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.
Please explain your point a bit more, I am interested.
Maybe I have fallen behind...
I have been thinking lately, "Who are the readers on this list?"
The traffic seems to be very light, when compared to the good old days.
Take care!
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 9:01 AM, Rick Lippincott <rjl6955 -at- gmail -dot- com> wrote:
> We should probably note for the benefit of
> the majority of readers on this list, in the context of this discussion
> Ed's use of the word "contractor" is very different from the normal tech
> comm usage.
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jun 29, 2015, at 9:37 PM, Ed <glassnet -at- gmail -dot- com> wrote:
>
> There are two major contractor employment bins, in my opinion. One bin has
> contractors directly supporting the mission, or the building of weapons
> systems. The other bin is filled with contractors who support the logistics
> efforts of DoD. In bin #1 your job is stable so long as DoD and foreign
> military sales are growing. In bin #2 much of the effort is duplicative,
> and has to be done that way because of the inefficiencies that naturally
> occur with big gov't and their dealing with contractors. I suspect bin #2
> has seen more cuts.
>
> The trend for the last decade is fewer DoD contractor employees.
>
>http://www.politico.com/story/2014/08/defense-industry-shrinking-110321.html
> There are pockets of strength in tech writing (DC, SD, etc.) but the trend
> is moving away from the pay that writers were making. Now the branches are
> a bit smarter, and getting that work done (or not done) by cheaper labor.
> There's also a shift away form the big companies to smaller ones, meaning
> fewer benefits. Some of the larger companies created new divisions so
> different benefits could be offered. The executive largesse is supposedly
> smaller, too.
>
> Another very significant point is that if you are coming out of service
> with relevant experience with combat systems, logistics, etc., then the new
> jobs are yours.
>
> There are also federal workforce reductions to contend with. If you are a
> federal worker who is subject to that, then you get first pick of many of
> the GS openings.
>
> The good news is that as one industry closes doors, others are ticking
> upward.
>
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 2:49 PM, Rick Lippincott <rjl6955 -at- gmail -dot- com>
> wrote:
>
>> Well...yes and no.
>>
>> Up tempo operations often translate into higher requirements for
>> maintenance, inspection, repair, and modification instructions...both
>> during and after the operations.
>>
>>
>>
>> -Rick Lippincott
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> > On Jun 29, 2015, at 1:13 PM, Robert Lauriston <robert -at- lauriston -dot- com>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > The job market for defense-sector tech writers is not very closely
>> > related to how much actual military action going on. It's tied more to
>> > R&D spending.
>> >
>> > Some defense industries cross over into civilian markets. For example,
>> > in the next ten years there will probably be a lot more jobs for tech
>> > writers documenting drone applications and infrastructure for the
>> > civilian market, since that's poised for exponential growth as
>> > regulations open up opportunities.
>> >
>> > On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 9:12 AM, Sean Brierley
>> > <sean -dot- brierley -at- gerberscientific -dot- com> wrote:
>> >> With wars looming in Iran and North Korea, not to mention a strong
>> >> possibility of troops going into Iraq to fight Isil? I'm sure the
>> defense
>> >> industry has plans to keep business strong. The question is, are
>> technical
>> >> communicators part of that future, or overhead?
>> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> > Learn more about Adobe Technical Communication Suite (2015 Release) |
>> http://bit.ly/1FR7zNW
>> >
>
>
--
Ed
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Learn more about Adobe Technical Communication Suite (2015 Release) | http://bit.ly/1FR7zNW
