A few more words on the job market

[Dick Margulis <margulis -at- fiam -dot- net>]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Undeliverable Mail
Date: 	Fri, 5 Sep 2003 18:49:25 -0400
From: 	Postmaster <postmaster -at- mail -dot- fiam -dot- net>
To: 	<margulis -at- fiam -dot- net>



Delivery failed 20 attempts: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com


Original message follows.

Folks,

In the heat of the moment the other day I had some comments to add to the 
job market thread, but neither of the two messages I wrote made it to 
the techwr-l server. So here they are, combined and edited. 

The first time I posted this it bounced also. So maybe the third time is the charm. Mostly this is just a test to see if I can post again. 

My impression is that when companies advertise that they want in-state 
or local applicants, what they're really saying is that (a) they won't 
pay relocation; (b) they want someone who can start pretty soon (not 
after a month of house-hunting, in other words); and (c); they want to 
be able to say "this isn't working out" after a few weeks without a lot 
of recriminations about the relocation expense incurred by the employee.

So if you can reassure a company on those three points ("I'm going to be 
staying with my sister to start and then I'll find my own place after 
we're sure this is going to work out," for example), a reasonable 
employer should consider your application.

One other thing that has not been brought up in this or the parent 
(India) thread:

Since the advent of economic civilization, people have migrated for 
employment opportunities. There is no natural right to stay where you 
are, continue to do the kind of work you are accustomed to, and continue 
to be paid as well as you used to be paid. Millions of people every year 
migrate for a better opportunity or a lower cost of living, whether from 

[message truncated]




---
[This E-mail scanned for viruses at mail.fiam.net]