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.
Rebecca wrote:
...
> In this case, as sensitive to the gender issues as I am, the legal clarity
> of the term MUST take priority, and the gender-sensitive term
> would HAVE to be clearly defined, because it is non-standard.
>
> So in short, whoever it was who started all of this, I'd
> check with your legal counsel to find out their take on the situation.
> Because it really could have dire legal ramifications if handled wrong.
I might suggest that the term "man-month" might lack legal clarity as well.
Considering issues like holidays and length of work day, I would not sign
a contract expressed in "man-months" without clarification. That clarification
might be a definition in a labor law dictionary or something, I Am Not A
Lawyer, and I don't know. But I'd want that clarification.
---
Office:
mike -dot- huber -at- software -dot- rockwell -dot- com
Home:
nax -at- execpc -dot- com
