Split from DZ Atlantic Message

[Eric_Bartlett]

Are you serious? More friendly? You better talk to people that have been in this business more than 3 years. Unless there has been a miracle, the people yeah. The company? Be afraid be very afraid.
Just some advice from someone who has been in the business for 30 yrs.

C'mon now Mark, Mr. BIG we haven't treated ya that badly have we?  If we have treated ya wrong let me know what we did (or didn't do) so I can try and rectify it so it never happens again...

Eric

[MR BIG]

C'mon now Mark, Mr. BIG we haven't treated ya that badly have we?  If we have treated ya wrong let me know what we did (or didn't do) so I can try and rectify it so it never happens again...

Eric

Eric,
First let me apologize. YOU have always treated me right. As far as I know, you have been straight up and honest with me. But seriously, 90% of your staff is NOT telling the people the truth. Not submitting resumes for plants unless they agree to go to some other outage that they are required to go to. And if they don't they don't get into the plant they ask for. Just talk to some (ALOT) of techs that don't work for you very often. There is a reason they don't work for you regularly. It's because of the way they are treated from the recruiters. I understand.....you probably aren't aware of everything. It's impossible to keep up with all of it. You are a big company. But you would draw a lot of faithful, loyal people if your recruiters would stop controlling and demanding when and where people go. I mean I know dozens of techs that have worked for DZ only because you guys didn't have anything at the time and they needed to work to pay their bills or refused to submit a resume, and when your office found out that they were working for THE COMPETITION, they were so called "black balled" from any of your outages.....unless you were desperate for a warm body and then they might call you. Eric, that's just not right. And I don't believe YOU are that way. But believe me, your people are doing it, and doing it to alot of GOOD techs. I just thought you should know. Maybe you do. But I don't think you know the extent of how some of your people are alientating good people away from your outages. I would really like to work at some of your plants, but I know how I am treated. I have been doing this for 30 years and I am a good tech. I have NEVER had a no show..... I finish every outage without leaving early. I AM loyal to the people I work for. But it has to be a two way street. You guys have to take care of us also and be loyal. And not hang it over our heads if at brief times we need to work for DZ if you don't have anything at the time that we need work. We have to put food on the table. And it should be across the board as much as possible, and not just for a handful of the "CHOSEN". I realize alot has been said here, and if you need to PM me with your reply I understand. But I would be interested in hearing your opinion on this.

Thanks for responding to my original post. I may have been a little harsh, but I wanted someone from Bartlett to respond to it. I guess I got my results. Again forgive me if I directed anything personal towards you.  That wasn't my intent. I just wanted to try and shed some light on your people. I know....I have owned 3 businesses. I can't change my company for the better unless I know all the facts and realize there IS a need to make it better. I just thought you should know, so if you can make the changes to improve your company, you can do that. Just some input that I thought might be helpful.

Thanks!
Mark

[dosetek]

The truth comes out.

[RAD-GHOST]

EB,

Better sit down for this.......

........I'm still impressed, 7+ weeks, gotta be a record!


RG!

[Camella Black]

I'd like to address an issue I have with some at the home office. While I am NOT employed by Bartlett, I believe that Henry has worked long enough and I have dealt with the company enough to be treated with more respect that I was the last two times I spoke with someone on the phone.

The staff need to be better trained in phone/people skills in my opinion. Perhaps it is my Southern upbringing but friendly responses such as yes, you're welcome, thank you, etc should be used instead of yeah or no reply at all. I also believe it is proper to say good-bye on the telephone instead of just hanging up.

I worked a number of years for PSESI and have dealt with a many companies in the 30+ years I have been around this business and some at the office of Bartlett are just down right rude!

To Tricia/Trisha thanks for the help and the great attitude!

Camella

[Melrose]

C'mon now Mark, Mr. BIG we haven't treated ya that badly have we?  If we have treated ya wrong let me know what we did (or didn't do) so I can try and rectify it so it never happens again...

Eric

Did you just "out" this guy???  Big no-no...

BTW, you forgot to initial/date you line thru.

later

[Eric_Bartlett]

Well RG - its been awhile that I've posted one of my dissertations - here ya go have fun with it!

Did you just "out" this guy???  Big no-no...

I tried not to out him, just to let him know i knew who he was so as to have a better chance at an honest and productive dialogue.  I found that most individuals who post a question or a statement looking for a response, that I don't let know that i know who they are, are not very forthcoming to me, where as if i can identify them it actually takes awaythe whole cloak and dagger deal of hiding behind a user name and they normally will call me directly to talk, send me a personal message or e-mail or post very directly and make valid points instead of just barking at the moon like so many like to do.  Now I know Mr. BIG and I've had plenty of dealings with him in the past and I would consider him top tier as it pertains to someone I'd like to employ, it just hasn't worked out that way over the past couple of years and I now know why.  But out him, never (unless there is only 1 Mark in this business), after all if I outed people they'd get new handles and it would be twice as hard to identify who everyone is!

Eric,
First let me apologize. YOU have always treated me right. As far as I know, you have been straight up and honest with me. But seriously, 90% of your staff is NOT telling the people the truth...

I'll try to respond as best I can, y'all out there reading this can take it as you will as me towing the company line or me trying to actually develop an understanding of where we are today as a company, as individuals and as an industry. 

First off no need to apologize as i took nothing personally, i was just trying to get a response from you so that we could have this dialogue.  As far as 90% of my staff not telling the truth, do you mean just my recruiting staff or the company as a whole - reason i ask is i have full power to effect change in my recruiters but am limited to the power of suggestion as to the rest of the company.  If you are referring to solely the recruiters then i will state as I've stated before - if anyone ever thinks a recruiter is being misleading, underhanded or blatantly lying I need to know - not a month or year later but as soon as you feel that it happened so that i can look into and address the situation.  Now you may not like my answers as to the results of me looking into a situation or you may come out of it feeling vindicated - each instance is always different, and either way i will do my best to get to the bottom of what transpired.

...Not submitting resumes for plants unless they agree to go to some other outage that they are required to go to. And if they don't they don't get into the plant they ask for...

I know I've stated this to allot of people, techs, in-house, clients, etc...but not all of you may have heard or read what I've stated in the past.  This industry has evolved allot since i got into it back in '89.  Those of you who were here before me and those of you that started in the early 90's know what i mean.  At one time technician could easily work 1 or 2 outages a season and still work >6-9 mo's a year.  That was when there were more techs than jobs and jobs went more than the standard 3-4 weeks.  The industry has evolved to the point that on a good season there are just enough personnel out there to evenly fill what the demand is.  We as a company and the utilities we service have changed.  The utilities that used to be scattered and many have been buying up each other so now they are vast and few.  As a company we evolved from the old way of staffing plants as individuals to staffing on a "fleetwide" mentality - it was the only way to survive.  If we still staffed on plant by plant mentality we would have gone the way of our competition along time ago.  Staffing using the fleetwide mentality has pissed allot of people off, some technicians, some house personnel, and some recruiters.  but it does provide the best results for what this company does, and that is fullfill its contractual obligations to our clients while trying to give individuals the longest run we can.  Sometimes it works out well, sometimes it doesn't.  But please understand, we did not set things up this way to piss people off, we set it up this way to survive in such a competitive market.  Until such a time that our clients aren't looking to save money on training costs, in-processing costs, and the varied other savings/benefits they receive by transferring techs down a system run this is how the majority of our staffing will be done.  With that said I can understand how this would piss someone off who wanted only 1 plant of a 2 or 3 plant run. 

...Just talk to some (ALOT) of techs that don't work for you very often. There is a reason they don't work for you regularly. It's because of the way they are treated from the recruiters. I understand.....you probably aren't aware of everything. It's impossible to keep up with all of it. You are a big company. But you would draw a lot of faithful, loyal people if your recruiters would stop controlling and demanding when and where people go.... 

Allot of the techs that don't work for us regularly don't for a myriad of reasons, some we would prefer not to use unless we had too, some refuse because they blame us for something that we did indeed do that ticked them off, some don't because they blame us for their own shortcomings, some due to geographical constraints, etc, etc... You are right we do have a big company, but i don't feel its big to the point that concerns regarding recruiting should go unvoiced or unanswered.  I'm not aware of everything that happens, i want to be, but unfortunately i am only one person and i myself have alienated enough techs to fill a few outages myself.  As far a recruiters demanding where people go, i can see that from your point of view it would look like that, but from a my point of view i don't see it as so cut and dry.  I see recruiters trying to staff a system run or a run identified by management (normally me) and being told that until site B fills up we will only be hiring those individuals that will do A to B.  Once B is full then we can go to those that just wanted A.  Sometimes it works well for all concerned, sometimes it doesn't either way we are fullfilling our mandate to transfer people down the line, using choice plants at the beginning and end of a season to ensure that the plants that fall in the peak season get staffed - if you were recruiting wouldn't you try to ensure that same?   After all it does us no good as a company to staff the first 3rd of a season and the last 3rd of a season while the middle third goes short - that just means contract loss, which leads to bye bye Bartlett (which I'm sure a few of y'all would dance the jig if it were to happen, but I'm willing to bet the majority wouldn't be so happy)

...I mean I know dozens of techs that have worked for DZ only because you guys didn't have anything at the time and they needed to work to pay their bills or refused to submit a resume, and when your office found out that they were working for THE COMPETITION, they were so called "black balled" from any of your outages.....unless you were desperate for a warm body and then they might call you. Eric, that's just not right. And I don't believe YOU are that way. But believe me, your people are doing it, and doing it to allot of GOOD techs. I just thought you should know. Maybe you do. But I don't think you know the extent of how some of your people are alienating good people away from your outages...

I, and maybe I'm more naive to the situation than i think, I know of no "black balled" list just because someone went to work for Brand X.  Now there is the old "probation" list but that only accounts for those techs that have been terminated for cause or that have failed to fullfill a commitment or the best, that have no showed to a job, where we wont use someone for a season or 2.  I would drather have a tech working for the competition than be sitting home on unemployment.  If a tech is working in this business, for anyone, there is a less likely chance of them dropping out of this business for a non nuke job, likewise if they are working they aren't collecting, if they aren't collecting then our unemployment stats don't increase - win win all around - not to mention they are getting additional experience that will make them more marketable in the future.  Where i think we have the disconnect is if i have Tech A working at a Bartlett site and I have Tech B working at a Brand X site, both want a position i have open for what is considered a prime outage say late April, may time frame - one of the last of the season - i am going to of course defer to the individual coming from a Bartlett site - likewise if I'm staffing a kickoff site, one of the first shutdowns of the season, we will of course defer to those applicants that most recently worked for BNI so as to get them off of unemployment and show them that we are loyal to them as they are us - due to preferred returnee lists being "system wide returnee lists now instead of plant specific" there is of course great potential that these jobs can/will be staffed exclusively with techs coming from Bartlett jobs.  This is not to say that we don't want to hire a tech coming from a Brand X site, its just that we have an obligation to hire those coming off of a BNI site.  Funny thing is i get it all the time from BNI techs that we screwed them out of a position because we gave it to someone that came from a Brand X site - i guess there is no winning on this one - which ever way we go someone is going to feel like they were wronged.  But at least you know where we are coming from.   

I would really like to work at some of your plants, but I know how I am treated. I have been doing this for 30 years and I am a good tech. I have NEVER had a no show..... I finish every outage without leaving early. I AM loyal to the people I work for. But it has to be a two way street. You guys have to take care of us also and be loyal. And not hang it over our heads if at brief times we need to work for DZ if you don't have anything at the time that we need work. We have to put food on the table. And it should be across the board as much as possible, and not just for a handful of the "CHOSEN". I realize allot has been said here, and if you need to PM me with your reply I understand. But I would be interested in hearing your opinion on this....

I would really like you to work at our plants.  I was unaware of how you were treated.  All i can give ya is if you feel like you've been mistreated I would recommend you call me ASAP so i can address the issue - not guaranteeing it will be to your liking 100% of the time, but i will address it.  In the times you have worked for us you have shown you are a highly motivated and competent individual capable of allot more than just meter swinging.  I myself have always found you to be a personable individual, easy to talk to and do business with.  As stated earlier its not that we try to hold the fact that you worked for Brand X over your heads its that we have a moral and business obligation to first employ those who last worked for us prior to taking someone that came from another company.  It doesn't always work that way.  But thats how we have done business since I started here and make perfectly good sense to continue that way.  Hopefull I'll be able to snag you one day and set ya up for some good work to make you allot of money, until that time i wish you and yours to be as successful and prosperous as one can be.  I appreciate your bringing up these concerns, as they seem to be the reoccurring concerns people have every year.  The more i get to talk about them with you the better i can help you understand, even though you may not like the explanation, our position and methods.  Karma to ya and hope to talk to ya soon about job opportunities.

As always - take it slow,
Eric

[Rennhack]

Eric,
Karma to you.  That was a great explanation.  I never get tired of reading it.  Perhaps it should be required reading at all the outages?

How many other companies even bother to reply on NukeWorker... I'll tell you how many.  2  -- Eric Bartlett, and once in a while Eric Laning from SEC.  I don't remember any other EVER replying to a comment or concern in the open forum, and try to explain their business as well as Eric does.  I have a lot of respect and praise for Eric.

I started in the Biz in 89 also.  I didn't work for Bartlett until two years later in 1991.  At that time, I talked to all the recruiters, but found that Jamie D and Eric to be the most honest and open with me. One lady that worked in their office at that time was well known for playing favorites and lying to techs.  She has been gone for a long time now, but she really hurt Bartlett's reputation with techs back then, because to the techs the recruiter IS Bartlett.  I sure wish this website existed back then, so I could have aired my concerns then.

Of course, back then, Numanco wouldn't even answer their phone AT ALL, and only called back the people they wanted to call back.  WOW, that is bad business.

Things have changed, mostly for the better.  Sometimes I think back to how we did things back then and wonder how we did it.

Again, thank you Eric for address things, and trying to help.  Your understanding of both sides of the story, and willingness to help is much appreciated.

[RAD-GHOST]

Eric,

ROFLMAO!

I'll bet you got a blister, or two, on those little nubbies from that one!

Hummmmmmmmmmmm, I'm think about Erica Bartlett as a new user name!  Kinda Catchy, don't you think!

I'll get back to you as soon as I finish my game of solitaire.....


Until Tomorrow, RG!

[PAULTHEVOL]

  I would drather have a tech working for the competition than be sitting home on unemployment. 

Very classy statement....
I have worked for Bartlett several times and have always been very pleased for the most part...
To hear you say something like that means alot and is something I will remember in the future...K+

[RAD-GHOST]

Dear Eric,

Since you invited me, I'll chime in with a couple of comments.

Here we are, six to eight weeks from the Spring Season.  Here you are, conveniently addressing and clarifying issues for the forum members, impeccable timing!  I must admit, you offered some great information and clarified on some issues, BUT will there be a follow through, or just a temporary appeasement?  I'm convinced you've finally managed to master the computer and set an automatic reminder to toss out a couple of best buddy tidbits to the crowd.  Your as predictable as a National Holiday! 

Recruiter Problems: 

I have plenty of hilarious stories I could share about Bartlett recruiters from the past, but all of those recruiters have gone by the way side, all but one!  I can definitely state that, that remaining recruiter has two credits chalked up on the lie side!  From a more political perspective, let's deem them miss-truths!  I know, that's water under the bridge, ancient history and let by-gones, be by-gones!  The facts surround each of those situations still remain clear, but completely insignificant.  Then again, there is the matter of integrity!  It's difficult to recover from one integrity issue, let alone two!  Does anybody in the nuke industry trust an individual who has two integrity issues?  Hell, I'll still talk to that recruiter on the phone and maybe strike up a web based dialog with them, that's just the kind a guy I am!

As far as the current Bartlett recruiting staff, I personally rate them on the high side and thank them for their efforts! 

The Business Plan:

Hey, everybody has one!  Of course your company business plan doesn't take in to account the workers business plan.  One of the most distasteful phrases I've heard out of your company is, "Human Capitol"!  Their actually called human beings and they all have name and needs!  The utilities and your company management seem to need a reminder of that every once in a while!  Consider yourself reminded! 

The industry is definitely evolving and I have yet to determine if's for the better or worst!  I seem to be working with a lot of temporary outage employees that don't even understand the basics of working in a nuclear facility.  I'm guessing that the streamlined, save a dime, ain't got the time indoctrination could be the culprit!  They're primary training seems to be Human Performance Improvement, otherwise known as; "If something happens then it's your fault"!  It does add a little humor to the equation when you see a group of workers entering a building with light's, bells and sirens wailing away, at full blast, and they ask if you can turn that damn thing off!  Then you ask them, what that damn thing is?  They're reply, "I don't know, should I"! 

Commitment:

What's a commitment?  I'm a little bit antiquated on this issue.  If I agree to anything, including a job assignment, any changes outside of the original terms, VOIDS that commitment!  If you change the money, hours, start dates or make any modification to the originally agreement, then your prior commitment is dissolved!  Seems like a standard business no brainer!  Then again, if one had the agreement in writting, (something your company refuses to do), a lot of questions wouldn't be asked!   

Here's one for you, would this qualify as a NO SHOW?  A few techs received a call to report two days later than the originally date agreed upon.  That equates to a revenue loss of about $300.00 per day, or $600.00 collectively.  Then they received another call informing them to report two days later then their second report date, another $600.00 loss!  Does your company actually believe they had a commitment with these individuals after the first call?  Maybe your company representative's should be a little more calculated with modifications to any agreement!  I don't believe your company is going to take a $1200.00 hit, but somehow you believe the Technicians should!  Not your fault, Yes it it!  We don't have any agreements with the utilities, YOU DO!  Our agreement is with BARTLETT, not them!  I don't give a rats arse if the utility is over budget, out of cash, or doesn't need me for two more days!  If Bartlett doesn't fullfill their side of the agreement, then there is no agreement!


Have a Great Day,  RG

[harleydad101]

RG, You were doing good until that last paragraph. You should have stopped while you were ahead.  I agree on everything you said about commitment.  The money issue, well, not so much.  How can you be out money you didn't have.  If you were to apply for a job outside of the nuke biz and the employer called and said we need you next week not this one are you saying you would ask them for back pay, before you were hired.  I guess you think that Bartlett is billing for you even if you aren't there.

Don't get me wrong, I understand what you're trying to say, I've been there. But I wasn't out any money.  I was poor before and still am, .

[PWHoppe]

RG, You were doing good until that last paragraph. You should have stopped while you were ahead.  I agree on everything you said about commitment.  The money issue, well, not so much.  How can you be out money you didn't have.  If you were to apply for a job outside of the nuke biz and the employer called and said we need you next week not this one are you saying you would ask them for back pay, before you were hired.  I guess you think that Bartlett is billing for you even if you aren't there.

Don't get me wrong, I understand what you're trying to say, I've been there. But I wasn't out any money.  I was poor before and still am, .

I have to agree with Harleydad. If you didn't show then you WEREN'T working, hence not getting paid. I'm really confused by all of this soul searching or what ever you want to call it. I've been in this biz for 30 years, 15 as a contractor and NOBODY ever lied to me. I may have not liked the answer they gave me, but they didn't LIE. I have worked for too many companies to count, and I didn't always like my options, but they were MY options. If I didn't like the pay or the hours or the plant or ....  the whatever, it was MY option. This industry has been "berry, berry  good to me" and my family. If you don't like the deal, then DON'T go, it seems pretty simple to me. If the hours are not what was promised or the pay is not what was advertised then LEAVE! I'm thinking that the actual occurrence's of those things happening are very, very small. I find it hard to believe that I'm the sole individual in the biz that nobody "lied" to. I'm guessing that most peeps heard what they wanted to hear, not what was said.

Now the Hopster climbs down off his soap box, peace and love to all of you

[SloGlo]

A few techs received a call to report two days later than the originally date agreed upon.  That equates to a revenue loss of about $300.00 per day, or $600.00 collectively.  Then they received another call informing them to report two days later then their second report date, another $600.00 loss! 

wise tex only let dis happen won time.  after dat, when dey git da reporting date, they nebber answer da phone agin, 'n show @ da plant on da agreed date.
money in da bank.
  stress stays at da recrewtars desk.

[RAD-GHOST]

The last paragraph dealt with the company tag assigned to the Technicians, (ie. No Show).

Interesting perspective, if the techs never lost a dime out of their pocket, then they ain't got a biotch!

If the company never lost a dime out of their pockets, then they don't have a Biotch!

In all actuality, the days of the midnight runs to facilities are pretty much over.  Most responsible Technicians usually arrive a day or two ahead of their report date.  Sitting in a hotel, ten miles from the facility, being told to take an extra four to five days vacation, equates to poor economics.  Then again, the company didn't ask you to be responsible!

PWHoppe,

You've been in the business for 30 year, 15 as a contractor and NOBODY ever lie to you?

With all due respect.....I'll wait for your Autobiography, it will be a PRECIDENT!


Respect to You, RG!







 

[harleydad101]

I can't and won't argue with that logic.  I'm just wondering how many times someone, anyone, has shown up on thier report date and been told it was moved out a week.  I'm betting not many.  And on the few occasions that it has happen, maybe they should be asking for perdiem or reimbursement of some kind.  All you can be told is, no!!!  Part of being responsible is verifing things like report dates, pay rates, travel pay, etc.  Like the Hoppster said if you don't like it's your option to leave.

I too am done with this topic, thanks for listening.

Jj

[Brett LaVigne]

I am not going to try and sound like a Bartlett cheerleader with this, I will say that I have generally been pleased with Bartlett and usually would write in thier defense when replying to a Bartlett Bashing party. That said...

I believe that Eric's earlier post is an accurate account of how they try to do business. While we, as techs, are on the front line, it can be hard to understand the logic of the company when something happens (or doesn't happen) that impacts us directly (like not getting into a plant, not getting that second or third outage for the season etc.). I try to keep in mind that Bartlett needs to do business and fill contract postitions as best they can and sometimes that means that I may not get to go to the first plant on my wish list. Doesn't mean that I am always happy with how things work out, it just means that I understand why sometimes things don't work out exactally like I want.

I will also add that I have worked for another company as an RP tech. recently. I did it one time this past spring when Bartlett was scrambling to find enough people to staff outages in a abnormally busy outage season. I probably could have helped with 2 outages if not 3 last spring for Bartlett. I have not noticed any difference in them securing work for me.  Sometimes I get to go to the plant I want, sometimes I do not. In the end I get about the amount (weeks) of work I expect to get and I get treated like a professional when I speak to someone in the office, more so than we sometimes get treated by utility management at the sites that's for sure.

I believe that sometimes people are quick to say that Bartlett doesn't treat them right or is dishonest when they don't get thier way. I am sure that some of the stories are true, but I think that generally, Bartlett tries to do what is right for the survival and profit of Bartlett. If it were my company, that's what I would do and sometimes that means that people are not going to be pleased with every move you make. One of the things that makes a business successfull is to try and keep the troops happy most of the time, and I think they do that. It would be very counterproductive to minipulate the troops to the point of making most of us unhappy with our employer and I think if we had a more accurate weigh in from the techs out there traveling and not just the handfull that comment on nukeworker, we would see that most don't have one horror story after another. Most of us have a story of being displeased with an event, but generally get what is expected from being a traveling Bartlett tech.

[hoghunter]

I've been following this topic and there is a lot I would like to say,but I will leave it be simple. I've worked for Bartlett for years,they have always treated me good. Eric knows if it wasn't for them I would have lost everything I had when my Wife and I split in 98. I started with AVS in 81 and been with a few sense,one thing I have learned is we as people with find something to fuss about or someone to put our blame on. I know people,time and all things change and if you just take time to deal with it things Will work out most time. I feel some times that the answer I get may not be the one I want,but if I didn't want it I do have the right to reject if I so mind.People as techs in the field need to understand that the recruiters are doing the best they can and if you have a problem just work it out with them just remember calm and cool attitudes go far

[PWHoppe]

PWHoppe,

You've been in the business for 30 year, 15 as a contractor and NOBODY ever lie to you?

With all due respect.....I'll wait for your Autobiography, it will be a PRECIDENT!


Respect to You, RG! 

LOL, sorry my brother but there will be no autobiography anytime soon, way too many skeletons in my closet

I will amend slightly what I said. I still maintain that no one has lied to me. There have been times where I did not ask enough questions to get a clear picture of what I was getting in to, but that's my bad. A small example; I asked how many days are we working? The answer was 6. I was good, but I failed to ask How many hours per day? If I had done that then I wouldn't have done an entire outage on 6-8's I took that as a lesson to myself, ask all the questions and assume nothing.

Take care, and don't bother looking on B. Dalton for the Life and Times of The Hopster