Re: Acceptable salary levels

["Susan W. Gallagher" <sgallagher -at- STARBASECORP -dot- COM>]

> In article <3f3q1u$npm -at- newsbf02 -dot- news -dot- aol -dot- com>, <cjbenz -at- aol -dot- com> writes:
> > Path:
> > Regarding STC's salary survey, I just found the results too vague and
> > statistically insignificant to be of much value. I doubt, too, that the
> > survey is in any way statistically valid given that:
> > 1) Less than 5% of the membership responded.
> > 2) The responses were returned only by those people who chose to do so.
> >
> > Also, because the survey was limited to STC members, the results, at best,
> > can only reflect the salaries of STC members. Do STC members make more or
> > less money on average? Who knows?
> >
> <snip>
> >
> > I noticed, BTW, that 98% of U.S. Writers/Editors received health-insurance
> > benefits. It certainly sounds to me like the majority of survey
> > respondents were full-time employees. Maybe they were the only ones who
> > could afford the time to fill out the survey! (No offense intended to
> > full-time employees; just pointing out a potential statistical flaw...)
> >
I took part in the STC salary survey this year. The reason that 98%
of the respondents look like full-time employees is because they are.
The first two questions determine that, and if you don't pass this
initial test, you don't get to fill in the rest of the survey. Guess
that's why the call it a **salary** survey and not an **income**
survey ;-)

BTW, the week after I responded to the survey I got a raise! I guess
I should have procrastinated just a little longer.

Sue Gallagher
StarBase Corp, Irvine, CA
sgallagher -at- starbasecorp -dot- com