"due to" issue

["Vollbach, Elizabeth" <evollbach -at- LOGICON -dot- COM>]

     Mark is right; "due" shouldn't be used when it is not modifying a
     noun.  This reminds me of a complaint I've had for years about
     incorrect contructions that we *have* to use in our documentation even
     though we know it's wrong.  For instance, the company you work for
     insists you use a boiler-plate paragraph throughout its user guide
     that contains some incorrect constructions.  You want to rewrite it
     but, even though that's why they hired you, they won't let you.
     "That's the way we've always done it," they say or something similar.
     So when you interview with other prospective employers, do you show
     them this as an example of your work?  I sure don't.

     I've been in this predicament for years.  I've found that regardless
     of where I work, there's always that question, do I keep this as an
     example of *my* work even though it contains things I wouldn't have
     written if I had had a choice?  Or if I was an editor, editing someone
     else's writing, sometimes that didn't really show *my* work, either.

     Sure, I've listened to suggestions that I create something on my own
     to show off.   Come on; in the real world that just doesn't work when
     you've been a tech writer and editor for 15 years unless, maybe,
     you're looking for a DTP job.  I even found, after I graduated from
     college, that didn't usually work.  They didn't care.  It was just a
     kind of cute thing to do.

     Actually, even though I guess it sounds like it, I'm not looking for
     advice.  Just spouting off.  I've found very good jobs with companies
     that didn't even bother to look at writing samples, just considered my
     resume and spoke with my references.

     :-)
     Beth Vollbach
     San Diego, CA