I am soooo upset right now!! My husband has worked for Barlett for 10 yrs or more, and his father before him, for who knows how many years, and now he's being treated like some Joe-Blow off the streets. I totally understand the act of doing business, but this just isn't right.
In December, my husband put in for Comanche Peak. He was ultimately told that since he hasn't been there for a couple of outages, that he would be put in as a non-returnee. Jim contacted the site coordinator and left a message with him, wanting to know if he had received his resume yet and to let him know that he was interested in returning. After not hearing from the S.C., he contacted the office and was told that C.P. was staffed. Ok, so, what's he to do then? Sit on his thumbs and wait for the phone to ring? No, he went to another company who had positions opened at plants that he had been to when Bartlett had their contracts. He confirmed for 2 plants. Not 10 minutes after confirming, Bartlett called him saying that the S.C. wanted him at C.P., but Jim had to decline because he had already confirmed with the other company.
So, now Jim has requested to be put in for Palo Verde. When he called Barlett, he was told that PV was staffed. A couple of days later, he found out that there are actually 4-14 positions still available. So, he called back and spoke to someone else and was told that those positions were being held for people that are working FOR Bartlett...and asked him if he wanted to go to a couple of other sites that Bartlett holds the contract for, then he would be pretty much guarenteed a spot...but unless he breaks his commitment to the current company, he will not be guaranteed a spot. Give me a break!!
Jim spoke with Eric yesterday and Eric says he'll investigate the situation. I sure hope he does because, in my opinion, this is rediculous. Jim has made his fair share of money for Barlett and I just feel he's being treated like trash. The ONLY thing Jim has is his WORD!!! One thing that he will NOT break. When he confirms, he DOES NOT break his word. You would think that this would be commended in this industry, but no......
Lorrie A. Henson
Yes, Jim did speak to me about this situation that concerned himself and Bartlett and I tried to explain what I think may have happened to him and told him that I would look into it further. So imagine my surprise to find this posting less than half a day later. Now that you've taken this from a matter between Jim and a recruiter and made it part of the public forum to be tried, judged and sentenced by the masses I feel that I should reply solely via the public forum so that not only you and Jim get an answer but that I can also now try to clarify what happened to everyone else that you’ve tried to rally with your insinuations.
These are the facts as presented to me by Jim on 2/27 (with some minor clarification from a couple of recruiters)
Fact 1 he put in for Comanche
Fact 2 Comanche initially staffed up w/out him (only 64 total slots for SHP and a few hundred applicants)
Fact 3 not getting the first choice he went and took other work – it just happened that Brand X could get him to work earlier than we could
Fact 4 a slot came open at Comanche and he was offered the slot
Fact 5 slot was turned down due to prior commitment w/Brand X- admirable
Fact 6 asked for Palo Verde
Fact 7 told Palo was staffed
This is where elaboration comes in – this is where I may become long winded so please bear with me. Palo, as many are aware is for all intents and purposes a prime job - happening at the end of the season when most people are getting laid off. A few months ago we, Bartlett, decided that Palo should be used for helping out those techs that didn’t jump on the first thing Brand X offered and waited for a job w/Bartlett. I understand he couldn’t wait for a job to come around w/Bartlett and that they had offered him an early start for his current outage and truthfully I think its admirable that he stayed true to his word when so many nowadays don’t (on all sides). For that they, Brand X, should be rewarding him with a late season job, just as Bartlett is using Palo to try and reward as many as we can that stuck by their word and showed up to do a whopping 1 outage this season with us.
Now as far as originally being told Palo was staffed, I think I know the reason he was told this. To understand this you would have to be aware of how we operate in the recruiting dept. Each day a report is circulated listing what has been requested and what has been filled on those requests, standard recruiting protocol. If we have a site that for all intents and purposes is staffed, due to that we have placed slots on hold for select individuals that have helped us or need additional work other than the one 3 week outage they were signed up for, we list it as being staffed here in the office so that anyone taking calls and requests wont be offering it as a choice – YES we have open slots, BUT they are on hold for select individuals, so for all intents and purposes it is staffed if you are not one of those individuals, especially if it happens to be a prime job and you happen to be coming off a job w/another company and not us. Its only sound business practice, hat by the way is not a new practice. We’ve been operating that way since long before I started here back in ’89. After all how would you like it if you committed to Bartlett to work “Plant A” staffing around 3/25, shutdown around 4/1 for approx 3 weeks with the understanding that if we can get you to Palo we will. Then out of the blue we decide to hire someone coming off of, oh say Duane Arnold and Monticello w/Brand X for that spot at Palo instead of you, who now only gets 3-4 weeks of work because we decided to forgo any type of loyalty to our workers.
I more than understand yours, his, frustration with being told it was staffed when in reality it wasn’t – but for all intents and purposes when it comes to someone in your situation, coming off a non-Bartlett job, IT IS STAFFED. It’s only proper business sense to keep our current workforce working as long as possible so that they can make as much money as possible, we can bill as long as possible for them and to keep them off of the unemployment rolls. If Brand X sold you on a job at the beginning and middle of the season you should be asking them “what are they going to do for you at the end of the season” just like we get hammered here in this office with that very same question under the very same circumstances. I am sorry if you feel you’ve been wronged – you aren’t the first and truthfully you won’t be the last. No matter what we do there will always be someone out there that will think that they got the %$#& end of the stick.
Now let’s get back to the sequence of events…
Fact 8 called back to check on Palo and was told there were slots (heard via word of mouth from other techs that there were open slots) and was told slots on hold as per my long winded dissertation above
Fact 9 was told that we could possibly place him at Palo if he was willing to help us out where we needed him right now, if not then we would need that spot to give to someone who could and would help us out right now - unlike your claim that we would put him there as long as he breaks his commitment to Brand X – it’s not about getting into Palo by hurting Brand X, they don’t seem to need any help in that arena, it was about getting into Palo by helping Bartlett. 2 separate items that happen to go hand in hand.
Fact 10 did the admirable thing and stayed true to his word to Brad X to fulfill his commitment to them – don’t get me wrong I’m not being sarcastic about him keeping his word, it is admirable when so many don’t
Q: Are there times that we place people on “prime” jobs that are coming off a job w/another company?
A: Yes, few and far between, but yes.
Q: Why then and not now?
A: It primarily happens when forced by a client or upper level mgt to do so
Now after all of that I would like to say that Jim is a desirable tech to have working for us. He does a good job, is polite, professional and dependable. Do I want him back with Bartlett? Damned straight I do. Do I have other good, polite, professional, dependable workers that need to work Palo? Yes I do. Who am I going to try and put there first? The techs coming off of our sites will be placed first. Would I hire Jim or someone else coming off of a job with another vendor to fill a “prime” slot? Yes, if I ran out of techs coming off of our jobs. Will I try and take care of Jim in the future? Yes, as best I can. I can’t promise jobs, all I can promise is to try and treat everyone fairly and to do my best to take care of those that are currently taking care of Bartlett. If you are currently taking care of/helping/working for another vendor, that vendor should be doing everything they can to take care of you. Next season is a whole new season that will have techs, that are not working for us this season, working for us that we will try and take care of and there will be a techs that did help us this season that will go to Brand X next, that I wont be able to take care of because of I’ll be trying to take care of the ones that will be helping us next season. Well there’s my lengthy reply to a lengthy post. Believe me or not, take it or leave it. It happens to be the way it is. I am sorry we can’t please all of the people all of the time, maybe in the future….
You stated that you thought that all of this was ridiculous – in a way your right. It is absolutely ridiculous that I should have to spend a good chunk of my morning answering accusations and questions, that have already been answered privately, on a public forum, but alas you left me no choice. Whether or not my reply affects your feelings towards or desire to work for Bartlett, I don’t know. I will tell you this though, if and when you guys give us a call, we will do our best to take care of you down the line, just like I, we, have always tried to do in the past.
Eric Bartlett
