Professionalism and pay (was RE: 'Know thy audience')

[Elizabeth J Allen]

Sadly, I document hardware. Semiconductors to be exact. I write  
reference manuals, datasheets, document pinouts, signal mapping, and  
register specs. I am very good at my job and have been called "the  
best technical writer we've ever worked with" by a previous employer  
(another semiconductor company). Documenting semiconductors is a  
fairly rare skill in the realm of technical writers.

But I am not, according to my employer, an engineer. Therefore I am  
perceived to be not as valuable as an engineer.

I have to wonder at the wisdom of a company that decrees that a level  
I engineer, straight out of university is inherently worth more in  
terms of compensation than an experienced technical writer.

Well, I can say the company has successful motivated me. I'm just not  
sure they want me to be motivated in this way.

Elizabeth
--
Elizabeth J. Allen
Samurai Consulting Inc.
eja at samurai.com

"Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler." —Albert  
Einstein


On 23-May-07, at 3:14 PM, Ned Bedinger wrote:

> This is correct--the skills that qualify as Tech Writing apparently
> range from copyediting to business analysis, system architecture,
> programming, technical expertise at the component level, and so on.  
> Tech
> writing skills are required in many other job descriptions. Hourly,
> staff, independent contractor or W2, it doesn't really matter. I think
> tech writers who are good at their job are perceived as professionals
> and are paid commensurately, and this submits to microeconomic
> explanations. The rarer skills are harder to find and better  
> compensated.
>
> But the fact that our job description can be codified into law as
> non-professional is a real and troublesome aspect of our quest for
> stature and standing in the business model.