Author | Topic |

Location: 1st street on the right
Registered: November 2002
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 10:54

|
 |
Lambolica wrote on Mon, 03 May 2004 17:29 | Excluding the director (years of experience).The rest studied straight through to get their PhD's and started work here. I have no qualifications and yet these 3 engineers constantly come to me asking things that should be (I believe) assumed knowledge to an Engineer.
These guys tend to spend their time fine anilysing 1 column to find the most effecient size/reinforcement and its impact on the rest of the structure, then move onto the next. now if you were working for N.A.S.A that would be fine but in Structural engineering spending that sort of time on a project may lead to problems later and no profits off that job.
And most don't have a clue how a building is built and don't think of "buildability issues" when designing.
Geez I could go on......
|
FINALLY someone speaks the truth on the paper vs experiance and practical application debate.
Like the engineer running my project. Put it there, the grund penetrating radar says its clear. One foot down, obstruction city, 4 mths and $700,000 later problem solved. of course they could have put it 75mm left and it would have been done in a day.
|
|
|
| Subject | Poster | Date |
 |
overqualified vs underqualified
|
draven | Mon, 03 May 2004 06:53 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Nark | Mon, 03 May 2004 07:09 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
mick | Mon, 03 May 2004 07:13 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Lambolica | Mon, 03 May 2004 07:29 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
BlackSupra | Mon, 03 May 2004 07:46 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Lambolica | Mon, 03 May 2004 08:34 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
clubagreenie | Mon, 03 May 2004 10:54 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
peewee | Mon, 03 May 2004 13:33 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
draven | Mon, 03 May 2004 13:53 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Nark | Tue, 04 May 2004 00:15 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
draven | Mon, 03 May 2004 07:52 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
gianttomato | Mon, 03 May 2004 08:28 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
ae86drift | Mon, 03 May 2004 08:37 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
draven | Mon, 03 May 2004 08:46 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
gianttomato | Mon, 03 May 2004 08:59 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
YelloRolla | Mon, 03 May 2004 07:28 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
lumpy | Mon, 03 May 2004 07:44 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
draven | Mon, 03 May 2004 09:01 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
ed_ma61 | Mon, 03 May 2004 09:57 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
lumpy | Tue, 04 May 2004 00:55 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
bbaacchhyy | Tue, 04 May 2004 16:29 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Lambolica | Wed, 05 May 2004 02:09 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Squid | Wed, 05 May 2004 03:54 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Lambolica | Wed, 05 May 2004 06:15 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Squid | Thu, 06 May 2004 06:34 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Lambolica | Fri, 07 May 2004 02:01 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
bbaacchhyy | Sun, 09 May 2004 21:59 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
ohwhatafeeling | Mon, 10 May 2004 06:07 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Lambolica | Mon, 10 May 2004 06:27 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
bbaacchhyy | Mon, 10 May 2004 06:59 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
ohwhatafeeling | Mon, 10 May 2004 23:17 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
bbaacchhyy | Mon, 10 May 2004 23:35 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
draven | Wed, 05 May 2004 02:01 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
bbaacchhyy | Wed, 05 May 2004 13:38 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Caledwvech | Wed, 05 May 2004 04:51 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Nark | Wed, 05 May 2004 05:06 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
ohwhatafeeling | Thu, 06 May 2004 22:40 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Cyber-punk | Mon, 10 May 2004 09:41 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
rob_RA40 | Mon, 10 May 2004 23:59 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
EvilJack | Tue, 11 May 2004 00:39 |
 |
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
CrAiGzEE | Tue, 11 May 2004 00:42 |
Current Time:
Fri Jul 18 09:01:22 UTC 2025 |
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.0054759979248047 seconds |