Owner’s can always think of a reason not to pay. Usually, it has something to do with the paperwork not being submitted properly or some small detail that wasn’t perfect in the submission of the payment application. Of course the real reason owners don’t pay is either because they don’t have the money or they would rather allocate that money to others that may be more important at that time.

I’ve thought long and hard about how to get paid, and I have yet to come up with a good way of getting it done. Of course you could always stop work, but then that usually just makes an owner more angry with the contractor than they already are. So what typically happens is that the end of the project is reached and a large sum of money is left outstanding. The owner will then try to make a settlement for less than half of that amount. This is a brutal game, that I would suggest trying to avoid. If you must stop work in order to avoid this situation, it may be the best option.

The bottom line, unfortunately, is that I do not know the best way get paid and I’m more than open to hear opinions from anyone that does. Owners hold all the cards in the construction process and if they don’t want to pay, there is little stopping them from doing so. The best option is to probably work with owners that you know have sufficient funds, and better yet, have a history of paying their contractors. But of course, this is rarely the case.

The answer to the question is not easy, but there are options believe it or not.  I’ll try to sum up a few.

Look International

I’m not saying that the international construction market is much better than it is in this country, but there could be some opportunities with American companies that are having trouble getting their more rooted and stubborn older employees to drag their family overseas.  You can definitely make some money overseas, there are tax advantages, and a company will often pay your living expenses while you’re over there and probably let you come back to the states about four weeks a year.  I would just make sure  you have an exit plan if the company decides they want to send you to Antarctica for ten years to build their top secret alien communication headquarters.  I would just be clear that you want to get back to the States a few years down the road and maybe even get it written into your offer letter.

Build Highways

I know, I know, who the hell would want to build highways?  Well, certainly not me, but believe it or not, there are a lot of people that do it, and they make some good money.  And I don’t think it’s really as boring (no pun intended) as everybody thinks.  There are actually pretty innovative methods of financing highway projects with public and private entities partnering up and sharing revenues.  If you’re interested in politics there is certainly a heavy dose of it in construction of highways, bridges, and other transportation projects.  With all the stimulus money pouring into infrastructure, this would be a good way to get a paycheck during these “challenging” times.  But be careful of the pigeon hole, and being shipped to Alaska to build the first paved dogsled track.

Do It Your Damn Self

The worst part about this is that it takes two things that most people who are coming out of college don’t have: experience and money.  Maybe you can get a loan to start the company and pay your bills for the first year or so, but it’s going to be very tough to get awarded a contract without a track record or at least some references.  However, you may be able to partner with a more seasoned entrepreneur who may be able to get financing and also provide the much needed experience required by most clients in order to get a project.  Just be careful cutting a deal with a partner that you don’t know (or that you do know for that matter).  You probably want to at least pay a lawyer for a few hours to review the agreement and documentation that all parties involved will be signing.

Last but not least,

Chill Out

Just because you don’t have a job right after you graduate doesn’t mean the world is coming to an end or things won’t improve in the future.  You may want to take this opportunity to do some traveling or volunteering around the world for a couple of years and then come back to a much improved job market.  Believe it or not, there are some employers (albeit not many) that may look at that as a valuable growth experience that will benefit their organization in the long term.  But either way, it will certainly be personally beneficial and it’s only a matter of time before things are cruising along nicely again.

This question has boggled my mind for years.  People in position of authority would rather their employees think they are doing a bad job even if the contrary is true.  I think the perception of the manager may be that if we are told we are doing a good job we won’t push for improvement and may even take our foot off the gas.  While this conventional psychological assessment done by a manager may be true for some employees, I think it is in fact counter productive in the majority of occasions.  And I know for a fact that it is not the way in which I will perform my best.

I can’t stand people yelling at me and telling me I’m no good.  In my experience, managers are terrible at motivating people.  They believe that the more they beat people down, the better they will perform.  However, this could not be further from the truth.

I don’t know how or why this method of management has crept into the world of conventional wisdom, but I could venture a guess that it has something to do with the military and perhaps a certain general by the name of George S. Patton.  Patton once struck a soldier who he regarded as a coward who was hospitalized for battle fatigue.

Some may say Patton was appropriate in his behavior and some may say he was not, but I do know that if I was the soldier in the hospital that day, George S. Patton would have been given a fist full of knuckles as a kind response to his gesture.

The bottom line is that while some may be motivated by a condescending manager, I believe that the majority do not.  And I know for certain that I respond much more positively to praise and encouragement than degradation.  But of course, that’s me.

I started apply to job postings and talking to recruiters several months before my dramatic departure from the job in Vail.  I wouldn’t say that I was aggressively seeking employment, but I probably spoke with a company or recruiter about once a week.  One day I was called into the office by the “operations manager” of the company for whom I was working.  This guy didn’t work at our site everyday, but he just came by once in a while to check in.  He decided to check in with me that day by telling me that he knew I had sent my resume to a recruiter that the company works with.

I was slightly shocked by the confrontation but I will say that I played it quite cool by explaining that I had often talked to recruiters over the years and even at times sent them my resume and it wasn’t necessarily an indication that I was aggressively seeking a new job.  However, I did go on to say that I was worried about what the company was going to do with all the people they had hired for the project I was on as there didn’t seem to be many projects of similar size in the pipeline.

He agreed that the situation was cause for slight concern and I thought that I had done a masterful job of talking my way out of the situation when he made a comment that absolutely threw me for a loop.

He said, “When I was talking to [so and so] over at [so and so recruiter] he mentioned that he may have something for you.”

What the hell does that mean?

First he tells me that I’m very justified in being worried about what the company is going to do with all the people they’ve hired and then he says that the recruiter I sent my resume to may have something for me although the recruiter said nothing of the sort to me.  And by way, why the hell was the recruiter telling my boss that they have my resume?

This guy was trying to get rid of me and he was using a sleazy method of doing it.  I was extremely pissed off when I left this little meeting and soon called the recruiter and tried to get some answers.  They of course played dumb and claimed that didn’t know who did it or how it happened.

I pretty much made up my mind at this point that I was going to leave.  However, shortly after this incident the operations manager was fired for unknown reasons and I was left in a position work-wise that wasn’t too bad.

The question is: If I had stayed what damage to my reputation would have been done by the incident and could I have continued my career with them with the same opportunity had the situation never happened.

My opinion was and still is: no.

Your reputation is so crucial within an organization that once it is tarnished with the perception of lack of commitment or what many consider to be selfishness, it is nearly impossible to recovery.  I think it would take at least five years of hard devotion to wipe the slate clean.  I didn’t feel like I had that kind of time.

I was the low bid on a township building remodel project in Bucks County Pennsylvania.  It was a $220,000 job that I bid on a 10% margin for overhead and profit.  However, about two days after the bid, I read an article from a local newspaper saying that the job was awarded to another contractor.  I originally thought it was a misprint or the article was flat out wrong as to who won the job.  I was under the impression that that low bid wins no matter what.  I was sadly mistaken.

There is an ordinance in this particular township stating that all contractors doing public work must be affiliated with a “Class A apprenticeship program”.  I was called the day of the bid by the town engineer asking if I was affiliated with this program.  I mentioned that I was a general contractor and I did not hire apprentices or any direct construction workers for that matter and an apprenticeship program would not apply to my company.  Evidently it didn’t matter.

I did a little research and even called the federal department of apprenticeship to see if I could become affiliated with such a program.  I was told that I would not even be eligible for the program because I was a general contractor and didn’t hire direct labor.  I then immediately relayed this information to the municipality.  Evidently it didn’t matter.

I later found out that this was a way for the town to force the job to go union without saying that it was a union job.  If they said it was a union job it could be argued that they were excluding contractors from bidding on their job, which would in effect make it a non-publicly bid job.  However, by mandating an apprenticeship program, they are doing just that, excluding otherwise qualified contractors.  Not only are they excluding them, they are not telling them they are excluded and are still making them purchase plans, and go through the time and expense of bidding on their project.  I was extremely ticked off.

I called the managing director of the town and expressed my displeasure about the situation.  I will say that I am surprised that he took my call and appreciate him doing so.  However, he gave me what sounded like a dog and pony show about the ordinance and how they are trying to change it to allow smaller local companies win some of their contracts.

I doubt they could change this ordinance without significant resistance from the unions.  Even if I did have an apprenticeship program I still think I would be disqualified because I don’t have an established relationship with the unions.

I doubt I’ll be bidding any jobs in this particular town anytime soon.

I could never really figure out how healthcare and employment got all wrapped together.  Your employer doesn’t have much to do with your health, and at least not more than they have to do with your house or you car.  Employers don’t provide car insurance, or homeowners insurance, so why would they provide health?  Regardless, it has become the norm that employers provide this benefit and people have come to expect it along with the high premiums that are shared between employers and employees.

I was originally under the impression that the new Healthcare Bill was going to provide governement health benefits to all citizens, but as it turns out, that is far from the case.  It seems to me that the system will stay largely in tact with some added regulation as to what insurance companies can and cannot do when it come to providing or denying benefits to policy holders, ultimately resulting in a more policy holder friendly environment.

By employers providing health insurance, there is certainly an added necessity for people to have a job that provides these benefits.  It also gives employers the ability to hold employees in place at their company who may be in fear of losing health benefits.  Salary is something that people can probably go without for a while, but health insurance is nearly a necessity unless you are interested in taking on significant risk.  And most people are not.

If all citizens were given the opportunity to purchase affordable healthcare, employees would be much more likely to switch companies or go out on thier own, and this is certainly not in the best interest of employers.  But how this particular bill will affect the likelihood of employees venturing out on their own or to other organizations still remains to be seen.

Could this bill spark a frenzy of entrepreneurial spirit and drive positive change to a stagnant industry?  I hope so.