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: The Lessons of ValuJet 592 From:Jane Credland <circe -at- ULTRANET -dot- CA> Date:Fri, 29 May 1998 08:59:51 -0500
At 12:00 PM 5/28/98 -0500, Tracy Boyington wrote in response to Wayne
Douglass:
>> I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV, but it sounds to me as if
>> somebody is off the hook since the warnings and procedures are documented.
>It sounds that way to me too, but that might only be because we're not
>lawyers. :-) What defines "documented?" Yes, the procedures were in
>writing, but I can see a lawyer trying to convince a jury that they
>weren't written to the right reading level, or didn't appear in enough
>places, yada yada yada.
Well, I'm not a lawyer either, although I spent more than a decade working
for them, but Tracy is right. There's a definite argument that warnings
and procedures can be documented up the ying yang, but if the worker can't
understand them, they might as well not exist. The documentation is a
mitigation of the company's damages, but it's not going to exonerate them
from responsibility. The documentation writers are going to come under
fire as well, with a lot of emphasis put on how much audience analysis they
did before writing the procedures.