employment law, overtime
Jay Maechtlen
Jay Maechtlen
Allan Ackerson
Cheers!
Al
> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 07:43:29 -0800> From: techw...@covad.net> To: tech...@lists.techwr-l.com> Subject: employment law, overtime> > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^> > Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or > printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007 > Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.> http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList> > True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.> Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical> documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com> > ---> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as alack...@msn.com.> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > techwr-l-u...@lists.techwr-l.com> or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/alackerson%40msn.com> > > To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr...@lists.techwr-l.com> > Send administrative questions to ad...@techwr-l.com. Visit> http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.>
Jay Maechtlen
Al Geist
Overtime" that had nothing other than a row of "^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^."
What's the message?
Al Geist
Technical Writing, Help, Marketing Collateral, Web Design and Award Winning
Videos
Voice/Msg: 802-872-9190
Cell: 802-578-3964
E-mail: al.g...@geistassociates.com
URL: http://www.geistassociates.com (Online portfolio and resume)
See also:
URL: http://www.geistimages.com (Fine art photographic prints for home or
office and beautiful note cards for all occasions.)
" ... I walked to work, quit my job, and kept walking. Better to be a
pilgrim without a destination, I figured, than to cross the wrong threshold
every day." (Anon)
Jay Maechtlen
>
>
Well, I thought I wrote it, anyway.
Sorry about the previous messages - it seems that various stuff was
hiding in HTML format- I took it into Notepad, and reduced it to text.
This may be of interest to those in the US who work unpaid overtime.
It was written:
"... I informed my manager that I will not work 80 hours a week as
a rule. They'll get the usual crazy OT out of me at milestones and
deadlines, but I will no longer give my company two writers for the
cost of one. That may sound horrible to you, but I spent a decade
working nutty hours, and all I got was sickness, no social life, and
less money per hour. ;-) How will upper management ever feel the
pain if we writers continue to perform miracles? My boss not only
agrees with me, he was horrified to think I'd consider anything
else. I hope your manager is as understanding."
Recently we had a talk at our local STC chapter regarding work rules,
hours, etc.<br>
It develops that we techwriters are entitled to overtime compensation
in nearly all cases.
Unless the writer is also the boss, overtime rules apply.
At least, that's the case in California.
I believe it applies nationwide. If your company compensates properly,
you writers should be making a bucket of money!
Overtime compensation is not just a nice idea, it is the law.
--
Jay Maechtlen
626 444-5112 office
626 840-8875 cell
www.techpubs.com
Jay Maechtlen
> Am I missing something, but this is the third message about "Employment Law,
> Overtime" that had nothing other than a row of "^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^."
> What's the message?
>
>
I seems that there are subtleties to the use of email that I don't fully
understand.
I'm guessing that my previous messages went out as multipart (MIME ?)
which the techwr-l system may not like?.
I finally set the account to compose and send in plain text, which seems
to have helped. (if it is plain text, how can I see color in the quoted
text above?)
Regards
Jay
Dori Green
"exempt". I checked with my labor office (New York) -- this _does_ mean
"exempt from labor law"!
Thank goodness, my current employer does not abuse this. I have had
employers who did, and I voted with my feet.
Dori Green
Martinek, Carla
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacation
Notice that there's only ONE country in the entire list that does not
have a required minimum vacation period. No wonder so many of us are
overworked and overstressed! I remember starting at a new job, and not
being able to take any paid vacation time for over a year -- it ended up
being close to two years between when I was actually able to take
vacation.
At least where I'm at now, I have a great manager and we get to
(unofficially) take comp time when we've had to work extra hours. And
in a few months, I'll be up to three weeks of vacation!! Woohoo!!
I do like the setup some EU countries have where you and/or your
employer pay into a gov't-managed "holiday account," so no matter where
you work, there is money there for you to get paid when you take your
holiday.
-Carla
- CONFIDENTIAL-
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential, and may also be legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not review, use, copy, or distribute this message. If you receive this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by reply email and then delete this email.
Jay Maechtlen
In California, at least, the 'exempt' status can't simply be decided by
the employer.
It is defined by statute according to well-defined characteristics of
the job activities and responsibilities.
A number of major employers are learning this- I don't know if the HR
folks weren't paying attention, or the slavedrivers/ managers weren't
listening to HR.
cheers
Rob Domaschuk
> <snip> it ended up being close to two years between when I was
actually able to take vacation.
At a company I worked for a few years ago, their policy was that you had
to work a full calendar year (January 1st through December 31st) before
you wre eligible for any time off. A fellow TW of mine started in the
middle of January. This meant he had to work that entire year and THEN
work the full Jan 1 to Dec 31 before he got vacation time.
For him, it was just under a true two years.
Rob
Evans, Diane L (Rosetta)
>being close to two years between when I was actually able to take
>vacation.
My sister, Donna, worked for many years at the same company. She had
something like 5 or 6 weeks vacation a year. Then, their company was
purchased by someone new. The new parent company made you accrue
vacation each month, and only use what was accrued -- which meant that
if Donna wanted to take a three week vacation, she could not do it
before July or August. Then, she was forced to take the time she earned
in November and December at the end of the year, because she would lose
it if it wasn't used.
The next year, the vacation policy changed. :)
Tech-writing tie-in: The writer/editor of the new employee manual could
have, and probably should have, noticed and pointed out this problem.
Would have saved a lot of grief if a simple note had been added -- "Do
you realize that no one will be in the office the last week of December?
Is this what you really want to say?"
Diane Evans
Requirements Analyst
ASQ CSQE
Rosetta Inpharmatics
206-802-6560
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notice: This e-mail message, together with any attachments, contains
information of Merck & Co., Inc. (One Merck Drive, Whitehouse Station,
New Jersey, USA 08889), and/or its affiliates (which may be known
outside the United States as Merck Frosst, Merck Sharp & Dohme or MSD
and in Japan, as Banyu - direct contact information for affiliates is
available at http://www.merck.com/contact/contacts.html) that may be
confidential, proprietary copyrighted and/or legally privileged. It is
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity named on this
message. If you are not the intended recipient, and have received this
message in error, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and then
delete it from your system.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Allan Ackerson
Cheers!
Al
> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 09:16:43 -0800> From: techw...@covad.net> To: tech...@lists.techwr-l.com; j...@laserpubs.com> Subject: Re: employment law, overtime> > Jay Maechtlen wrote:> >> > > Well, I thought I wrote it, anyway.> Sorry about the previous messages - it seems that various stuff was > hiding in HTML format- I took it into Notepad, and reduced it to text.> > This may be of interest to those in the US who work unpaid overtime.> > > It was written:> > "... I informed my manager that I will not work 80 hours a week as> a rule. They'll get the usual crazy OT out of me at milestones and> deadlines, but I will no longer give my company two writers for the> cost of one. That may sound horrible to you, but I spent a decade> working nutty hours, and all I got was sickness, no social life, and> less money per hour. ;-) How will upper management ever feel the> pain if we writers continue to perform miracles? My boss not only> agrees with me, he was horrified to think I'd consider anything> else. I hope your manager is as understanding."> > > > Recently we had a talk at our local STC chapter regarding work rules,> hours, etc.<br>> It develops that we techwriters are entitled to overtime compensation> in nearly all cases.> Unless the writer is also the boss, overtime rules apply.> At least, that's the case in California.> I believe it applies nationwide. If your company compensates properly,> you writers should be making a bucket of money!> Overtime compensation is not just a nice idea, it is the law.> > -- > Jay Maechtlen> 626 444-5112 office> 626 840-8875 cell> www.techpubs.com> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^> > Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or > printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007 > Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.> http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList> > True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.> Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical> documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com> > ---> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as alack...@msn.com.> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > techwr-l-u...@lists.techwr-l.com> or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/alackerson%40msn.com> > > To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr...@lists.techwr-l.com> > Send administrative questions to ad...@techwr-l.com. Visit> http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.>
Chesler, Lynn
Labor Standards Act (FSLA). Whether you are exempt or nonexempt under the
law relates to the specific duties you perform in your job. While I can't
speak for California (which tends to go off in its own direction), I can
say that if you are using professional judgment as described in the
statute, you qualify as exempt and therefore are not entitled to overtime.
Regarding the government contracts, the government might be tying specific
tasks to a specific title and the title of tech writer might not be
considered a "professional" position and therefore entitled to overtime.
This is just a guess.
The buckets described by the FSLA are somewhat subjective, and a tech
writer as defined by one company or the government can be doing very
different work from a tech writer as defined by another company. You need
to look at the language of statute and assess it against the tasks of your
own job.
http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/flsa/
Lynn
(an attorney who is not currently practicing and is not giving legal
advice)
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as lche...@auspicecorp.com.
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-u...@lists.techwr-l.com
or visit
http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/lchesler%40auspicecorp.
com
Gene Kim-Eng
the conditions under which an employee may be classified as
exempt. Some of the conditions that can apply to tech writers
are requirements for advanced education, performing
management functions (including managing one's own projects)
or work that is considered to require "creativity." There is also
a minimum pay requirment, but that's only double the state
minimum wage (currently $8.00/hr). So if you're a CA technical
writer, unless you are paid less than $16.00 an hour or are
micromanaged to the point where you can't decide to go to the
restroom without supervisor permission, you have a very small
chance of arguing that you can't be classified as exempt.
Gene Kim-Eng
Gene Kim-Eng
otherwise, are doing work that can be standardized and taught
to low-wage employees without advanced education who work
under direct supervision, such as secretarial/admin, clerical
or DTP workers, rather than professionals with advanced
education and skills who design, invent and/or manage as an
integral part of their typical work functions.. You can probably
expect to see more of this sort of thing now that even the STC
has thrown in the towel and adopted the BLS definitions and
statistics for technical writers instead of leading the charge to
promote a higher view of technical writing as professionals
rather than "glorified secretaries."
Gene Kim-Eng
Dan Goldstein
employers who have previously hired a professional technical writer can
tell the difference. And if they can't, why would you want to work
there?
-- Dan Goldstein (exempt)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gene Kim-Eng
> Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 11:03 AM
> To: TECHWR-L
> Subject: Re: employment law, overtime
>
> They're probably working on the view that writers,
> technical or otherwise, are doing work that can be
> standardized and taught to low-wage employees
> without advanced education who work under direct
> supervision, such as secretarial/admin, clerical
> or DTP workers, rather than professionals with
> advanced education and skills who design, invent
> and/or manage as an integral part of their typical
> work functions. You can probably expect to see
> more of this sort of thing now that even the STC
> has thrown in the towel and adopted the BLS
> definitions and statistics for technical writers
> instead of leading the charge to promote a higher
> view of technical writing as professionals rather
> than "glorified secretaries."
>
This message contains confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not the addressee, or the person responsible for delivering it to the addressee, you are hereby notified that reading, disseminating, distributing, copying, electronic storing or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message by mistake, please notify us, by replying to the sender, and delete the original message immediately thereafter. Thank you.
Gene Kim-Eng
at least not for myself. Nobody who has that
view of technical writers is going to even want
to talk to me once they hear what they'd have
to pay me for my time. But from the other
messages in this discussion there are at least
one or two people who have had the "tech writer
as nonexempt employee" experience. They
might want to be aware of the employer attitude
that is the cloud around the silver lining of their
OT pay.
Gene Kim-Eng
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Goldstein" <DGold...@riverainmedical.com>
To: <tech...@lists.techwr-l.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 8:29 AM
Subject: RE: employment law, overtime
McLauchlan, Kevin
Well, if we're talking about writers categorized (for employment) as
"Exempt" and "non-Exempt" - and whatever the equivalent categories might
be outside the Center of the Universe - I'll ask the other "elephant in
the room" question:
Are any writers on this list.... gasp! ... unionized?
How's that working out for you?
Kevin
PS: apropos of nothing, my window overlooks the bus stop, where a guy
(in full winter ensemble, with parka, boots, mitts, and toque) is
sitting on the bench with a set of bi-fold closet doors across his lap -
once again, I'm glad I don't take the bus :-)
The information contained in this electronic mail transmission
may be privileged and confidential, and therefore, protected
from disclosure. If you have received this communication in
error, please notify us immediately by replying to this
message and deleting it from your computer without copying
or disclosing it.
Will Husa
I could not work overtime. It was 40 hours and no more. Then a major
customer came into the picture and the owner of the company told all the
managers to "get it done. Whatever it takes." Some of the software
developers literally did not go home that week. I worked past 40 hours that
week myself and added the extra time to my next invoice (expecting a
confrontation). However, my invoice was approved, no questions asked. That
set policy right there. If the owner wants something done, he'll authorize
the overtime. Just to be on the safe side, whenever I had to work overtime
for this client, I made sure to include on the invoice the reason why I had
to work the extra time.
Your mileage may vary,
Will
=========================================
Will Husa
Technical Writer
Procedure Writing and Online Help
Phone: 708-927-3569
Fax: 630-668-9283
Website: www.4techwriter.com
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jay Maechtlen" <techw...@covad.net>
To: "TechWrl list" <tech...@lists.techwr-l.com>; "Jay Maechtlen"
<j...@laserpubs.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 11:16 AM
Subject: Re: employment law, overtime
> Jay Maechtlen wrote:
>>
>>
> Well, I thought I wrote it, anyway.
> Sorry about the previous messages - it seems that various stuff was
> hiding in HTML format- I took it into Notepad, and reduced it to text.
>
> This may be of interest to those in the US who work unpaid overtime.
>
>
> It was written:
>
> "... I informed my manager that I will not work 80 hours a week as
> a rule. They'll get the usual crazy OT out of me at milestones and
> deadlines, but I will no longer give my company two writers for the
> cost of one. That may sound horrible to you, but I spent a decade
> working nutty hours, and all I got was sickness, no social life, and
> less money per hour. ;-) How will upper management ever feel the
> pain if we writers continue to perform miracles? My boss not only
> agrees with me, he was horrified to think I'd consider anything
> else. I hope your manager is as understanding."
>
>
>
> Recently we had a talk at our local STC chapter regarding work rules,
> hours, etc.<br>
> It develops that we techwriters are entitled to overtime compensation
> in nearly all cases.
> Unless the writer is also the boss, overtime rules apply.
> At least, that's the case in California.
> I believe it applies nationwide. If your company compensates properly,
> you writers should be making a bucket of money!
> Overtime compensation is not just a nice idea, it is the law.
>
> --
> Jay Maechtlen
> 626 444-5112 office
> 626 840-8875 cell
> www.techpubs.com
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
> printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
> Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
> http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>
> True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
> Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
> documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as will...@4techwriter.com.
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-u...@lists.techwr-l.com
> or visit
> http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/will.husa%404techwriter.com
Gene Kim-Eng
contract, all your work is usually billed at straight time for
the exact number of hours worked. Employment laws don't
apply in the first place because you're a vendor, so exempt/
nonexempt is not an issue, it's whatever the client will pay
for. OTOH, if your contract specifice 40 hours and no
more without authorization, it's a two-way street, because
while they can't be made to pay you for additional hours
you aren't on the hook to work them.
But if you want to be on the "safe side," I would require
a signoff on hours beyond the contracted number *before*
I worked them.
Gene Kim-Eng
Sam Beard
Related to this discussion is a news story I heard on NPR last night
on the way home. Apparently, an emerging trend among some businesses is
"hiring" an employee as a "permalancer". This means the employee is
brought on full-time to the company, but without many (or all) of the
benefits of a regular full-time employee and some of the disadvantages
of a freelancer. They interviewed someone that was hired on as a
"permalancer" copywriter at an ad agency, but was given lower benefits
and pay, along with the decreased level of job security (such as it is
anyway) of a regular full-time employee. The report cited among the
benefits to the companies as lower health insurance and worker's
compensation costs, as well as no responsibilities for unemployment
payments if they have to let the employee go for some reason. All of
this sounds like, to me, another way that businesses are only paying
attention to the bottom line and not to how the people that help them
achieve that bottom line are being treated to get there.
Just thought I'd throw that out there for discussion.
Have a great day, one and all!
Samuel I. Beard, Jr.
Technical Writer
OI Analytical
979 690-1711 Ext. 222
sbe...@oico.com
Al Geist
"Related to this discussion is a news story I heard on NPR last night
on the way home. Apparently, an emerging trend among some businesses is
"hiring" an employee as a "permalancer". This means the employee is
brought on full-time to the company, but without many (or all) of the
benefits of a regular full-time employee and some of the disadvantages
of a freelancer. They interviewed someone that was hired on as a
"permalancer" copywriter at an ad agency, but was given lower benefits
and pay, along with the decreased level of job security (such as it is
anyway) of a regular full-time employee. The report cited among the
benefits to the companies as lower health insurance and worker's
compensation costs, as well as no responsibilities for unemployment
payments if they have to let the employee go for some reason. All of
this sounds like, to me, another way that businesses are only paying
attention to the bottom line and not to how the people that help them
achieve that bottom line are being treated to get there."
If memory serves me correctly, didn't Microsoft end up in a huge lawsuit for
doing the same thing back in the 70s and 80s?
Claire Conant
work as a contractor at Microsoft (not a vendor), then you can only work
there for a year. At the one year mark you have to have a break in
employment of 100 days. This also prohibits moving from one area of the
corporation to another or onto a completely unrelated project within
Microsoft.
Why 100 days? It was a random - what I call aerial extraction - number. The
purpose is the person has to sever all ties with the company and this
separation does that. I had to go through the 100 days, and it made it very
complicated to get an interim job at the time. Three months would have been
easier. One month would have been perfect.
If you are a vendor, however, there is no one year deal. You can continue on
there for years that way. Vendors would be someone through a consulting firm
or such that is placed there or doing ongoing work for one of their groups.
Claire
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Al Geist" <al.g...@geistassociates.com>
Cardimon, Craig
> <snip> it ended up being close to two years between when I was
actually able to take vacation. <
At a company I worked for many years ago, it seemed no one took
vacation. The staff was so small that the strain on everyone in the
office was already quite high.
When someone was out, for any reason, the stress levels rose to
dramatically. This was often followed by "resignations." Some
resignations were preceded by shouting matches. Management was
undisturbed by this trend.
I once asked our manager about this. I was much younger and ignorant of
office politics. He responded, and this is a direct quote, "I pay you to
work, not to take vacations." He himself never took a day off. Ever.
When I asked about the unhappy people leaving, he said that enabled him
to hire newer people at lower wages, thereby claiming greater
profitability for that quarter.
When I asked about losing the experience people took with them when they
walked out the door, he shrugged, saying he couldn't claim that loss on
a balance sheet. It simply wasn't a big deal to him.
Craig
*****************************************************************************************************************************************************
Information contained in this e-mail transmission is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient of this email,
do not read, distribute or reproduce this transmission (including any attachments). If you have received this e-mail in error, please
immediately notify the sender by telephone or email reply.
*****************************************************************************************************************************************************
Dori Green
one Fortune 500 company I worked for, they acknowledged that they needed
permanent technical writers on staff but that because there was no
formal "career path" for them (i.e., into management), they could
therefore only hire them through agencies.
I worked for that company as a "temp" or "part-timer" (sometimes 60
hours per week) for almost six years. I knew of at least one technical
writer who had done so for twelve years.
There are federal laws against that sort of abuse. They got around it
by rotating us through temp agencies every two years. Same desk, same
boss, same work, different agency.
Dori Green
Gene Kim-Eng
"contractor." Unless you are carrying your own 1099
or corp-to-corp contract, you are not a contractor. If
you are working through an agency, the agency is the
contractor and you are a temporary employee of the
contractor. If you are not working through an agency,
then you are a temporary employee of the company,
their use of the term "contractor" notwithstanding.
Federal law and most states apply some limit on how
long a temp may be employed without being provided
the same benefits as a regular employee. The federal
line is rather fuzzy, but the state lines are usually
clearer. Here in California that limit is one year, and
that seems to be the norm in many other states. Check
yours to be sure.
Gene Kim-Eng
Sam Beard
I wasn't aware of the Microsoft case (I was either still in school or
serving in the Air Force at the time, so I didn't follow such things),
but the NPR story made it out as something that is picking up steam and
popularity with companies. Perhaps they've discovered some loophole that
allows them to do this now? It certainly seems a rather underhanded way
of doing business and shows a definite lack of concern for employees,
IMHO. But, then again, mayhaps that's why I'm not a manager! ;-P
Samuel I. Beard, Jr.
Technical Writer
OI Analytical
________________________________
From: Fred Ridder [mailto:doc...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 12:18 PM
To: Sam Beard
Subject: RE: employment law, overtime
Some states have had major crack-downs on this because a few big
companies were seriously abusing the practice. For a number of
years, it was virtually standard policy at Microsoft untile the
Washington
State Labor Commission stomped on them. And the size and visibility
of the Microsoft case led to a lot of other states following
Washington's
lead (payroll and unemployment taxes were at stake) and also to the
IRS paying a lot more attention to people claiming self-employment
status.
> Subject: RE: employment law, overtime
> Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 11:01:02 -0600
> From: sbe...@oico.com
> To: tech...@lists.techwr-l.com
>
> All,
>
> Related to this discussion is a news story I heard on NPR last night
> on the way home. Apparently, an emerging trend among some businesses
is
> "hiring" an employee as a "permalancer". This means the employee is
> brought on full-time to the company, but without many (or all) of the
> benefits of a regular full-time employee and some of the disadvantages
> of a freelancer. They interviewed someone that was hired on as a
> "permalancer" copywriter at an ad agency, but was given lower benefits
> and pay, along with the decreased level of job security (such as it is
> anyway) of a regular full-time employee. The report cited among the
> benefits to the companies as lower health insurance and worker's
> compensation costs, as well as no responsibilities for unemployment
> payments if they have to let the employee go for some reason. All of
> this sounds like, to me, another way that businesses are only paying
> attention to the bottom line and not to how the people that help them
> achieve that bottom line are being treated to get there.
> Just thought I'd throw that out there for discussion.
>
> Have a great day, one and all!
>
> Samuel I. Beard, Jr.
> Technical Writer
> OI Analytical
> 979 690-1711 Ext. 222
> sbe...@oico.com
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats
or
> printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista &
2007
> Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
> http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>
> True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
> Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
> documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as doc...@hotmail.com.
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-u...@lists.techwr-l.com
> or visit
http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/docudoc%40hotmail.com
>
>
> To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr...@lists.techwr-l.com
>
> Send administrative questions to ad...@techwr-l.com. Visit
> http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>
________________________________
Need to know the score, the latest news, or you need your Hotmail(r)-get
your "fix". Check it out. <http://www.msnmobilefix.com/Default.aspx>
Ned Bedinger
>
> Are any writers on this list.... gasp! ... unionized?
> How's that working out for you?
I sought a union once. I had wearied of a certain manager's policies in
assigning avalanches of TW work, and in using annual performance reviews
(the gateway to annual bonuses and profit sharing) as "motivation" for
us to accept the inevitable regular extra hours needed. Rather than
leave the job, I hoped to influence management by finding union
representation that could help bring about a more employee-friendly
workplace.
What I found was the Screenwriter's Guild. They offered collective
bargaining and they apparently are willing to have tech writers as
members, but they didn't seem to be very active in the sector I worked
in. So I didn't join, and for lack of effective advocacy in the
workplace, then burned out on work, got laid off when the sector slid
downhill, wasn't rehired when the company's fortunes changed, and my
sense of professional dignity continues to exist only in the shadow
world. Geez, are unions dead or something? How could my righteous work
ethic lead me to that pathetic end?
Thanks for asking, it helps :-)
Ned Bedinger
d...@edwordsmith.com
Lauren
> Actually, yes. This was settled in 2000. It was huge. As a
> result, if you
> work as a contractor at Microsoft (not a vendor), then you
> can only work
> there for a year.
Intel had a similar rule when I contracted there 10 years ago. As I
understood it, contractors, regardless of whether they were W-2 employers
through a vendor or incorporated vendors themselves, could not work more
than 9 months out of the year and, I think, a full three-month break was
required between the 9-month stint to prevent 9 to 18 month contracts from
creative interpretations of "year."
1099 independent contractors, or freelancers, were not permitted without
holding a separate entity status, either as a corporation or an LLC. This
is probably to prevent those individuals from claiming employee status
because they were working on site.
The 9-month limitation was per person and not per company. So a person
could not work more than 9 months at Intel, regardless of whether the person
went to a different department or through a different company.
Lauren
Michael L. Wyland
Yes, and, actually, the history goes back a lot further than that in
the IT world. I worked as a contractor for IBM in the early '80s,
and was limited in how long I could remain as a contractor. IBM had
been sued - successfully - a number of years before (1970s?) by
long-term contractors and forced to pay benefits. As a result, they
enforced time limits on all subsequent contracts.
Michael L. Wyland
Sumption & Wyland
818 South Hawthorne Avenue
Sioux Falls, SD 57104-4537
(605) 336-0244
(605) 336-0275 (FAX)
(888) 4-SUMPTION (toll-free)
mic...@sumptionandwyland.com
Since 1990
Strategic Planning * Executive Coaching * Training & Facilitation *
Grantsmanship
http://www.sumptionandwyland.com
-- NEW web site
-- free e-newsletter sign-up
Bill Swallow
cool things I've done to date because they would have required me to
break union "laws" to get them done.
> > Are any writers on this list.... gasp! ... unionized?
> > How's that working out for you?
--
Bill Swallow
HATT List Owner
WWP-Users List Owner
Senior Member STC, TechValley Chapter
STC Single-Sourcing SIG Manager
http://techcommdood.blogspot.com
Ned Bedinger
> This is the result of the widespread misuse of the term
> "contractor." Unless you are carrying your own 1099
> or corp-to-corp contract, you are not a contractor. If
> you are working through an agency, the agency is the
> contractor and you are a temporary employee of the
> contractor. If you are not working through an agency,
> then you are a temporary employee of the company,
> their use of the term "contractor" notwithstanding.
I agree that there are important distinctions, but also note that, fwiw,
agency contractors were invited to join the class action suit for
retroactive benefits against Microsoft. I dunno if they got awards.
Ned Bedinger
d...@edwordsmith.com
Kelly Keck
exempt/non-exempt issue. This is all based on Federal law, from reading
I've done on the Department of Labor's web page, and it's all "if memory
serves." That is, it's been several months since I looked any of it up, and
I'm not a lawyer or an HR person.
First off, to not be paid overtime, it's not enough to just fall into one of
the "exempt" categories. You also have to be paid on a salary, rather than
hourly, basis. Where this gets confusing is that people who are truly
salaried might still have an hourly rate on their timesheet. (Presumably it
makes life simpler for payroll and accounting personnel.) To be salaried,
one has to be paid the same in any week work is done, regardless of the
hours worked. The downside is that, yes, if you're salaried, a 60-hour week
is worth the same as a 40-hour week. The plus side is that a salaried
person can't be docked pay for working a short week either. (Not to say
that not getting your work done or breaking company policies won't still get
you fired.) For example, if a snowstorm knocks out power to your office and
it's closed for three days, a salaried person cannot be docked for the time
they didn't come in. So, if that's not true of you, then your company isn't
treating you as salaried, and you might be eligible to be paid for overtime.
Ultimately, everyone has to decide whether they feel like they're being
treated fairly or not, and if not, what to do about it. Voting with your
feet is always an option. Also, if your company is actually breaking
employment law, maybe it's worth pressing the issue.
Being confrontational wouldn't be my first choice if I liked the job and
wanted to keep it. But what about a polite query to your boss or to HR?
"I'm a little confused, because I've been working extra hours with no pay,
but [explanation of why you're legally entitled to overtime, with references
cited] seems to suggest that that's not how it's supposed to work."
(Technical writers, after all, ought to be good at communicating clearly
while still being tactful and respectful--we have to do it with SMEs and
users all the time.) That might be enough to correct the issue. Granted, if
a company is willfully taking advantage of you and flouting the law, the
polite inquiry might get you nowhere. But, in that case, at least you'll
know exactly where you stand, and can fall back on the "vote with your feet"
option, or report those unethical practices. (For self-preservation's sake,
if it were me, I'd be reporting them only after I had a couple other good
job leads lined up, or a back-up plan that would allow me to keep paying my
bills if I did lose my job.)
I know there's always a concern about getting fired if you call attention to
illegal or unfair practices. But something to remember is that the
companies who take advantage of their employees do it because they know they
can get away with it. If they fire someone for refusing to work 80-hour
weeks, it's because they know they can find someone else who will. When the
third or fourth person quits after finding out that that's the expectation,
the company might be forced to change their tune.
Kelly Keck
John Rosberg
to the Microsoft suit.
There are a number of companies, though that have a large number of
"part time" employees, which allows them to dodge benefit and salary
agreements they have with (typically, but not always, union) full
timers. UPS, FedEx, and almost all retail outfits operate like this.
I listen to NPR regularly, value it greatly, enjoy it immensely, but
they get things wrong as often the the for-profit news sector
(especially in the business arena).
While I would agree that permalancers and part timers don't get as good
a deal as they might otherwise, I'm not sure I would characterize the
practice as "underhanded." Anyone accepting such a position would likely
understand it, and agree to it. This is, of course, different than
reveling in it, I know.
Choices -- you always have choices.
Signed, a manager that understands the link between good, relatively
happy employees and the bottom line ;-}
rosberg
Stephen Arrants
Unions and their "rules" vary depending on the actual industry. Have you any direct experience as a union member?
--
Steve Arrants st...@mbfbioscience.com
Writer
MBF Bioscience (Microbrightfield, Inc.)
+1.802.288.9290 ext: 124
www.mbfbioscience.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: techwr-l-bounces+steve=mbfbiosc...@lists.techwr-l.com
> [mailto:techwr-l-bounces+steve=mbfbiosc...@lists.techwr-l.com] On
> Behalf Of Bill Swallow
> Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2008 8:38 PM
> To: Ned Bedinger
> Cc: McLauchlan, Kevin; tech...@lists.techwr-l.com
> Subject: Re: employment law, overtime
>
McLauchlan, Kevin
> Bill, that statement makes no sense. Given that you didn't join a
union,
> and you most likely don't even know WHAT the union rules (not laws or
> "laws", rules) are, how do you know that you couldn't have done what
you
> did do? I don't know of any writers union, guild, or trade group that
has
> hard, specific, and ENFORCEABLE rules regarding how to do the job.
>
> Unions and their "rules" vary depending on the actual industry. Have
you
> any direct experience as a union member?
I do have direct experience as a union member........ but not while a
writer.
'Twas in the days before I became a techwriter. I was a production
technician on the factory floor of a company that made pre-PC things,
and then made PCs when that trend had become more than obvious.
The union covered everybody in the production facility who was not
management, and was a very "democratic" organization (meaning that they
worked first toward the good of the union hierarchy, second toward the
good of the largest category of their members, and a distant third
toward the "good" of people in [to them] marginal categories). The
majority of the members were production-line assembly people and those
involved in warehouse-ish activities. Most of them were nice people,
many quite smart, but semi-skilled at best. The technical folk were
poorly served. The few line workers who aspired to learn technical
things, and move up the food chain a bit, faced interference and
obstruction (as did the supervisors who wanted to give them a chance).
The union liked to claim us techs, but didn't really like us. It was
effectively impossible to circumscribe our jobs with the time-and-motion
analysis that was used on the line-workers' tasks. They tried to place
restrictions on the extent to which a given line worker could be taken
from one line task and put to work on another (even though the average
line worker welcomed a change in the monotony...). The same approach
just slid off our backs when we techs would happily hop around the
various assignments as needs changed. That willingness meant less
pressure on the company to hire additional (unionized) workers.
One fellow got a union reprimand when he helped to get a wonky
wave-solder machine back in operation. I think it might have been sweet
revenge when he was later instrumental in getting robots working on the
production floor.
(The company was growing so fast that all the robots they could "hire"
never resulted in a single job loss on the line.)
Anyway, I jumped at the first chance to get off the production floor and
into a staff job, where I immediately had to work at least ten more
hours per week, and thought it a good trade. From that first staff job
(as third-line tech support), I slid sideways into my first techwriting
job. I can't say that I haven't looked back - I'm looking back right
now, but not with fondness for unions.
I just wondered if there existed any situations where working technical
writers were dues-paying members of actual unions, and how that was
handled in the workplace.
Kevin
Bill Swallow
their careers they both had to go through endless union red tape to
get anywhere.
So let me ask this: What would a union provide that a person can't get
themselves?
On Jan 25, 2008 10:43 AM, Stephen Arrants <st...@mbfbioscience.com> wrote:
> Bill, that statement makes no sense. Given that you didn't join a union, and you most likely don't even know WHAT the union rules (not laws or "laws", rules) are, how do you know that you couldn't have done what you did do? I don't know of any writers union, guild, or trade group that has hard, specific, and ENFORCEABLE rules regarding how to do the job.
>
> Unions and their "rules" vary depending on the actual industry. Have you any direct experience as a union member?
--
Gregory P Sweet
> So let me ask this: What would a union provide that a person can't get
> themselves?
Oh I dunno, job security, better pay/benefits vacation, power-in-numbers
come to mind right away.
But apparently the prevailing attitude these days is that the union is of
no benefit and employers are laughing all the way to the bank on it.
I've never been asked to work more than 40 hours in a week in a union shop,
however in the one nonunion gig I had the vice president of the department
told me out-right that I "made too much money" to only work 40 hours a week
and had better start putting in 70 or 80 or else. So there, I piped up with
the exception to that one, too.
I may not always be happy with my union but I staunchly support it and
believe I am far better of with it than with out. Previously I was a member
of the International Brotherhood of Elevator Constructors who had very
strict rules about job titles and scope of work. The also provided
world-class training to ensure that anyone who held the rank of elevator
mechanic really knew their sh*t. Some might have saw that as red-tape.
Others, myself included saw that for what it was, achieving the leverage to
negotiate a better deal by ensure a highly-skilled work force.
Let me ask this, if unions are so pointless and ineffectual why do
corporations like WalMart spend millions on anti-union activities including
surveillance vans for each store and a union-busting fast-response team
with it's own private jet?
Gregory P. Sweet
Proud member of CSEA Local 316/AFSCME Local 1000
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential or sensitive information which is, or may be, legally privileged or otherwise protected by law from further disclosure. It is intended only for the addressee. If you received this in error or from someone who was not authorized to send it to you, please do not distribute, copy or use it or any attachments. Please notify the sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete this from your system. Thank you for your cooperation.
Bill Swallow
> come to mind right away.
I don't have power in numbers but I am a bit on the large side. ;-)
Pay/benefits/vacation/job security... I have those.
> But apparently the prevailing attitude these days is that the union is of
> no benefit and employers are laughing all the way to the bank on it.
> I've never been asked to work more than 40 hours in a week in a union shop,
> however in the one nonunion gig I had the vice president of the department
> told me out-right that I "made too much money" to only work 40 hours a week
> and had better start putting in 70 or 80 or else. So there, I piped up with
> the exception to that one, too.
LOL! Sounds like the VP was on a power trip. I generally don't pay
attention to noise like that.
> I may not always be happy with my union but I staunchly support it and
> believe I am far better of with it than with out. Previously I was a member
> of the International Brotherhood of Elevator Constructors who had very
> strict rules about job titles and scope of work. The also provided
> world-class training to ensure that anyone who held the rank of elevator
> mechanic really knew their sh*t. Some might have saw that as red-tape.
> Others, myself included saw that for what it was, achieving the leverage to
> negotiate a better deal by ensure a highly-skilled work force.
If it works for you, great. I'd personally feel bound and hindered,
because I enjoy not doing the same work year over year.
> Let me ask this, if unions are so pointless and ineffectual why do
> corporations like WalMart spend millions on anti-union activities including
> surveillance vans for each store and a union-busting fast-response team
> with it's own private jet?
I don't know. I honestly don't understand a lot of things that
Wal*Mart does, and don't shop there as a rule.
Gene Kim-Eng
level of marketable skills tend to limit them to working for
employers who exploit their lack of options. The passing
of collective bargaining laws was an acknowlegement that
there are whole classes of workers who often do not have
the choice of voting with their feet.
Gene Kim-Eng
Combs, Richard
> Others, myself included saw that for what it was, achieving
> the leverage to negotiate a better deal by ensure a
> highly-skilled work force.
More precisely, they achieve leverage by restricting the supply of labor
(to the detriment of those excluded, which used to be mainly minorities
and women). It's the same time-honored method used by licensing
advocates of all stripes, cartels like physicians and lawyers, and every
other anti-competitive enterprise that decides it's easier to increase
their wealth by coercing it out of others than by adding more value to
what they do.
> Let me ask this, if unions are so pointless and ineffectual
> why do corporations like WalMart spend millions on anti-union
> activities including surveillance vans for each store and a
> union-busting fast-response team with it's own private jet?
Wow -- surveillance vans for each store, private jets ... do they have
black helicopters, too? 'Cause, you know, Wal-Mart doesn't care about
cost containment. These evil capitalists just exist for the purpose of
crushing workers under their boot. <yawn />
> Gregory P. Sweet
> Proud member of CSEA Local 316/AFSCME Local 1000
Hey, go have a Friday afternoon brewski with the gang and sing a chorus
or two of "Joe Hill." Feel the solidarity wash over you. It's kind of
1930s-ish, but if it floats your boat... :-)
You might want to dial back the paranoia a bit, though.
Richard
------
Richard G. Combs
Senior Technical Writer
Polycom, Inc.
richardDOTcombs AT polycomDOTcom
303-223-5111
------
rgcombs AT gmailDOTcom
303-777-0436
------
Technical Writer
Gene Kim-Eng wrote:
<quote>This is the result of the widespread misuse of the term "contractor." Unless you are carrying your own 1099 or corp-to-corp contract, you are not a contractor. If you are working through an agency, the agency is the contractor and you are a temporary employee of the contractor. If you are not working through an agency, then you are a temporary employee of the company, their use of the term "contractor" notwithstanding. </quote>
Good definition, to which might be added a caveat that employers are as willing to call their temps "contractors" as the temps are willing to work in that category. Specifically, the temp believes there is some prestige or aura attached to the term "contractor" that is worth at least as much as lost "fringe benefits." Silly people.
The current trend is not so much temp vs contractor as it is a multi-tiered employee status. Consider: an executive is an employee, but is given substantially more perks (and compensation) than "regular" employees. In what way is this different than creating a tier or category of temps that is paid a salary with fewer benefits, regardless of the term used to describe them?
As long as there is a substantial labor pool from which to draw temps, job rotation is good for everyone except the hardcore "lifers," and they are only pretending to be "permanent employees" anyway; as Gene Kim-Eng pointed out, they are simply temps and nothing more, regardless of length of employment.
Consider: rotation after a fixed period spreads the work among a larger number of temps. I do not see anything at all harmful in the practice, and see a LOT of benefit in increasing turnover.
http://www.tekwrytrs.com/ - Contract project management services for software development, technical documentation, and rapid application development (RAD) in Visual Basic .NET, Visual C# .NET, ASP .NET, and XML
_________________________________________________________________
Shed those extra pounds with MSN and The Biggest Loser!
http://biggestloser.msn.com/
Ned Bedinger
> Consider: rotation after a fixed period spreads
> the work among a larger number of temps.
Who has that goal?? My first thought is that it
might suit employers whose work requires only
generic skill.
Generic skills are not a characteristic of tech
writing work, except where it intersects with jobs
for "tool specialists" who do things like prettify
documents, or warm bodies who occupy the tech writer
desks as a concession to some visionary who felt that
they "ought to have tech writers."
.
> I do not
> see anything at all harmful in the practice, and
> see a LOT of benefit in increasing turnover.
Increasing turnover means losing experienced people,
with the attendant loss of time and productivity, and
additional costs for training the new temps, doesn't
it? This is the benefit LOT you're trolling, no?
Ned Bedinger
VP in Charge of Institutional Memory
d...@edwordsmith.com
Technical Writer
Ned Bedinger wrote in response to tekwrytr:
>Consider: rotation after a fixed period spreads the work among a larger number of temps. Who has that goal?? My first thought is that it might suit employers whose work requires onlygeneric skill. Generic skills are not a characteristic of tech writing work, except where it intersects with jobs for "tool specialists" who do things like prettify documents, or warm bodies who occupy the tech writer desks as a concession to some visionary who felt that they "ought to have tech writers."
tekwrytr response: The leap to generic skills is unnecessary. A competent TW should be able to hit the ground running, and be productive almost immediately. If not, it is a lack of skill on the part of the TW or a lack of skill on the part of the hiring manager. The "cult of personality" has no place in a modern organization, and the idea that only specific people are capable of doing specific jobs is a crutch for incompetent managers unable to organize the work. > I do not see anything at all harmful in the practice, and see a LOT of benefit in increasing turnover.
Increasing turnover means losing experienced people, with the attendant loss of time and productivity, and additional costs for training the new temps, doesn't it? This is the benefit LOT you're trolling, no? Ned Bedinger VP in Charge of Institutional Memory d...@edwordsmith.com tekwrytr response: That presupposes the "experienced people" have somehow acquired set specific skills that other (equally skilled and competent) TWs lack. That is rarely the case, and if it is, becomes a problem in itself. Specifically, if the TW cannot be readily replaced, he or she is "unreplaceable, except at great expense to the organization." That is a failure of management to organize the work in a manner that facilitates completion by other skilled, competent TWs that only lack direct experience in that particular job description.
If it takes "experienced people" to perform what should be relatively routine tasks (which comprise the majority of tasks assigned to TWs), that is a failure of management. No one, including VPs and CEOs, is unreplaceable.
_________________________________________________________________
Connect and share in new ways with Windows Live.
http://www.windowslive.com/share.html?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_Wave2_sharelife_012008
Ned Bedinger
> If it takes "experienced people" to perform what should be relatively routine tasks
Oops, I mean, is this a strip club or something? What happened to the
Technical Writing and Rock Climbing department that used to be on this
floor?
Darned elevator.
Ned Bedinger
d...@edwordsmith.com
Greg Holmes
>It is flattering to the ego to believe one is doing work of such
complexity that
>one is the only person capable of doing it, and that one is, therefore,
>unreplaceable for all practical purposes. It is also seriously misguided. In
>a labor market filled with highly skilled, competent people willing to work
>for modest salaries, the "be-nice-to-me-or-I-will-quit" threat rings hollow.
>In fact, most TWs can be replaced in a flash, and usually by someone as
>(or better) skilled.
Wow, I guess I really want to work for www.tekwrytrs.com after reading that ...
Andrew Plato, is that you? ;)
>Back in the olden days when waterfalls were considered reasonable software
>development, and months could go by when no one really knew what the IT
>department was doing or why, "star programmers" could hold companies hostage
>because they were the only ones who could understand the programs they
>were writing. Those days are gone forever in all but a handful of dinosaur
>organizations. Outsourcing of IT work is as much to retain (or regain)
>control of the process as to save money.
The truth, of course, is somewhere in between. Systems are only as good
as the people in them. The dream of people as interchangeable cogs
has clearly failed, and everybody outside of the boardroom can see
that in outsourcing (the mindless working to spec without understanding,
the massive language and cultural barriers, etc.).
>From a manager's perspective, any time a specific employee is
>"unreplaceable," it is in the best interest of the organization to resolve
>that situation as soon as possible. Specifically, the "unreplaceable"
>person is a threat to the bottom-line and continuity of the
>organization. Any manager who does not realize that--and take action
>to resolve it--should not be a manager.
Not quite. Good employees *are* irreplaceable in the sense that they
can only be truly replaced with *other good employees* (who needless
to say, are *not* a dime a dozen), and that you shouldn't be replacing
them anyway without a darn good reason.
Greg Holmes
McLauchlan, Kevin
OK, let's think of Tekwryter (and the other folks competent in tools and
in basic research and writing) as the kid fresh out of tradeschool.
Let's think of me (and many of you) as the plumber who has been in the
biz for twenty years.
Tekwryter and his basic-skills crew have most of the same basic skills
that I do - I've just got more years of experience, especially in my
industry.
A competent hiring manager, looking to fill a position for a grunt in a
multi-person techpubs department probably wants Tekwryter, cuz I cost
more to fill that generic seat.
A competent hiring manager, looking to fill a position for a lone
writer, or the only writer at a busy development branch of his company,
might prefer to hire me.
Why? Back to that plumber thing.
The plumbing goes wonky.
You take out your best wrenches and tinker for a while, with no success.
You give up and call the plumber.
The plumber comes in, looks the situation over, plucks an old, well-used
wrench from his toolbelt... and gives the pipe a solid whack! The
plumbing starts working properly, and the plumber presents his bill for
$300. He's been at your place for ten minutes... barely.
"What??" you expostulate. "I could have done that. Where do you get off
charging me three hundred bucks to whack one pipe?"
The plumber scratches his chin and says... "Hang on, I'll write you up
an itemized bill."
A minute later, you are reading the newer, longer version of the bill.
It says:
- whacking pipe $50
- knowing where to whack pipe $250
Similarly, we've been hiring developers recently. None of them hit the
ground running, though they're all smart, experienced people. They all
spend couple of weeks reading specs, reading code and asking questions,
before they dip their toes in their first real assignments.
The occasional software architect that we hire takes considerably longer
before he (there hasn't been a she applying for those positions) starts
contributing at the level of the previous holder of that office. It's
all code and hardware that works with the code, but there's a lot of
knowledge that needs to be soaked up that is specific to our industry,
and that is specific to how our company has been doing things. That's
the "knowing where to whack" part. That's the non-modular,
non-cookie-cutter part of the job.
Hm.
I think I've just said: If you're a good TW, seek out non-commodity
employers.
Combs, Richard
> Ya go away for the weekend, and the conversation gets silly.
Amen! Excellent commentary. You've saved me the trouble of finishing my
extended rant about how tekwrytr goes on and on about _skills_ without
ever mentioning _knowledge_. Not to mention _understanding_.
Certainly, no one is irreplaceable. But years of learning about
telephony, conferencing, VoIP, our products, etc., certainly _do_ give
me a distinct advantage over a similarly skilled writer fresh off the
street: I ask the engineers and product managers far fewer questions. In
fact, I frequently answer questions of theirs. That has far more value
than an "arcane skill set."
McLauchlan, Kevin
> > Ya go away for the weekend, and the conversation gets silly.
>
> Amen! Excellent commentary. You've saved me the trouble of finishing
my
> extended rant about how tekwrytr goes on and on about _skills_ without
> ever mentioning _knowledge_. Not to mention _understanding_.
>
> Certainly, no one is irreplaceable. But years of learning about
> telephony, conferencing, VoIP, our products, etc., certainly _do_ give
> me a distinct advantage over a similarly skilled writer fresh off the
> street: I ask the engineers and product managers far fewer questions.
In
> fact, I frequently answer questions of theirs. That has far more value
> than an "arcane skill set."
Well, as one of the three remaining people paying any attention to this
thread, you surely have not failed to notice that only one person seems
to have brought up the notion of "unreplaceable", and then proffered
arguments for both sides...
Not a single one of the other participants actually made that argument
(not even using the proper term "irreplaceable"). That method of
debate has a name that I once knew... something bucolic... um,
"hayseed"? Nope. Um, "scarecrow"? Nope. Help me out here, I'm grasping
at ... "straws"... :-)
Pro TechWriter
I completely agree.
-- "Someone who knows how to wack the pipe without having to read specs for
three weeks"
PT
On 1/28/08, McLauchlan, Kevin <Kevin.Mc...@safenet-inc.com> wrote:
>
> Ya go away for the weekend, and the conversation gets silly.
>
> Kevin
>
>
> The information contained in this electronic mail transmission
> may be privileged and confidential, and therefore, protected
> from disclosure. If you have received this communication in
> error, please notify us immediately by replying to this
> message and deleting it from your computer without copying
> or disclosing it.
>
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
> printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
> Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
> http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
>
> True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
> Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
> documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as pro.tec...@gmail.com.
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-u...@lists.techwr-l.com
> or visit
> http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/pro.techwriter%40gmail.com
Ned Bedinger
McLauchlan, Kevin wrote:
That method of
> debate has a name that I once knew... something bucolic... um,
> "hayseed"? Nope. Um, "scarecrow"? Nope. Help me out here, I'm grasping
> at ... "straws"... :-)
>
"Trying to thread a camel thru the eye of a needle inna haystack."
But what about this one?
"
> The notion that TWs (or programmers) have arcane skill sets so
> specific to the particular job at hand that they are unreplaceable is
> misguided. If that situation exists, it is a deficiency in managerial
> competence; the manager(s) turned over responsibility for task
> completion to the employees.
I classify it as a variant of the rhetorical device known as "mirrors"
which comprises barbershop mirrors, funhouse mirrors, smoke and ....
That is, if the writer or programmer does not execute and document the
work so thoroughly that their successor can simply pick up the thread
and continue where they left off, and that failure is taken as a failure
of management, then isn't the management failure likely to be actually a
failure at some higher level (let's say, a stockholder failure, just for
hyuks) to require a thoroughgoing documentation methodology on all
projects great and small, such that no one can gain career leverage by
stashing secret special knowledge in a private hope chest. AND, to
complete the mirror cycle, of course, the tech writer is responsible for
making the mandated project documentation happen, and the manager must
facilitate the tech writer by ensuring access, and all dev leads are
obliged to be forthcoming, etc...
Honextly, I've begun thinking that the OP is a brilliant management
theoretician and strategist. Let's get him onboard before some rogue
power discovers he's missing or snaps him up.
Ned Bedinger
doc@edwordsmith
D'fence # 3.214NSK1
Chris Borokowski
profession and that knowledge is stored in individuals. The idea of
workers as replaceable cogs is bad enough, but to deny the inequality
of experience, knowledge and basic intelligence among tech writers is
to doom us all to real boredom.
Although I like many of the ideas in Plain Language, Simplified
English, DITA, etc. a lot of what I see there is an attempt to make the
job more interchangeable cog-ish. That will chase away the real
communicators and ensure that all documentation is interchangeably
boring.
> I think I've just said: If you're a good TW, seek out non-commodity
> employers.
http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/
technical writing | consulting | development
____________________________________________________________________________________
Looking for last minute shopping deals?
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
McLauchlan, Kevin
> Or in other words, make it clear that ours is a knowledge-based
> profession and that knowledge is stored in individuals. The idea of
> workers as replaceable cogs is bad enough, but to deny the inequality
> of experience, knowledge and basic intelligence among tech writers is
> to doom us all to real boredom.
Recent articles in the biz press and on TV are saying that the coming
crunch in employment is going to be even worse than suggested by the
absolute numbers of retiring boomers, versus the (much smaller) absolute
numbers of incoming youngsters. What they are saying is that the people
now entering the workforce have a completely different philosophy (many,
not all), and it will take two or three of them to equal the
productivity of each of the workaholic boomers that they "replace". That
means, from the point of view of the employer wanting certain work done.
Plenty of new kids have a fine work ethic, but without the "dedication"
to a career or employer. Instead, they'll work at what pleases them and
take short-term jobs when they need extra money. So, think of somebody
running a pottery shop during tourist season, because they like it, then
closing shop and taking a couple of temp jobs over the winter, just to
get by... between ski vacations... or stints working as ski-hill
staff... or maybe they'll take occasional shifts at elder-care
facilities, helping the robots that do most of the lifting and cleaning
of our (boomers') failing bodies.
In other words, hardly anybody will be willing to work 40-hour weeks at
the same job, for years at a time, becoming intimately familiar with a
particular industry and company and all the peripheral stuff that we
boomers do almost unconsciously while devoting our faculties to the
"real" part of the job.
So, management IS going to become the art of setting up automatic
procedures and of herding "cats" - temporary workers who have only
discrete skills, intelligence and willingness, but no history or
industry knowledge.
In other words, jobs will need to become plug'n'play because the worker
who is doing a job today wasn't here yesterday, and might not be here
tomorrow.
In other-other words, those of us who now find it nervous-making to face
searching for new jobs in our mid-fifties will soon find ourselves being
sought out as "golden" repositories of knowledge and understanding
beyond the rote skills of writing and using a couple of tools.
Yeah, I know that many on this list are perpetual contractors and
actually like to spend "off" hours, as well as a percentage of paid
hours (shh!) during the final weeks/months of a contract lining up the
next contract. But many others of us are ... um.... serially monogamous
about our jobs and only start looking for new ones if the current ones
are unsatisfactory or start looking shaky. The rest of the time, we're
immersed, handling multiple projects at different stages, and enjoying
the work for which we're paid.
Melissa Nelson
While I agree with a lot of this post...after my divorce I worked my way through a bachelors and masters degree doing this.....
shifts at elder-care facilities, helping the robots that do most of the lifting and cleaningof our (boomers') failing bodies.
Four years in a nursing home for $9 an hour..way, way, way, way, way tougher than my technical writing job, for a lot less money! Believe me no one does this for long without a work ethic! This is also something a robot could not do!
Melissa
> Subject: RE: permalancer> Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:02:44 -0500> From: Kevin.Mc...@safenet-inc.com> To: ath...@yahoo.com; tech...@lists.techwr-l.com> > Chris Borokowski wrote:> > Or in other words, make it clear that ours is a knowledge-based> > profession and that knowledge is stored in individuals. The idea of> > workers as replaceable cogs is bad enough, but to deny the inequality> > of experience, knowledge and basic intelligence among tech writers is> > to doom us all to real boredom.> > Recent articles in the biz press and on TV are saying that the coming> crunch in employment is going to be even worse than suggested by the> absolute numbers of retiring boomers, versus the (much smaller) absolute> numbers of incoming youngsters. What they are saying is that the people> now entering the workforce have a completely different philosophy (many,> not all), and it will take two or three of them to equal the> productivity of each of the workaholic boomers that they "replace". That> means, from the point of view of the employer wanting certain work done.> Plenty of new kids have a fine work ethic, but without the "dedication"> to a career or employer. Instead, they'll work at what pleases them and> take short-term jobs when they need extra money. So, think of somebody> running a pottery shop during tourist season, because they like it, then> closing shop and taking a couple of temp jobs over the winter, just to> get by... between ski vacations... or stints working as ski-hill> staff... or maybe they'll take occasional shifts at elder-care> facilities, helping the robots that do most of the lifting and cleaning> of our (boomers') failing bodies.> In other words, hardly anybody will be willing to work 40-hour weeks at> the same job, for years at a time, becoming intimately familiar with a> particular industry and company and all the peripheral stuff that we> boomers do almost unconsciously while devoting our faculties to the> "real" part of the job.> So, management IS going to become the art of setting up automatic> procedures and of herding "cats" - temporary workers who have only> discrete skills, intelligence and willingness, but no history or> industry knowledge.> In other words, jobs will need to become plug'n'play because the worker> who is doing a job today wasn't here yesterday, and might not be here> tomorrow. > In other-other words, those of us who now find it nervous-making to face> searching for new jobs in our mid-fifties will soon find ourselves being> sought out as "golden" repositories of knowledge and understanding> beyond the rote skills of writing and using a couple of tools.> > Yeah, I know that many on this list are perpetual contractors and> actually like to spend "off" hours, as well as a percentage of paid> hours (shh!) during the final weeks/months of a contract lining up the> next contract. But many others of us are ... um.... serially monogamous> about our jobs and only start looking for new ones if the current ones> are unsatisfactory or start looking shaky. The rest of the time, we're> immersed, handling multiple projects at different stages, and enjoying> the work for which we're paid.> Kevin> > > The information contained in this electronic mail transmission > may be privileged and confidential, and therefore, protected > from disclosure. If you have received this communication in > error, please notify us immediately by replying to this > message and deleting it from your computer without copying > or disclosing it.> > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^> > Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or > printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007 > Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.> http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList> > True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.> Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical> documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com> > ---> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as melm...@hotmail.com.> > To unsubscribe send a blank email to > techwr-l-u...@lists.techwr-l.com> or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/melmis36%40hotmail.com> > > To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr...@lists.techwr-l.com> > Send administrative questions to ad...@techwr-l.com. Visit> http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.>
Chris Borokowski
I have things to add to it, but nothing to cut into it, so read the
following as a corollary.
I and several other members of my generation (early 1970s births) are
early adopters of this viewpoint, in part because of our experiences in
the startups and corporate load when we graduated from college in the
early 1990s.
I think in the hands of competent people, it goes the other way around:
we like to work on skills, but we do not like to sit at jobs for 40
hours a week waiting on the incompetence of management, the slowness of
others, or other "grind" processes. We see it as soul-killing.
There will be fools who see any job as like any other, but I think they
will find that gets boring after a while. Specialization may be bad
news, but having skills sure is not.
In this way, I think we're like some of the members of this list, both
the freelancers and the consummate serial monogamous job professionals.
We have our own agenda, and that starts with doing the job right, and
secondarily comes all the Bravo Sierra of corporate life. We want to
get in, do a good job, avoid the unnecessary window-dressing, and then
go get on with life.
At least for me, this seems to fit. My first paid gig was at age 15,
and I've been doing it ever since in different forms. Technical
writing, and the management of technical projects to make smoother, so
we can all get done with the job and go home early.
I had always thought I would be more attracted to sticking with a job
for the long-term, but I've found that good situations like that are
rare. I'm not against it. I end up being more of a cowboy because
everytime I get a department working smoothly, or find a place in a
smoothly running department, they hire some idiot with an MBA who comes
in with some "progressive changes" that amount to more grind and less
effective documentation.
I'm in this profession to write effective documentation, because I
believe it's like well-written software: it makes lives better.
I'm considering getting an MBA so I can start fixing departments for
the long term, and busting heads when some idiot walks in the door with
a trend that will make everyone miserable.
--- "McLauchlan, Kevin" <Kevin.Mc...@safenet-inc.com> wrote:
> In other words, hardly anybody will be willing to work 40-hour weeks
> at
> the same job, for years at a time, becoming intimately familiar with
> a
> particular industry and company and all the peripheral stuff that we
> boomers do almost unconsciously while devoting our faculties to the
> "real" part of the job.
> In other words, jobs will need to become plug'n'play because the
> worker
> who is doing a job today wasn't here yesterday, and might not be here
> tomorrow.
http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/
technical writing | consulting | development
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
McLauchlan, Kevin
> -----Original Message-----
On Behalf Of Melissa Nelson
>
> While I agree with a lot of this post...after my divorce I worked my
way
> through a bachelors and masters degree doing this.....
>
> shifts at elder-care facilities, helping the robots that do most of
the
> lifting and cleaningof our (boomers') failing bodies.
>
> Four years in a nursing home for $9 an hour..way, way, way, way, way
> tougher than my technical writing job, for a lot less money! Believe
me no
> one does this for long without a work ethic! This is also something a
> robot could not do!
My interim point in that paragraph was that, while robots might not be
doing that stuff now, they soon will, simply because there won't _be_
enough able bodies (at $9/hr or considerably more) to do the heavy
lifting and yucky cleaning). The demographic pressure will provide
incentive to create (and buy) machinery to assist hospital workers in
handling heavy, inert patients. It already exists to some extent, but
mostly as early-adopter, high-priced equipment.
As demand rises, and the next couple of generations of equipment come to
market, they'll be cheaper, smaller, lighter, more flexible/adaptable,
and smarter.
The job that you had will exist only in the bottom-end facilities. In
the more expensive places, the job will consist of supervising machines.
The people who supervise the machines will form unions/guilds/coalitions
to limit access and forestall salary erosion, as the machines rapidly
become more autonomous and need less-qualified overseers/operators.
Meanwhile, the boomers who remain lucid enough to vote will be voting to
open up those jobs to the semi-literate, in order to lower some of the
costs of their own eldercare.
They'll be glad of the secret ballot - when union-busting politicians
win election and open the robot-overseer jobs to "unqualified"
competition, the individual boomer (frail and decrepit) will be able to
lie smoothly that "Oh no, I would never vote to undercut your pay, dear.
You've been such a godsend to me as I lie trapped in this decaying husk
of a body.
No, that must have been some other foolish bunch of voters. Please don't
hurt me, or withhold the food again!"
Ahem.
People keep telling me that I should write fiction.
Laura Lemay
> Plenty of new kids have a fine work ethic, but without the "dedication"
> to a career or employer. Instead, they'll work at what pleases them and
> take short-term jobs when they need extra money. So, think of somebody
> running a pottery shop during tourist season, because they like it, then
> closing shop and taking a couple of temp jobs over the winter, just to
> get by... between ski vacations... or stints working as ski-hill
> facilities, helping the robots that do most of the lifting and cleaning
> of our (boomers') failing bodies.
(tsk) Kids today!
I remember much of that same advice being said about my generation,
Generation X. We were lazy, slackers, we didn't want to put in our
dues, we were selfish, we had no sense of company loyalty, we had short
attention spans, and only wanted to work on things that made us happy.
We were working strings of temp jobs and moving back in with our
parents. We were going to be difficult to manage ("herding cats" yup,
that nuggest again) and making us get any work done at all was going to
be a real problem. Death of industry predicted.
GenX is now 40+ and industry isn't dead yet. Industry seems to be going
on pretty much the way it has all along. I predict that the current
generation will do just fine in the workforce too.
Laura
dancing with myself
Chesler, Lynn
1. US workers used to have relative job security, but in the 80's?
companies began laying off loyal workers with the prevailing winds.
Therefore, many younger workers cut their teeth in an era when job hopping
became the norm through no fault of their own. You have to constantly
reinvent yourself when you're laid off every few years. Eventually,
self-preservation trumps company loyalty.
2. Younger workers who are not supporting families can change jobs and
careers more freely because steady pay is less important to them. When we
get older, well, I can only speak for myself, but... As the sole support
for my family, the lack of job security in the current climate scares me
to death.
Lynn
(A boomer who is willing to put up with some boredom on the job in
exchange for a decent and steady income to help me raise my family.)
(tsk) Kids today!
Laura
dancing with myself
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList
True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as lche...@auspicecorp.com.
To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-u...@lists.techwr-l.com
or visit
http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/lchesler%40auspicecorp.
com
Chris Borokowski
important enough to be icing on the cake, but perhaps gumdrops in the
corners).
In every generation, most people are going to be kind of lazy,
disorganized, and so on. We don't remember them thirty years on,
because they fade into the wallpaper. We remember the successes, and I
don't mean just monetary successes, but people who were able to fulfill
a role or task with grace and accuracy.
Generation X, and whatever this new generation is called, are bringing
something good with them, and that's a mindset that work needs to
balance a healthy life. They don't like busy work. They like meaningful
tasks.
I can't argue with that. I'm sure the best of them, thirty years on
(assuming civilization survives), will be remembered well.
In the meantime, the smartest of them are recognizing that they can
learn a lot from the seasoned oldtimers who aren't already so bitter,
burnt out and ungracious they have nothing good to say. I like how most
of the self-proclaimed curmudgeons on this list have secret hearts of
gold.
--- Laura Lemay <le...@lauralemay.com> wrote:
> I remember much of that same advice being said about my generation,
> Generation X. We were lazy, slackers, we didn't want to put in our
> dues, we were selfish, we had no sense of company loyalty, we had
> short
> attention spans, and only wanted to work on things that made us
> happy.
John Rosberg
seeking non-commodity employers (which, of course, intimates an employer
that likely doesn't create commodities), I disagree, a bit, on the
comments concerning Controlled Writing, DITA, et al.
While these techniques and tools certainly COULD be viewed as
simplifying the job to the point of interchangeable cogs, I do not think
this it would work. I tend to view these things a tools, a better
(perhaps) pipe wrench -- simply having the wrench will not help the
plumber know which pipe to whack.
In some organizations, the press of requirements (localization, among
others) simply to not allow for each of 20 writers to finely craft the
deliverables in a way that reflects the totality of their skills.
The use of Controlled Writing and DITA may be viewed as techniques that
can increase the writer's efficiency, lower the cost of localization,
increase the usability of the deliverables, in short, increase the
writer's value to the organization.
Two sides of the same coin, I suppose -- depends a great deal on how you
choose to look at it.
rosberg
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Borokowski [mailto:ath...@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, January 29, 2008 9:00 AM
To: tech...@lists.techwr-l.com
Subject: RE: permalancer
Or in other words, make it clear that ours is a knowledge-based
profession and that knowledge is stored in individuals. The idea of
workers as replaceable cogs is bad enough, but to deny the inequality
of experience, knowledge and basic intelligence among tech writers is
to doom us all to real boredom.
Although I like many of the ideas in Plain Language, Simplified
English, DITA, etc. a lot of what I see there is an attempt to make the
job more interchangeable cog-ish. That will chase away the real
communicators and ensure that all documentation is interchangeably
boring.
> I think I've just said: If you're a good TW, seek out non-commodity
> employers.
http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/
technical writing | consulting | development
________________________________________________________________________
____________
Chris Borokowski
because I, too, recognize the other side of the coin.
However, it's not how you choose to look at it -- both cases are true
at the same time. It's kind of like saying that eating cake is good OR
it makes you fat, when both are simultaneously true.
--- John Rosberg <jros...@interwoven.com> wrote:
> The use of Controlled Writing and DITA may be viewed as techniques
> that
> can increase the writer's efficiency, lower the cost of localization,
> increase the usability of the deliverables, in short, increase the
> writer's value to the organization.
>
> Two sides of the same coin, I suppose -- depends a great deal on how
> you
> choose to look at it.
http://technical-writing.dionysius.com/
technical writing | consulting | development
Melanie Blank
In my experience, the Project Plan, Customer Requirements, Functional
Requirements, various specification documents, and various levels of
Architecture documents have all been called for. And quite a few
others..........
I've worked with software development (as a Tech Writer/Editor, not as a
Developer) in a medical device software environment, where the required
documentation is extensive, but maybe the above would make sense in other
kinds of projects?
Mel
(Melanie B.)
Paul Hanson
There is an on-going discussion around here re: where types of documents should be stored. During the software development for a single project, these are the following types of documents that get created (not necessarily Word docs, some are Excel). Different people write them though sometimes there is an overlap:
Time & Cost estimates (T&C)
Requirements
Specs
Programmer Word doc that details the changes they actually made <called a "move sheet" around here>
The way things are now, using project 12345 as an example:
==> the T&C is in v:\as400tc\12000to12999\12345\12345.xls
==> The requirements doc is stored in i:\projects\12000 to 12999\12345\12345requirements.doc
==> The specs are stored in v:\as400sp\12000to12999\12345.doc <==no subfolder by project
==> The move sheets are stored in I:\move sheets\projects\12000to12999\PJ12345.doc <==no subfolder by project
I see an issue that you have to go to multiple places if you are researching a single project. The organization is by type of document instead of by project.
One of the ideas being kicked around <and I'll admit, strongly supported by me> is to create this:
a folder called I:\projects\12000to12999\12345
and within that folder to have all these types of documents - T&C, requirements, specs, and move sheets. You would have:
|
==> the T&C I:\projects\12000to12999\12345\12345.xls
==> The requirements I:\projects\12000to12999\1234512345requirements.doc
==> The specs I:\projects\12000to12999\12345\12345.doc
==> The move sheets I:\projects\12000to12999\12345\PJ12345.doc
|
Another element is that our network drives i:\ and v:\ are being consolidated into a single network drive. My opinion is that, as a part of that consolidation, documents in these various locations would be moved into a single directory structure.
I guess the question becomes: at your company, are these types of documents based upon document type or project number? Obviously, you don't have to agree that a single directory structure is your preferred way to go so if you don't agree, please back up your opinion with a convincing argument.
Paul Hanson
Technical Writer
RoboHelp ACE - http://www.adobe.com/support/forums/team_macromedia/robohelp.html
Quintrex Data Systems http://www.quintrex.com
email: phanson at quintrex.com
hls...@comcast.net
by project rather than by type of document.
Every project starts with the same standard folder structure.
Some folders are pre-populated with an assortment of templates,
samples or description.txt files (what is the purpose of this folder)
as needed.
Not every project uses every folder, but this way everyone knows
what to expect and every document has a pre-ordained home.
Also, seeing the folders and starter files are a gentle reminder to
create various artifacts in the course of working on a project.
I've also found it useful to look at another project's files to get a better
handle on what to create, how to do it, where to put it, etc.
--
---------------hls...@comcast.net
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Paul Hanson <pha...@Quintrex.com>
> Melanie's post triggered something...
>
> SNIP>
McLauchlan, Kevin
Each project gets a sharepoint directory, and is also assigned a Product
Life Cycle (PLC-xxxxxxxx-....) number with an abbreviated title stuck on
the end of the number.
The SharePoint web page has a frame to one side with useful and timely
links, such as explanations of the process, explanations of the
numbering and nomenclature system, who's-who, etc.
It's actually not bad, especially since we're developing strong
processes and have very good project managers with tireless whip-hands
to ensure that up-to-date versions of all such docs are usually
available... and now we know where they live (the docs, I mean). Wanna
see my whip scars? :-)
Barbara Vega
We are looking at a new way to do our TOC
We use Flare BTW. (That has little/nothing to do with post).
At any rate, my boss is a fan of the way MSDN does theirs. On MSDNs, you
start at a high level for the first topic, which has a "+" sign to the
left, You can click on the "+" signs and drill down to successively
lower topics to get to the "ground floor: topic. Depending on the topic
being discussed, there are varying ways of presenting the material; you
may have links of topics, you may have tables, or charts, or white
papers, etc.
It is, as you may expect, quite dense.
My feeling is it is too dense, and a bit overkill for our software, even
though our software is very complex (knowledge base information
management software)
Anyway - you can check out msdn's software at the library section of
their site at http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/default.aspxthe
- the left hand side of the page
Can you point me to other types of - perhaps similar tocs but not quite
so dense that I can take a look at? I know Microsoft was doing something
with Vista then bagged it and then - I can't remember - and I am out of
the loop -
Thanks
Barbara Vega
Documentation Department
Liberty IMS
Costa Mesa, CA
"This message is for the named person's use only. It may contain confidential, proprietary
or legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege is waived or lost by any
mistransmission. If you receive this message in error, please immediately delete it and all
copies of it from your system, destroy any hard copies of it and notify the sender. You must
not, directly or indirectly, use, disclose, distribute, print, or copy any part of this
message if you are not the intended recipient.
If you receive this communication in error, please notify us immediately by telephone (collect)
at (714) 751-6900 and return the original message to us at the above listed address via electronic
mail. We will reimburse you for telephone expenses involved. Thank you."
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scanning of this message and addition of this footer is performed by SurfControl Email Filter
software in conjunction with McAffee virus detection software.
Pro TechWriter
I guess it depends on how the users will want to use the material. Will they
be looking up a reference? Or solving a problem, or getting education about
a topic? Is the material oriented to different roles within an organization?
Specific to areas or disciplines? Or task specific?
Usually I start there: What does the user need to do? For my last position,
the policies and procedures were accessed under different conditions, by
different roles, and for different reasons. Some topics changed infrequently
(state regulations), and others had up-to-the-minute changes (federal
disaster area declarations). Some topics were organizational and not
germain to everyone.
To give an example, there were "entry paths" in the TOC that were related to
each state (Arizona, California, etc.), and then another path for "Disaster
declarations." These both made use of the same content, but the user didn't
need to know that. There was only one copy of each topic, but it was
referenced in two places (or more, depending).
The TOC also had entry paths by role and department, because a loan officer
and an underwriter don't always need the same information, because their
jobs are different. Where a topic intersected, or was needed in both places,
it was linked to, and displayed in, both places.
It's nice to look at an information access schema that someone else uses as
a starting point, but the most important thing to know is how *your* users
will want to access the data. Its' good that you are asking the question.
The top-down, general-to-specific approach, IMHO, is great for reference
material like dictionaries, or leisurely learning a task that is broken down
from a general overview to steps, but this may not work for other
applications. It would drive me nuts if I need to know (right now) what the
steps are to enter and report on some thing or another. I would want the
steps, period, so I could get on with my day.
I hope this helps :-)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Create HTML or Microsoft Word content and convert to Help file formats or
> printed documentation. Features include support for Windows Vista & 2007
> Microsoft Office, team authoring, plus more.
> http://www.DocToHelp.com/TechwrlList<http://www.doctohelp.com/TechwrlList>
>
> True single source, conditional content, PDF export, modular help.
> Help & Manual is the most powerful authoring tool for technical
> documentation. Boost your productivity! http://www.helpandmanual.com
>
> ---
> You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as pro.tec...@gmail.com.
>
> To unsubscribe send a blank email to
> techwr-l-u...@lists.techwr-l.com
> or visit
> http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/pro.techwriter%40gmail.com
>
>
> To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr...@lists.techwr-l.com
>
> Send administrative questions to ad...@techwr-l.com. Visit
> http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.
>
>
--
"Life is short, but there is always time enough for courtesy."
- Ralph Waldo Emerson
getlegal....@gmail.com
>
Your job is more than just a way to pay your bills--if you are like most of us, it's where you spend most of your time when you are not at home. So it's important that it not become a place that you fear to go, either because of concerns about you safety, or worries about harassment or unfair treatment. One of the best ways to protect your rights is by learning as much as you can about the laws and procedures governing the workplace.
http://public.getlegal.com/legal-info-center/employment-law/