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.
Subject:RE: So many jobs want CURRENT security clearances From:eric -dot- dunn -at- ca -dot- transport -dot- bombardier -dot- com To:MList -at- chrysalis-its -dot- com, TECHWR-L -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com Date:Wed, 13 Aug 2003 16:22:44 -0400
MList -at- chrysalis-its -dot- com wrote on 08/13/2003 04:08:50 PM:
>
> Are there actually workable procedures where a person
> can simply request a form at the FBI (USA), RCMP/CSIS (Canada)
> or other (your country, whoever you are), and the clearance
> process just automatically procedes until they receive a certificate
> of some sort to wave in the faces of prospective
> employers? Does that
> process have a user fee that's manageable by an unemployed writer
> or editor who's simultaneously trying to keep the family fed and
> sheltered?
> Isn't one of the clearance sticking points... being unemployed?
Whether there are or aren't workable processes to get the required
clearances is a side issue. If the only way to find someone to fill the
position is poach them from a current employer too bad for the unemployed.
Even during the boom years the best way to get a new job was to work for
the competition of the place you wanted to work. It's the first place they
went looking for new hires.
If there is nobody that can possibly have the required clearances and
no-one will ever be found, why sweat it? Do you want to work for a company
that sets impossible objectives and expectations?