Quality vs. Quantity (was Roadblock...)

[Melissa Morgan <mmorgan -at- CDG-HARGRAY -dot- COM>]

Alice said:
>Considering that you only have two years experience (and no degree), I
think
>that you are inflating the idea of what you should be making per year.

I'm not too keen on the idea that years of experience should neccesarily
determine wages. I have encountered several technical writers who have
more than five years experience, and rather poor skills (seriously, an
interviewee at my previous job turned in a writing sample that she called
a user guide, but it was just an outline with some goofy icons and she
had 7 years consulting experience!). What I'm getting at is that someone
with two years experience could possibly have skills that meet or exceed
the skills of another with five years.

In addition, someone with industry-specific experience (even if only one
year) might be entitled to a higher wage than someone with no experience
in the specific industry, but say four years experience in another
industry.
There are so many things to consider that I think it is hard to respond
clearly to ANON's posting. I would not want to jump to conclusions about
inflation of earning potential, because ANON may be a real smart cookie.
So, my point is basically that basing salary potential solely on years of
experience is not as cut-and-dried as it would seem. Does anyone else
agree? I wonder how employers see it vs. how employees see it. For
example, would anyone apply for a job in which you did not meet the
minimum for years of experience, but for which you had industry-specific
experience? Food for thought.

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Melissa Morgan
mmorgan -at- cdg-hargray -dot- com

The opinions expressed here are my own, and are not neccesarily
my employer's.

"Mark my words...," said the programmer to the Tech Writer

 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=