Re: Rates

Subject: Re: Rates
From: Gene Kim-Eng <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>
To: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 10:56:51 -0700

Yes. Whether you choose not to apply, for any reason, or send in an
application that is excluded, for any reason, or apply, take the interviews
and then turn down or not get the job, for any reason, the result is the
same. You don't go to work for that employer, in that job. So the question
is always how much time and effort applying will require vs the potential
gain or loss of getting or not getting the job, and the criteria for
answering that question varies with the individual, the situation and the

In my case I would not apply for a job that is something I don't want to do
or that lists a very low salary, but I wasn't talking about those issues. I
was talking about applying or not applying if the application requires a
salary history. I don't consider that alone sufficient cause to not spend
15 minutes filling out an application for a job that could otherwise be
suitable. YMMV.

Gene Kim-Eng

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Robart, Kay <Kay -dot- Robart -at- tea -dot- state -dot- tx -dot- us>wrote:

> I fail to understand your comparison. If you read a job advertisement
> that has something in it you don't want to do or that lists a very low
> salary, do you see not applying for that advertisement as the same as
> being excluded? I don't think so.

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.

You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit

To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:


Re: Rates: From: David Neeley
Re: Rates: From: Gene Kim-Eng
RE: Rates: From: Pinkham, Jim
RE: Rates: From: Robart, Kay
Re: Rates: From: Gene Kim-Eng
RE: Rates: From: Robart, Kay

Previous by Author: Re: Rates
Next by Author: Re: Rates
Previous by Thread: RE: Rates
Next by Thread: RE: Rates

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads