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.
I agree with both positions to a degree. I took a "lowball" contract
between full-time jobs, and while it kept the lights on, it also ate
into other opportunities I was able to land at about twice (if not
more) the rate. It actually hindered me from taking on some of these
more substantial gigs.
If you feel you need to take a lowball offer to stay solvent, then by
all means do so. But, through experience (mine and that of those I
know) I can say that taking a lower wage just to stay afloat may not
always be the best option, and can create problems over time. Rather
than scratch at what you can get, it may (also) be a good time to
start thinking about what you want.
On a side note, a friend of mine had a very good paying engineering
job that he absolutely hated. He decided to save as much as possible
once the hint of layoffs started floating through the office. When he
was laid off, he took time to figure out exactly what to do, living
off unemployment and savings. He decided to switch gears completely
and intern, for free, at a brewery. He is now about to go to the
Siebel Institute of Technology for a formal degree in brewing science
on the remainder of his savings, and has decided to downscale his life
accordingly until he's up and running as a paid brewer. And, he's
never been happier.
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 9:09 AM, john rosberg <john_rosberg -at- hotmail -dot- com> wrote:
> Tony Chung wrote:
> "Don't take this the wrong way, Keith, but that logic is flawed. To
> accept a poverty wage just because you need work makes it difficult
> for the entire industry to remain competitive. Employers will ask why
> bother hiring a contractor at $40-100/hour when they can hire
> experienced people for $20/hour?"
> While I understand Mr Chung's thought process, I do not agree with it.
> The OP needs income to maintain his life -- many of us have been there. I would suggest that he (the OP) negotiate a better rate, taking into account all the expenses noted in the many posts in this thread. Doubling what he called the "hourly rate" would be a good ballpark in which to start.
> While I think we all owe ourselves, our clients, and our profession the best work we can deliver, suggesting that we are responsible to each other for the maintenance of a specific compensation level is, in my opinion, mistaken.
Create and publish documentation through multiple channels with Doc-To-Help.
Choose your authoring formats and get any output you may need. Try
Doc-To-Help, now with MS SharePoint integration, free for 30-days. http://www.doctohelp.com
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-