council Member Stan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Estonia
    Posts
    3,817

    Default

    I've had two relatively short contracts (3 years each) where little more than my CV was needed (sight unseen) (I don't know too many retired NCOs with Estonian language background ). Nearly the same deal with them initiating contact. I will however say that the company administrator and logistics guru were on me constantly with financial and accountability documentation and stats, so I wasn't just out there with free reign.

    On the other hand, I received a strange request last week from the same company inquiring about Explosive Detection Dog (EDD) capabilities. My pathetic and often sarcastic self is pondering over the CV for our four-legged members
    If you want to blend in, take the bus

  3. #3
    Council Member carl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Denver on occasion
    Posts
    2,460

    Default

    In the projects I have worked on, all the pilots seemed to be qualified. One or two unqualified slipped through but I attribute that to the normal flaws in the hiring process and not to any rush to get bodies in the seats.

    Something I have noticed about the equipment operators is that at times, they seem to be hired based on computer proficiency almost to the exclusion of all else. We've had guys who didn't know what a mortar was or couldn't see the importance of using the phrase "apparent machine gun with a bipod" vs. "automatic weapons."
    "We fight, get beat, rise, and fight again." Gen. Nathanael Greene

  4. #4
    Council Member 120mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wonderland
    Posts
    1,284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by carl View Post
    In the projects I have worked on, all the pilots seemed to be qualified. One or two unqualified slipped through but I attribute that to the normal flaws in the hiring process and not to any rush to get bodies in the seats.

    Something I have noticed about the equipment operators is that at times, they seem to be hired based on computer proficiency almost to the exclusion of all else. We've had guys who didn't know what a mortar was or couldn't see the importance of using the phrase "apparent machine gun with a bipod" vs. "automatic weapons."
    The more I look into this, the more I'm convinced that a lot of this is the fault of the hiring agencies. The great majority of job announcements are horribly mis-written, and the people who do screening and hiring go off the job requirements as written on the announcement.

    The hiring folks are most often caught in a "box" mentality. With pilots, and other specialists, the box works, but in the less easily defined jobs, "boxing in" candidates actually gets you less qualified people. Add to this the problem of "qualifications". In my opinion, I would rather hire an unqualified guy who is trainable and adaptable, than a fully-qualified individual, who is not, except in those few cases where qualifications really matter. (I think Academia is the worst for leaning upon qualifications, where qualifications are functionally irrelevant.)

    I've seen where a certain company requires knowledge of FARs for all employees hired, even the wheeled vehicle mechanics and trans/log weenies. It's obviously just some hack cutting and pasting an announcement that started as an A&P slot, but there it is, right on the requirements list.

    I'm currently in competition for a job with a person who is more qualified on paper than I, (according to the job announcement) but if she gets the job, she will be an epic fail: The job announcement says that they are looking for "her", but in reality, what the really need is "me".

  5. #5
    Council Member marct's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Ottawa, Canada
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Hi 120,

    Quote Originally Posted by 120mm View Post
    I'm currently in competition for a job with a person who is more qualified on paper than I, (according to the job announcement) but if she gets the job, she will be an epic fail: The job announcement says that they are looking for "her", but in reality, what the really need is "me".
    'tis a real problem that has only gotten worse in the past 20 years. It's really a problem of numbers: too many people apply for too many positions. The HR "solution" () was to computerize using simple keyword searches, a process that allowed junior HR dweebs to "go through" thousands of resumes an hour. Of course, that meant that you could get rid of those expensive senior HR people who actually knew something about the real job requirements .

    So, now lists are king, ~30-50% of HR people doing the hiring have no idea about what they are hiring for, and the name is mistaken for the thing.

    BTW, if you want me to give you a reference let me know ....
    Sic Bisquitus Disintegrat...
    Marc W.D. Tyrrell, Ph.D.
    Institute of Interdisciplinary Studies,
    Senior Research Fellow,
    The Canadian Centre for Intelligence and Security Studies, NPSIA
    Carleton University
    http://marctyrrell.com/

  6. #6
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    1,444

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marct View Post
    The HR "solution" () was to computerize using simple keyword searches, a process that allowed junior HR dweebs to "go through" thousands of resumes an hour.
    Unfortunately, that keyword system doesn't really simplify things all that much. The keywords just select a bunch of resumes. Those resumes must still be reviewed and applicants interviewed. If anything, the keyword thing makes it more difficult.

    I've been through the federal hiring process from the employer side. Absolutely mindless. Five of us were given 25 resumes to review (we were all reviewing the same 25 resumes). We were to rate them in five areas on a 1 to 5 scale and then we would see which 4 of the applicants scored highest. All of the applications were about 3 or 4 pages, single spaced, tiny font, 1/4" margins, and they all sounded the same because the resume was simply a vehicle to deliver all of those keywords to us.

    If nothing else, it was an interesting exercise in random number generation. Because all of the resumes were alike, all five of us scored different ones highest and lowest - it was completely arbitrary. But, in accordance with some federal practice, we found the 4 whose scores on our arbitrary scale were highest - even though they were insignificantly higher - and we called them in for the interview.

    Then came the interview. We were each assigned a specific question to ask (basically, our jobs amounted to reading a script). In order to ensure "fairness" we had to ask each candidate the same question. The candidates were like their resumes - canned, non-specific responses to cookie-cutter questions. The position was some a personnel slot - similar to a BN or BDE S-1, but dealing with Active, Reserve, and DOD Civilians. I could have asked the same questions to an infantry E-7 and gotten the same answers, and learned about as much about his qualifications.

    I think the woman who broke down crying during the interview eventually got hired.
    Last edited by Schmedlap; 01-16-2009 at 06:49 PM. Reason: addition

  7. #7
    Council Member CR6's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    TX
    Posts
    181

    Default Have you tried

    Quote Originally Posted by 120mm View Post

    in reality, what the really need is "me".
    standing outside the HR guy's window wearing a trenchcoat and blaring some Peter Gabriel from a boombox? It worked for John Cusack...
    "Law cannot limit what physics makes possible." Humanitarian Apsects of Airpower (papers of Frederick L. Anderson, Hoover Institution, Stanford University)

  8. #8
    Council Member 120mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Wonderland
    Posts
    1,284

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by marct View Post
    Hi 120,



    'tis a real problem that has only gotten worse in the past 20 years. It's really a problem of numbers: too many people apply for too many positions. The HR "solution" () was to computerize using simple keyword searches, a process that allowed junior HR dweebs to "go through" thousands of resumes an hour. Of course, that meant that you could get rid of those expensive senior HR people who actually knew something about the real job requirements .

    So, now lists are king, ~30-50% of HR people doing the hiring have no idea about what they are hiring for, and the name is mistaken for the thing.

    BTW, if you want me to give you a reference let me know ....
    If I could, I'll take you up on that. I am rather frantically looking for my next job, as my contract expires in 6 months, and I don't want to be the last one standing. Plus, I think I need to get overseas with this gig, for a variety of reasons.

    Quote Originally Posted by CR6 View Post
    standing outside the HR guy's window wearing a trenchcoat and blaring some Peter Gabriel from a boombox? It worked for John Cusack...
    Yeah, but look how poorly it worked for Stan Barflowski

    As an update to my efforts, the individual I was competing with ended up turning down the job, but since she had a PhD, the customer now believes they need someone with a PhD, despite having advertised for someone with a Master's. They are now looking at an unfilled position, but since they've rejected me, (officially - they sent an e-mail and everything) I am tainted goods.

    I am taking bets that they hire someone less qualified than me a few months down the road, and the job will be unfilled until then.

    I am currently dealing with the HR department of another prospective employer who just asked me to rewrite my resume, again, despite their unintention of ever hiring me. It seems that there is a "standard" resume they have to adhere to, and failure to have your resume "standard" is a fail to their HR department.

    Of course, they furnish an example resume, but do not explain what makes it "standard". I am humoring them by resubmitting mine in different forms just to get triangulation on what they consider "standard."

Similar Threads

  1. Vietnam collection (lessons plus)
    By SWJED in forum Training & Education
    Replies: 140
    Last Post: 06-27-2014, 04:40 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 09-14-2010, 02:38 PM
  3. CNAS-Foreign Policy Magazine U.S. Military Index
    By SWJED in forum Military - Other
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-20-2008, 02:41 AM
  4. Outfitting a Big-War Military with Small-War Capabilities
    By SWJED in forum Equipment & Capabilities
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-02-2006, 01:50 PM
  5. Conference on Professional Military Education
    By SWJED in forum Training & Education
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-08-2006, 10:58 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •