Do plants overhire?

[Cycoticpenguin]

Me and my father had an interesting conversation. He was wondering if plants over hire for positions (i.e. they hire 12 expecting 10 to stay/pass)  or do they hire what they need and hope for the best?  Just curious is all.

[co60slr]

Me and my father had an interesting conversation. He was wondering if plants over hire for positions (i.e. they hire 12 expecting 10 to stay/pass)  or do they hire what they need and hope for the best?  Just curious is all.

My father and I....
(Sorry, I couldn't let that go).

The answer is more complex.   Everyone (even in the Navy) has predicted attriction rates based on variables (e.g., average age of the workforce).   12 vs 10 isn't very significant and is probably more driven by people leaving/retirements.

If a plant has a 30% attrition rate from their program and hire 13 when only 10 are needed, then hopefully they're also working on why they can't qualify all 13...since they'll probably have 3 more people retire/quit.

In short...it depends on many variables unique to each plant/site.   HR Hiring strategy.  There isn't one answer, I don't think.

[MacGyver]

Me and my father had an interesting conversation. He was wondering if plants over hire for positions (i.e. they hire 12 expecting 10 to stay/pass)  or do they hire what they need and hope for the best?  Just curious is all.

The short answer is it depends.  The longer answer is my plant does not nor do they intend too anytime soon.  Yes we are chronically short in ops.

[Fermi2]

I've hired more than a few times and so far as I know the answer is no. It's too expensive.

[Cycoticpenguin]

I've hired more than a few times and so far as I know the answer is no. It's too expensive.

This was my thinking honestly. Something tells me you guys dont hire people that wont make it through.

Thanks!

[Fermi2]

Usually you tell the company how many you want, they then tend to cut it down some but not always. The utilities try to get the best candidates and
in cases where the candidates are close enough will hire a somewhat weaker on the surface person if he is local. But no they don't hire based on saying we need 10, we'll hire 15 just in case.

[Marlin]

   If you heard that from someone it probably applied to the contract/construction side of the business, it does happen there. I doubt it happens as much now but I have seen a layoff in the first month for RadTechs on a long term project and the first 20 craft to the "Brass shacks" laid off early in a major modification project at a plant. Much different enviroment on that side of the street.

[redline]

My employer will allocate slots for the next year based on anticipated attrition. It doesn't matter what happens between now and then, those slots are generally locked. We recently had one fail to gain unescorted access after accepting an offer. That position was lost until they allocate for next year...maybe forever!
In this business, the type of folks who make those hiring decisions don't sweat the individual numbers. If a manger comes up short he can request increased numbers next year. In case of an emergency shortage there's always contract help.

[MacGyver]

My employer will allocate slots for the next year based on anticipated attrition. It doesn't matter what happens between now and then, those slots are generally locked. We recently had one fail to gain unescorted access after accepting an offer. That position was lost until they allocate for next year...maybe forever!
In this business, the type of folks who make those hiring decisions don't sweat the individual numbers. If a manger comes up short he can request increased numbers next year. In case of an emergency shortage there's always contract help.

Though I do not disagree with your overall premise (due to it being your plant); I must disagree with the "In case of an emergency shortage there's always contract help."

I do not know of a contract OPS employee (i.e. SO/RO/SRO/SS/SM/etc) at any plant.  So, maybe in other departments but not in OPS.  At least from what I have witnessed.

[Fermi2]

TVA has Contract SROs, former TVA SROs who retired then immediately came back as a contractor. In fact I have one on my shift.

[MacGyver]

TVA has Contract SROs, former TVA SROs who retired then immediately came back as a contractor. In fact I have one on my shift.

Well then there you go.  Contract OPS do exist.  I reserve the right to be wrong again in the future.

[Fermi2]

IIRC until about 2 or 3 years ago no one had contract ops. TVA had to ensure the NRC was good with it. Contract Unit Supervisors are ok, Contract SMs are not.

[thenuttyneutron]

IIRC until about 2 or 3 years ago no one had contract ops. TVA had to ensure the NRC was good with it. Contract Unit Supervisors are ok, Contract SMs are not.

Do they have to pay for the training and for the biennial written exam?

[Fermi2]

They do everything every other licensed operator does. They attend training and requal and get paid during those periods.
When they take vacation they do not get paid.

[redline]

We do have some contract Ops people. We also have dozens and dozens of licenses sitting on the shelf collecting dust. Those could be reinstated pretty quickly in an emergency (months rather than years) but licensed folks should never be a problem here, the pipline is always full!
We would be more concerned with technical folks; RP, Chemistry, engineering etc. those pipelines often run dry, but get well supplemented with vendors.

[Fermi2]

We do have some contract Ops people. We also have dozens and dozens of licenses sitting on the shelf collecting dust. Those could be reinstated pretty quickly in an emergency (months rather than years) but licensed folks should never be a problem here, the pipline is always full!
We would be more concerned with technical folks; RP, Chemistry, engineering etc. those pipelines often run dry, but get well supplemented with vendors.

Do these licenses still attend requal?

[IPREGEN]

The answer is it depends. I would actually talk the recruiter if it was someone that had never been at the station before and ask about their history. If we staffed with all reliable returnees we would not "overhire" if there were new folks or returnees with a history, then yes, would would add a couple more. That was a while ago.

[Fermi2]

I don't think he's talking about contracters. I think he's talking plant staff.

[Fermi2]

Me and my father had an interesting conversation. He was wondering if plants over hire for positions (i.e. they hire 12 expecting 10 to stay/pass)  or do they hire what they need and hope for the best?  Just curious is all.

Look at it this way. Say you're an Instant SRO hired in from the Navy. If you hire 12 guys, thinking only 10 will get through by the end of the 3 year training period you've wasted nearly 700,000 dollars on personnel just to get your 10. No utility has that kind of money to burn. At on time TVA had 3 SRO classes going on at SQN.
Using the 12 for 10 question you just asked over a period of about 45 years we'd have thrown away 2.2 Million Dollars which is righly 6 to 7 % of a refueling outage budget.

[HydroDave63]

Look at it this way. Say you're an Instant SRO hired in from the Navy. If you hire 12 guys, thinking only 10 will get through by the end of the 3 year training period you've wasted nearly 700,000 dollars on personnel just to get your 10. No utility has that kind of money to burn. At on time TVA had 3 SRO classes going on at SQN.
Using the 12 for 10 question you just asked over a period of about 45 years we'd have thrown away 2.2 Million Dollars which is righly 6 to 7 % of a refueling outage budget.

45 years? That would be more than a full career! You really DO plan ahead!  or is it just a "righly" rough estimate?

[Fermi2]

DANG 4.5 years!

[retired nuke]

DANG 4.5 years!

Janitor... don't you know spelling, punctuation and DECIMAL POINTS count....

been dying to fire that shot...

[Fermi2]

Janitor... don't you know spelling, punctuation and DECIMAL POINTS count....

been dying to fire that shot...

Touche'

Back to my mop.

[co60slr]

Touche'

Touché

So close.  -0.25 pts for trying to use an apostrophe (i.e., e') instead of the é.  I would have recommend -0.50pts; however, the NW Spell Checker wants to change it, so I can see how one could be led astray.

Wow...quite the dissertation on this subject here:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%89
I'm not sure I gained or lost IQ points on that Wiki search.

How are we doing here Marssim?   Have we sufficiently diverged from topic?  Time to move on? 

[Fermi2]

I couldn't get the proper e. My computer kept changing it.!