http://jobview.usajobs.gov/GetJob.aspx?JobID=95398573&aid=93987393-14111&WT.mc_n=125
Good money to boot. No wonder my taxes are high.
Good money?[(-D] Not for the skills required,IMO.
Read all the qualifications and requirements. Aside from the 0 deg. to 100 deg. F working conditions, holidays and weekends included, this one was the most extraordinary for me:
"Knowledge of and ability to operate and maintain 1869 era [!!!] steam locomotive(s) and auxiliary equipment."
Good luck with finding all that in a reliable person for only $60K a year . . . [:-^]
- Paul North.
It’s the equivalent of a GS-10 position which will require you to move, at your own expense, to a very desolate part of Utah. All your duties will be outdoors in all weather, and you’ll have a rather far daily commute. I was a GS-11 instructor at the U.S. Army Intelligence School here at Fort Huachuca, Arizona for 16 years. It was an inside job, within 5 miles of my home and I didn’t have to move. After 16 years my Civil Service retirement pay is $734 per month because they offset it against Social Security. If I hadn’t already retired from a previous job, I sure couldn’t live on my civil service pension and social security.
I must be in the wrong profession. I also work in all sorts of weather- rain, snow and sleet, hot humid days, nights and weekends. Today it reached a high of 22 degrees and I was repairing a mass excavator in an ice covered hole in the ground. I also have to buy my tools and travel to the 5 different quarries in the company. The furthest is 68 miles from the main plant. Heavy equipment mechanic involves a heck of a lot more duties then that listed in the job description. And I don’t make that much money and I have been doing it for thirty five years. So to me it looks like an easy job that pays darn good.
Pete
That’s less than union scale hourly wage, and a lot of cross craft work to boot.
On the other hand, you do get to run a steam locomotive…
For a single guy it might be a dream job.
…and there’s your winner folks. For the right person this is probably a dream job. As in “I can’t believe I get paid to do this!”
When I read their job requirements and their assessment questionnaire, I cannot determine whether I would be qualified or not. There are too many qualifications that begin with “Knowledge of…” For example, I have never rebuilt a locomotive air compressor, but I certainly have knowledge of them.
So, whether the pay is too high or not really depends on how much they enforce their stated job requirements. I speculate that the job requirements are made to sound stringent in order to justify the pay being offered. I’ll bet the person they hire will not be anywhere near meeting the most stringent interpretation of the stated job requirements.
I would also speculate that the benefits of this job are worth at least twice the high end of their stated pay range.
All too often the job qualifications are tailored to the person they are already set to hire, but have to advertise the job before doing so.
Very true but also having clearly stated qualifications (basically a one-man steam loco shop + engineer) allows for easy termination if the new hire comes up short after a few months on the job. 46-58 K hardly seems like extravagant pay, considering all he/she has to do, with little to no supervision or assistance.
Reminds me of my early basic officer training in the Canadian Armed Forces. On a cold, rainy, day, the second in a row without much more than 2 hours sleep, and another full day ahead of us until the exercise stand-down, we would be doing something or other, kind of numb…but mostly hating the cold rain running down our backs. Rainsuits didn’t matter, although we had them, because the work was so physical that we would lather ourselves inside them.
Anyway, just as we were at our most testy and miserable, the DS would come by and cheerfully remind us, “Just think, gentlemen…civvies pay thousands of dollars to camp out like this!”
[(-D]
Quite, schlimm…and it is also a solid reference point for arguments in the other direction. If the management suddenly begins to impose requirements that were not originally specified, and for which no training seems to be forthcoming, the employee has some grounds for redress. Terms of reference, job description, and a statement of qualifications are some of the best HR practices to ensure everyone gets to sing from the same song-sheet. Even in a non-unionized environment, there should also be a shared document/policy specifying how such redresses, and disciplinary actions, are to be conducted.
Crandell
I tend to agree with both men. Sounds like the position is simply advertised for an applicant in hand, It just has to be codified by an advetisement of the position. It also lays out the groundwork for termination if for some reason the applicant or financing of the position do not work out for whatever the reason. Management has an escape clause built in from the start. [2c]
The fact that the advertisement is “on the street” may mean that they don’t have anyone qualified, or it could mean that they don’t have enough folks qualified on their list.
I’d opine that the description is for a “jack-of-all-trades” type. The problem with the government is that they often have positions that are unlike anything you’d find in the real world. Fifty years ago that one job description would have included several trades, all separate.
These days you’re most likely to find a qualified applicant is going to take the form of a Doyle McCormack (4449) or a Steve Lee (UP) - someone who has worked in all aspects of steam from pipefitter to engineer.
Unless somebody is pretty good at matching their resume to the application, the vetting process is going to winnow out most of those who really aren’t qualified.
Most “government” jobs from local to federal have to be publicly advertised in some manner.