Hiring scenario

[they don't love you like i love you]

Let's say you have too applications to be a construction worker.

A is a recent immigrant who doesn't even have a high school level education.
B is a guy who has a Ph. D in Nuclear Physics from a prestigious Ivy League school.

Who do you hire?

[Reluctant Republican]

A, for two reasons. B could get a job elsewhere more easily then A could. I'd feel guilty if I turned A away. And, I must confess I'd be a little suspicious about B’s motive for wanting the job. It’s a rather unreasonable thought, but I’d be worried that B wanted the job to like embezzle from the company or something.

[DownWithTheLeft]

If A is an illegal immigrant B, if they are hard-working legal immigrant and the other guy is way overqualified I go with A.  However, if the construction worker is heading a project and heading the company, I again go with B.  You makes things way to oversimplified.

[Sensei]

B

[Gabu]

Given that being a construction worker requires more physical ability than intelligence, their level of education wouldn't really be that important.  I'd be wondering why the heck B was applying for a job as a construction worker with a resumé like that.

[Hatman 🍁]

A is most likely illegal, and probably underqualified.

[John Dibble]

Given that being a construction worker requires more physical ability than intelligence, their level of education wouldn't really be that important.  I'd be wondering why the heck B was applying for a job as a construction worker with a resumé like that.

Indeed, though I would interview both.

[Verily]

Given that being a construction worker requires more physical ability than intelligence, their level of education wouldn't really be that important.  I'd be wondering why the heck B was applying for a job as a construction worker with a resumé like that.

Indeed, though I would interview both.

I have to agree. The PhD does nothing for a construction worker.

[Padfoot]

A obviously.  He likely has more experience with hard manual labor since most jobs available to drop-outs are physical in nature.  Hiring A would also make me feel better about myself because I'd be helping someone live the American dream.

Plus there is such a thing as overqualified.

[J. J.]

I would look at their related experiences.  B. might have worked construction in the summer.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

If I was a boss who didn't want to pay out high salaries to my workers than option A it is. However, if I wan't to do the opposite I'd select option B.

[MasterJedi]

It would depend on which person has the most work in construction. The answer could suprise you, or it might not.

[Small Business Owner of Any Repute]

It would depend on which person has the most work in construction. The answer could suprise you, or it might not.

I can't believe it took someone this long to say that.  There's clearly not enough information to make an informed decision in the question the way it is posed.

[DownWithTheLeft]

It would depend on which person has the most work in construction. The answer could suprise you, or it might not.

I can't believe it took someone this long to say that.  There's clearly not enough information to make an informed decision in the question the way it is posed.

Actually, almost everyone, including myself did.

[MODU]

Let's say you have too applications to be a construction worker.

A is a recent immigrant who doesn't even have a high school level education.
B is a guy who has a Ph. D in Nuclear Physics from a prestigious Ivy League school.

Who do you hire?

For starters, it is "two," not "too."  Secondly, there is nothing provided in your description indicating past experience in the construction field.  If neither person has used a hammer in their life, I would be less inclined to offer either of them a job.  Now, assuming that they both have some prior experience, and their experience is equal to one another, then I would go with the immigrant because I can get away with paying him less than what a Ph.D. would be asking for.  Additionally, one would have to question why a Ph.D. was applying to be a construction worker.  After interviewing him/her, I could probably find him/her a position within the company which better uses his skill-set.

On a side note, I did have a Ph.D. work for me as a weekend employee once.  While she had the degree, she really wasn't that "smart" when it came to dealing with students on a one-on-one basis.  After doing some researching, I found out that her Ph.D. was not for an accredited university, but rather from a school which specialized in those "get your degrees quickly" programs.  Not that it was required for her position, but it did explain her lack of comprehension on some rather simple tasks.

[CARLHAYDEN]

I am suprised that no one has yet bothered to note that most hiring of employees for construction project is done by subcontractors who specialize in some aspect of construction.

Typically there are subcontractors in electrical, plumbing, carpentry, masonry, etc.

Now, in many areas hiring is controlled by the unions.

Further, as JJ corrected noted, the law requires one to look at abilities as related to the specific job, rather than extraneous and possibly irrelevant criteria.


See Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971).

[opebo]

A - servility and desperation are paramount from the employer's perspective.