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.
Subject:Re: So many jobs want CURRENT security clearances From:"Bonnie Granat" <bgranat -at- editors-writers -dot- info> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Wed, 13 Aug 2003 12:58:34 -0400
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Plato" <gilliankitty -at- yahoo -dot- com>
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Sent: August 13, 2003 12:37 PM
Subject: Re: So many jobs want CURRENT security clearances
>
> "Bonnie Granat" <bgranat -at- editors-writers -dot- info> wrote
>
> > Who said anything about not having the skills? Even a quick reading of my
> > initial post and subsequent comments will show that I am talking about
> > security clearances, not skills.
>
> Its essentially the same problem. Security clearance, like skills, are job
> requirements. And the employer has the right to set those requirements to
> whatever they want (provided EOE laws aren't broken). There isn't much you
can
> do about that.
Nobody is disputing their right to do it. I know that there is nothing I can
do about it.
>
> I understand that its frustrating that there are a lot of jobs with tough
> requirements, but that doesn't mean those requirements should be relaxed.
The requirement that one already possess a security clearance is an unfair
requirement. That is precisely the point of my post. They should permit
otherwise qualified people to *get* clearances.
>
> While this might have some effect on unemployment, consider it from the
> employers perspective. They want the best people possible at the lowest
price.
> This is an employers' market right now, so it makes sense for them to set
the
> bar fairly high, since there are plenty of people with security clearance
> looking for work.
That is why I posted my lament.
>
> If you think this is an important "skill" to possess, then look into
obtaining
> such clearance. Surely there are government jobs available that do not
require
> such clearance, but will give you the opportunity to obtain such clearance.
>
No. That's not how clearances are obtained. You only get them when you NEED
them to do your job.
