Experince or quilifications question.

[Lordy]

Hiya all how's everybody doing.

I've done a few of these now on different forums just too see what the outcome and answers will be and I'm quite surprised of some of the answers given.

So I Thought I'd do one here too.

Here we go.

Your an employer and your looking for a employee too work for your company.

There are many candidates that have applied for the job.

It comes down too two portinal employees but which would you employ for your company?

Employee one as full qualifications in the chosen trade, He's got a NVQ level 3 making him fully qualified and able, how ever lacks experience in the trade and still learning the ropes, willing too learn new skills.
Hard working.

Employee two has no qualifications in the trade, how ever has worked for many years in the trade, knows his stuff and has a very good round personality and experience within the industry, willing too learn new skills.
Hard working.

Which employee would you take on if it was you?

[Lordy]

Damn it I've done a balls up can a mod do a poll for this please.

with the poll questions.

[murphyv310]

The problem Davey is that the guy with no formal qualifications although good at the job may not be fully aware of safety issues and not trained in it.
The lad up the street may be a brilliant sparky but wont have the training about the regulations, an employer takes him on and the lad makes a mistake.... just like we all do.... the mistake causes someone to get a shock, so who gets the blame? Yes the employer as he has taken on unqualified staff. Sorry in this day and age you need the paperwork and the experience.
That I am afraid is where it all falls down. Four years at uni and little practical experience is no use. Proper apprenticeships need to come back with the apprentice doing the job 4 days a week and one day, day release at college to learn the theory and how to do the job properly, that's what so many like me got with City & Guilds.

[Lordy]

Originally Posted by murphyv310

The problem Davey is that the guy with no formal qualifications although good at the job may not be fully aware of safety issues and not trained in it.
The lad up the street may be a brilliant sparky but wont have the training about the regulations, an employer takes him on and the lad makes a mistake.... just like we all do.... the mistake causes someone to get a shock, so who gets the blame? Yes the employer as he has taken on unqualified staff. Sorry in this day and age you need the paperwork and the experience.

Wow so far your first one too bring that up, no one has mentioned the health and safety aspect of it yet.

Top marks on that.

Can deffocility see that being a issuer, how ever many company's do a lot of health safety courses within the industry, When I left tech I had too do a health and safety course in Gawlia garage before I could even touch the vehicles in the workshop.

Not all Company's do that, but with this day and age, people are lot more switched on too the importance of health and safety.

Saying that tho qualified or not people still breech it on both sides.

All depends on the employer, Willing too play it safe or take someone on simply because they want too work and prove them selfs.

[RPWC]

Originally Posted by murphyv310

The problem Davey is that the guy with no formal qualifications although good at the job may not be fully aware of safety issues and not trained in it.
The lad up the street may be a brilliant sparky but wont have the training about the regulations, an employer takes him on and the lad makes a mistake.... just like we all do.... the mistake causes someone to get a shock, so who gets the blame? Yes the employer as he has taken on unqualified staff. Sorry in this day and age you need the paperwork and the experience.
That I am afraid is where it all falls down. Four years at uni and little practical experience is no use. Proper apprenticeships need to come back with the apprentice doing the job 4 days a week and one day, day release at college to learn the theory and how to do the job properly, that's what so many like me got with City & Guilds.

I did C & G 236 part 1 electrical installation competency at college, 1 night per week, using the 16th edition of IEE regs. probably count for nothing now if I tried to get into the electrical industry.

In answer to your question Dave, my choice would be number 2, but would send him on a safety course before he started work, or train him myself in safety, depending on the trade.

[RPWC]

I did a YTS in mechanics at 16, many moons ago, 12 weeks supposed on the job training at the garage, then one week at the skill centre for the year. At
t the s c we were shown how to use compressed air, how to use jacks and stands, how to use welding equipment. we were also shown videos of how things go wrong ,if safety techniques were not followed. EG how dangerous comp air is if fooled with, the after effects of using angle grinder without eye protection and so on.

[solarsailor]

It would be a darn sight quicker and easier to get the experienced one through any necessary H&S and regulation training than it would be for the qualified one to gain plenty of experience, so I know which one I'd pick.

One of the engineering officers we had during my time in the RAF had more qualifications than you could shake a stick at, but if you stuck a screwdriver in his hand he was a bleedin' liability.

[Arryhall]

The problem with "qualifications without experience" is that a theoretical knowledge is fine, but it's difficult to think around problems when they arise. Say you had a Haynes manual for your Probe, and were following it, and came across a sized bolt on the engine mount. How do you get it off? Can you use heat, because of the alloy? Can you use brute force? Do you need to drill it out? The Haynes manual won't help here, but experience will, or at least a practical knowledge of working around unexpected issues.
So I'd opt for the work experienced person (notice I didn't say guy or bloke or man, coz I done my sexist course, see ).

As for H&S, yes, it's very important, but each company has their own rules and policies and any induction into the company ought to go through these regardless as what one company may have deemed safe, another may not.

What doesn't apply in this scenario is, of course, legislation. You may be the greatest Gas fitter in the world, but without qualifications, you aren't legally allowed to do anything, same with electricity, and I can see plumbing going the same way. Can't legally connect up an LPG system on a car, so I have been told. Not 100% sure that's correct, but it seems likely because of Gas Safe regulations.

Oooooh! Just thought! Unless I can employ the recently qualified person on a cheaper pay rate as a trainee, and partner him with a current employee to make sure he can in fact do the job he is qualified for! The sheer number of people who apply for positions here for an administrative role that have degrees in English but are barely literate and can hardly type is astounding, yet they are "qualified". Never fails to amaze me, that.So....new person provided I can pay him less.

[Lordy]

Originally Posted by solarsailor

It would be a darn sight quicker and easier to get the experienced one through any necessary H&S and regulation training than it would be for the qualified one to gain plenty of experience, so I know which one I'd pick.

One of the engineering officers we had during my time in the RAF had more qualifications than you could shake a stick at, but if you stuck a screwdriver in his hand he was a bleedin' liability.

I know eleacty what you mean.

WE had a lad in tech called Daniel, Very intelligent knew his stuff when it came too theory and explain how the system worked.

He got top marks for theory, how ever during the practical sessions in tech that when he became the weak link.

problem solving wasn't one of his strongest points and the Couse tutors noted that.

[MSS]

There will usually be so many other factors in arriving at a decision than just the binary one in the OP.

To answer the question as posed, I would go for one with qualifications if I was taking a long-term view and the one with immediately applicable experience if basing the decision on the short-term.