TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Ask them specifically what they want insured and make sure it's E&O, then
check with your insurance broker. Often, clients will say "E&O" but they
really mean business liability. Huge cost difference. Also check the
Writer's Guild (someone correct me if I'm wrong or outdated) --- they used
to offer more reasonably priced E&O insurance.
I did have a client that wanted E&O a number of years ago. They were a good
client, so I decided to jump through the hoops (there were other silly
requirements as well; and then I got dumped by them in a "no contractor
edict" a few weeks later, but that's another story!) I built the cost of the
insurance into my rates for them (I figured the number of hours I typically
worked from them and spread the cost of the insurance through those hours to
come up with the rate increase. Don't just give the money away.
I suppose it puts us in a bad position, but I haven't found it has changed
my ways much. I always archive reviews and emails with the final project,
and there's a trail of email reminders that say, "review whatever it is and
get it back to me by blah-blah date." If I don't get a response, I make sure
I let everyone know that a) I can't release because I didn't get final
approval, or b) you said it's OK to release without final approval. I want
to have this information even if it just goes to a "he said, she said" match
(which, by the way, it never has in my 13 years in business), which is more
likely than a court case.
As far as keeping everything, I find it interesting that a large auditing
firm I do work for shreds and deletes everything except the final papers and
conclusions. I think it's on the belief that too much information will do
you more harm than good; if there is no proof, it's their word against
yours. It makes me think I should just scrap stuff instead of archiving, but
I can't bring myself to shred months of work. (Yes, still trying to part
with those 23 year old college class notes, too! A little bit at a time...)
-----Original Message-----
From: bounce-techwr-l-199665 -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
[mailto:bounce-techwr-l-199665 -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com] On Behalf Of
Siliconwriter
Sent: Monday, May 02, 2005 11:35 AM
To: TECHWR-L
Subject: Re: Liability insurance
On Thursday, April 28, 2005, at 07:29 AM, Sherry Michaels wrote:
> It becomes an issue of "picking your spot." If you don't want the work
> or the request is too onerous, move to the next gig or get with an
> agency that handles that stuff.
To a certain extent for me, it's a matter of principle. This really sucks.
It's really unfair and unreasonable for a writer, who has NO way to force
management to review her work, to bear all the burden for errors and
omissions. A friend of mine put it well:
"...this requirement does seem to place the tech writer (especially) in a
bad position. I think it forces the writer to become a lawyer/accountant and
keep everything. It means the writer needs to make reviewers sign everything
they review and also sign a paper if they did not review material when
requested or if they did not review the material on time. In addition, all
roadblocks to information gathering, however slight, would have to be
reported up the food chain to CYA. All reviews would have to be kept on file
to CYA. Same goes for all emails. And if anything that is not crystal clear
to the writer cannot be 100 percent "unmuddied," every effort to clarify the
information will have to be well documented so that the writer can show at
least "reasonable effort" to make it right, and show that the SMEs did not
provide the necessary information despite numerous efforts to obtain it.
This will slow down the process because many pieces of information will need
to be confirmed by multiple sources for CYA purposes. This will impact the
speed with which any documentation may be produced because a significant
amount of time for bookkeeping will be necessary."
Sarah Stegall munchkyn at munchkyn dot com
WEBWORKS FINALDRAFT - EDIT AND REVIEW, REDEFINED
Accelerate the document lifecycle with full online discussions and unique feedback-management capabilities. Unlimited, efficient reviews for Word
and FrameMaker authors. Live, online demo: http://www.webworks.com/techwr-l
---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archiver -at- techwr-l -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Send administrative questions to lisa -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.techwr-l.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.
