TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
The same argument can be made against extending benefits to family members.
I don't use the gym here; I could argue against the upcoming expenditure for
the new sound system for the room. Non-drinkers could complain about the
beer fridge in our lunchroom. And so on.
I think the trick is to have enough benefits to be able to say, "Okay, you
don't use daycare, but you do use the company car and the single-mom
secretary doesn't. You don't use the gym, but you do have prescription
My ex's former employer used flex dollars to allow employees to "buy"
benefits. The usage was a little odd in that employees with dependents got
more flex dollars, but they were restricted to "purchasing" the more
expensive family options for coverage.
Anyway, this is getting off-topic.
Cheers ... Kim
kim -dot- roper -at- vitana -dot- com
From: Elizabeth Ross [mailto:beth -at- vcubed -dot- com]
Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2000 5:18 PM
To: Kim Roper; TECHWR-L
Subject: Re: "atmospheric" benefits
This is where it gets tricky and political. Some would argue that on-site
daycare is an extra benefit that people with children receive, while
co-workers who remain childless don't get anything comparable. Considering
the cost of daycare, this is not an insignificant outlay. Is it fair? Why or
why not? Is it something we should be aware of as we moving up in the ranks
from writer to manager?
I am genuinely undecided on the issue, having heard some really good
arguments from both sides.
Senior Technical Writer, V3 Semiconductor Corp.
mailto: beth -at- vcubed -dot- com http://www.vcubed.com
Cogito cogito ergo cogito sum.
> From: Kim Roper <kim -dot- roper -at- vitana -dot- com>
> Reply-To: Kim Roper <kim -dot- roper -at- vitana -dot- com>
> Date: Wed, 8 Nov 2000 13:10:54 -0500
> To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
> Subject: RE: "atmospheric" benefits
> This isn't very imaginative, but on-site daycare would be good for me,
> especially when we're close to deadline. Of course, this would require
> my seven-year-old be shuttled from school to my workplace, as well.
Sponsored by SOLUTIONS, Conferences and Seminars for Communicators
Publications Management Clinic, TECH*COMM 2001 Conference, and more http://www.SolutionsEvents.com or 800-448-4230
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.