Pros
Experience of being trained in multiple areas (bidding, estimating, scheduling, managing subcontractors, etc.) give you the overall picture of a how to run a job from soup to nuts- much different than competitors who pigeon hole you into just being an "estimator" or "scheduler". The people you work with are generally pretty good people (both in and out of work), assuming they are not the dead weight in the company or trying to climb the company ladder and stepping on anyone and everyone on their way to do it. Working for the company 5 years ago was actually pretty decent. Now? I don't think they realize how many employees are half way out the door...and we do nothing to stop the good ones from leaving. We practically hold the door open for them to leave because the mindset from upper management is "You won't find better than us". Actually, we can and we slowly are.
Cons
Management is very old school- "live to work" went out about 20 years ago. Yes- construction has never been a 9 to 5 job, but when your protocol is inefficient and requires employees to triplicate information in various databases or generate multiple reports on a monthly basis because Sr. management won't look it up in said database, who is left to actually run the construction project we didn't have enough GCs to man in the first place? Efficiency, although preached, is never something the company is aggressive about resolving- especially if there is a cost associated with it. The ability to make quick, efficient decisions doesn't happen- we can build buildings quicker than we can resolve internal inefficiencies. There is a huge gap between levels of PE's to APMs to PM and in the higher PM levels (3+ to senior) as well. We make a better chorus line than a cheerleading pyramid with our hierarchy. Those who work hard and have stuck with the company are pushed to work longer hours, travel (unless you are one of the "lucky ones" who've never travelled for the company), and give up all semblance of a personal life with either no or minimal compensation, bonuses, profit sharing, etc. When it comes to hiring- again- our inability to make quick decisions means we are hiring the "B Team" because the "A Team" has already been scooped up by competitors. We wait too long to hire PEs and then stick them on a project and expect them to run the whole thing their 2nd week of work. We should have been hiring and training them 2 years ago so we could have them ready to work when needed. Quality of some employees is way below par. Throughout the recession, the company declared they "would not layoff any good people", we didn't lay off the bad ones either. Approval for reimbursement of classes, certifications, etc. takes an army. What once was the company standard of training falls by the way side with the cancelled training sessions month after month (although we still use our "monthly training" schpeel as a selling point in presentations). Advocate program has gone by the way side since there were costs associated with it. The focus has become to maintain the relationship, but pretty much at your own cost, unless you fight and make a stink about it. Who has time to fight these smaller battles when your project is a 60 hour a week job plus you're travelling 2 hours to work one way each day and you want to have a personal life? Travel packages for those out of town no longer take care of the employees for their sacrifice. I shouldn't be paying the company to work out of town, nor should it take months to reimburse employees for out of pocket costs associated with a temporary relocation.
