Best for Vets: Employers 2015 complete rankings - What are your experiences?

COL Charles Williams — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 09:38:45 -0400

What are your experiences with transitioning, and military friendly companies, not so military friendly companies... Do you think we expect too much? I understand what we bring to the table, but do corporations? Do you think we can be intimidating?

"With the unemployment rate for the latest generation of veterans routinely running below 7 percent, companies across all industries have realized how vets can boost bottom lines — and they're fighting to bring people like you onboard."

http://bestforvets.militarytimes.com/best-employers-for-veterans/2015/

http://www.militarytimes.com/story/veterans/best-for-vets/2015/04/13/best-for-vets-employers-2015-new-rankings-are-out/25704103/

Best for Vets: Employers 2015 rankings are out

Companies across all industries have realized how vets can boost bottom lines — and they're fighting to bring them onboard.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Apr 14 at 2015 9:54 AM

Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 09:54:32 -0400

I think we really don't know what to expect. The worlds of Military, Contractor, Government, Corporate, and Civilian are just so much different from each other that it's impossible to make reasonable expectations.

The military is a bizarre cross between a meritocracy based on competency, a hierarchy based on rank, a dictatorship where one man's word is law (the leader in front of you), whereas each of the other structures are just 'different.'

The ideology we bring from the military to the others is our strength. Being very mission focused allows us to accomplish great things. However the flip side, is the assumption of downward loyalty. This is a concept that doesn't exist in the same way outside in the military.

The 'compensation' package doesn't include a "Troop Welfare" clause. And that's where I think the expectations may conflict.

The organizations are different because their goals are different. This means the people, and parts of the organizations must also be evolved differently. Military members can do very well, as we understand the concept of Semper Gumbi.

Response by COL Vincent Stoneking made Apr 14 at 2015 10:21 AM

COL Vincent Stoneking — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 10:21:43 -0400

I've posted a number of posts along these lines, but I'm too lazy to search for one right now. :-) I think that these are fundamentally the wrong questions from a civilian employment point of view. Don't get me wrong, they are worthwhile questions, but they obscure the central issues from my perspective as a hiring manager. To show you what I mean, let's do a (very) little "red teaming." The analogy isn't perfect, because the employer isn't the OPFOR (another common unhelpful thought), but its close enough for current purposes.

What is the hiring manager's purpose? He's got stuff he needs to get done.
Why is he hiring? He needs people who can do the stuff he needs to get done.
When is he hiring? When he needs NEW people to do the stuff he needs to get done, either because someone left OR he needs to get even more stuff done.
How is he hiring? By whatever process that is in place. Either in good faith, trusting the process to help him find the right person, or through informal recruiting methods, and then welding the process on after the fact to be compliant. (that is several posts all by itself).

Now, the question we all care about:
Who is he hiring? A person that he believes will be the most net benefit in his mission of getting stuff done. This will be based on several factors, including: Can the person CURRENTLY do the work?; Will they be able to LEARN the work in a short amount of time?; Will they mesh with the team/culture?; Do I like them? (that last DOES have a direct effect on the hiring manager's life. So it will get factored, visibly or invisibly.)

There can be variations on the above, but the important thing to note is, other than something implied in "do I like them?" and a potential veteran's preference in the hiring process, military service in and of itself has NOTHING to do with what is on that hiring manager's mind.

As such, I have three issues with the "military friendly company" concept. First, it most often deals with CORPORATE benefit & recruitment policies. It is nice if they are generous. However, that tells you little about the working environment of the organization. Second, they focus on the CORPORATE level. While this is interesting and relevant, it obscures the fact that you will 99.999% of the time work for a specific boss at a specific location with a specific team. Third, it is very difficult to tell from the outside which companies ACTUALLY have a culture that is supportive of people's "role" as veterans and those that merely understand PR and have the right policies on paper.

At the end of the day, it is always going to come down to two factors:
Employer: Is this guy the right fit?
Candidate: It this place the right fit?
"Veteran friendly" may impact the candidate's opinion and to a lesser extent the employer's. However, it is going to be one of the least important factors in my mind, behind culture, pay, benefits, type of work, etc.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 11:24 AM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 11:24:18 -0400

I was like WOW at first. See hiring the Vets as a Charity? PLEASE don't do me any favors. Lol. That's my pride kicking in.

We bring the whole package to the table. I have never met a Vet that didn't strive to be the best that they could be in the job that they are in. That is what we were taught to do. We don't half ass stuff. We get it right and hopefully the first time.

I think we should expect to be put on top of the list ONLY if we are qualified for the job. I don't expect a company JUST to hire me because I am a Veteran.

Yes I think some Vets could tone it down a little when working in a civilian setting. We are not in the military anymore and those that weren't ever will never understand our confidence we have in our job, our pride, our morale and our drive to be the best that we can be.

Response by Col Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 11:36 AM

Col Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 11:36:52 -0400

It's great to see these companies investing in our heroes! Keep it up and set the example for other businesses.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2015 12:41 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 12:41:46 -0400

I'm out of the workforce, and have been since 2001. When I was hired, the company endorsed prior military because they were good employees, dedicated to their performance. Also, before I retired, the requirements were changed to include two years of college. The military were accepted without the college because their exceptional performance. I worked for Huntsman Chemical Corp. the best job I ever had in the civilian world.

Response by Cpl Tim Linville made Apr 14 at 2015 5:34 PM

Cpl Tim Linville — Tue, 14 Apr 2015 17:34:55 -0400

I understand that there are some who benefit from this information regarding civilian employers. I would say that it only benefits officers, not the enlisted which make up a huge percentage of the military. Almost all of this is for those with college degrees, thus really only helping a small portion of the vets. Just my two cents worth.