Woman of the Week – Amber Peebles

Hi, this is Amber. The person featured in this blog. I did not know this existed until it came to my attention this morning. I am honored that someone thought I was worthy of feature.

I have read the comments provided by tonyhemet and thought it important to clarify some things.

The article does not go deeply into my background but I see where the blogger believes I started out in a suit and tie and infers that without grunt work executive positions for women in construction are not as legitimate.

Some background - I did my first job in construction helping a roofer when I was 12 years old. I was not very good but was grateful for an income for a short period. Later, I served eight years in the United States Marine Corps (enlisted - my business partner was the officer - the article is a bit confusing on this point) with a primary MOS as a 2841 comm electronics technician. At the time, one of the most “grunt” things possible for a woman was serving in a combat support role in the Marine Corps. In my 7th year in the Corps I was severely injured in the line of duty and the resulting injuries effectively ended my career.

Having said that, a career in an arguably physically demanding trade was not suitable for me. As an enlisted Marine I am acutely aware of the value of having worked in the trenches brings to leadership. I was also the beneficiary of outstanding leadership from Marine Officers who received a direct commission.

I encourage anyone who ask, to pursue a career in construction as they deem appropriate consistent with their interests, limitations and abilities. There is no reason women should have to be a craftsmen first to bring credibility and leadership to the management table. In my opinion, it is no different than Officer and enlisted, different contributions and responsibilities all toward the same common goal. One is not necessarily better than the other but not all are suited for both. It seems rather limiting and creates a standard that is not expected of men.

On the residential vs. federal aspect, both industries require proper cost controls. I can assure you that on a hard bid job in federal construction the contractor is not simply afforded a rubber stamped check for cost overruns. That is why in federal construction, unlike residential, the contractor has to provide a bond (typically with a personal guarantee) in order to ensure the financial performance of the job.

Having experience with both residential and federal I can state with certainty that the demands and risks on a federal construction contractor are far greater than on a residential contractor, EEOC compliance, Buy America Act, legally qualified employees, certified payroll, submittals, QAQC plan, approved AHAs, OSHA compliance and FAR clauses just to name a few. However, I still prefer federal as it is a more level playing field and the rules are applied to all competitors equally for the most part.

In summary a woman’s advancement in construction should not be limited by any pre conceived notion as to what constitutes a legitimate and credible background. This standard is not applied to men nor should it be applied to women. The industry needs people of integrity, intelligence, leadership, work ethic and problem solving skills regardless of gender. If anyone with these traits wishes to pursue a career of any type in construction I enthusiastically encourage and support it as it is good for our industry.

Lastly, I crawled thru “mud and muck” for years in many a different clime and place, and have the scars, broken bones and medals associated with it. Perhaps this satisfies the blogger’s unilaterally mandated requirement for what constitutes a legitimate female construction manager/executive.

Respectfully,

Amber Peebles

Amber, you're wonderful.