RE: So many jobs want CURRENT security clearances

Subject: RE: So many jobs want CURRENT security clearances
From: John Posada <JPosada -at- book -dot- com>
To: 'Bonnie Granat' <bgranat -at- editors-writers -dot- info>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2003 16:18:12 -0400

Bonnie..I agreed with your original premise. However, I think it is starting
to get diluted.

First, I agree with the statement, whoever introduced it, that there are no
rules (except legal ones), on what an employer has the right to ask for, if
they can get it. If they want someone who already has a clearance, they
might know that a new clearance must be re-applied for (if that is correct
or not, I don't know or care), but I'd guess that a client would feel that
getting one for someone who had one is more assured (maybe not easier, but
more of a chance for success) than for one who has never had one before.

Second, it ISN'T it may not be for those looking for a job, but
pre-recession, I'm sure the employers felt it wasn't fair to have to pay $77
per hour for someone to write a medium size help's always not
fair to someone somewhere. (And no, it didn't stop me from asking for and
getting it).

Third, as far as right mind...if every position around me required that I
had to have a clearance, I WOULD take ANY job that would get it for me. Once
I had it, I'd take advantage of the best paying position that required me to
have it.

John Posada
Special Projects
Senior Technical Writer

This electronic mail message contains information that (a) is or may be
and (b) is intended only for the use of the addressee(s) named herein. If
you are not an
intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and take the steps
necessary to
delete the message completely from your computer system.

Not Intended as a Substitute for a Writing: Notwithstanding the Uniform
Electronic Transaction
Act or any other law of similar effect, absent an express statement to the
this e-mail message, its contents, and any attachments hereto are not
intended to represent
an offer or acceptance to enter into a contract and are not otherwise
intended to bind
this sender, llc, inc. or any other
person or entity.

Previous by Author: RE: Tech writing makes the front page
Next by Author: Cold calling by sectors, WAS: So many jobs...
Previous by Thread: Re: So many jobs want CURRENT security clearances
Next by Thread: Re: So many jobs want CURRENT security clearances

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

Sponsored Ads