Conference quark::human_relations-v1

    
    
    Boy, I'm really interested in hearing what other have to say, as
    this has been a question I've been asking myself for some time.
    
    Consider politicians and actors.  I heard a statistic that a major
    actor on one of the more popular sitcoms makes $65,000 PER EPISODE!
    That's more than I (and alot of people I know) make in a year! 
    And I'm sure that's not even considered "alot" in his profession.
    Who "decides" that an actor will make $900,000 in a year, but I,
    as a secretary, won't even make anywhere near that this year.  
                                                       
    I enjoy being a secretary, just as the actors, politicians, and
    singers enjoy doing their thing.  I get satisfaction out of what
    I'm doing, it's not a "glamour" job but I'm good at it.  Who sets
    these standards that say, in society's eyes, one person "deserves"
    to make an outrageous sum of money each year, but another person
    doesn't "deserve" it.  I know of people who work and work and work
    their entire lives, and just barely get by.  Then on the other end
    of the spectrum you have people who work for a few hours a week,
    for a few months out of the year, and after 3 or 4 years they're
    set financially for life.  Something doesn't seem quite right here.
    
    Do I have any solutions?  Nope.  But like .0, I'm interested to
    hear how others feel about/perceive this.
    
    Cherie
    
    Let's see a little 

    Re: .1
    
    >Who "decides" that an actor will make $900,000 in a year, but I,
    >as a secretary, won't even make anywhere near that this year.
    
    No one in particular.  It's the law of supply and demand coming
    into play.  There are a lot of secretaries.  There aren't a lot
    of actors with an established following to keep a show's ratings
    up and sell ad time.  (Politicians, of course, are an exception,
    being sort of self-regulated.)

	 it seems sometimes that earnings are based on the direct
	 impact a person has on the company/industry/nation.
	 Unfortunately some professions, such as
	 secretarial/manufacturing/etc don't have a perceived direct
	 impact on the company/industry/nation.  Whereas an
	 engineer/politian/actor seems to have a more direct impact.


	 I don't make the rules, I don't know.....just in my humble
	 observation.....

	 kath

    
    
      Y'know, I've always thought there should be a MAXIMUM wage law,
    just like there is a MINIMUM wage law.
    
      Nobody *deserves* a half a million dollars (or more) a year 
    especially when there are fellow countrymen working 10 times 
    as hard, day in and day out, and just barely getting by.
    
      What REALLY gets my goat is the people that make that enormous
    amount of money so love to show their mugs on TV to sing songs and 
    hold telethons in order to cajole the average person into donating 
    what little money they have to the charity thats fashionable for
    the moment.
    
    
    Dave

    As was said earlier, its supply and demand. If you don't think an
    actor is worth it, don't watch him (or her) and get lots of people
    who agree with you to do the same thing. When the ratings take a
    dive, I guarantee the network will not continue to pay that person
    $65K/episode. The same thing holds true for sporting events. If
    you don't go to games and don't watch televised games (hense lower
    ratings.....lower advertising rates.....stations won't pay the teams
    for the rights to the games...etc), then the overpayed players won't
    get the bucks. The only exceptions I can think of is when I pay
    someone for a job I won't do (like work on a roof). If I'm not willing
    to go up, then I have to pay someone, and usually what he wants.
    
    Eric

    Generally I am a read only but this topic hits a nerve....
    
    Personally I believe most actors and athletes *do* earn their salaries,
    there is a lot more involved to those professions than most people
    realize.  I don't think old Rocket (cry baby) Roger is worth 2.3 mil 
    but if he can get it all the power to him.....
    
    Politicians on the other hand....  pure scum.  Even when the public
    votes down their pay raises they still manage to get the increase.
    Why should I lose 1/3 of my salary to taxes when most of these fat cats
    don't pay a dime?  Where do they get off charging  the colleges $15k 
    for a 1 hour speach and then cutting educational funding?  A great
    example they set for our children.... scandal, lies and hypocrisy
    are the basis for success. 
    
    Yes, I do vote every year, on the issues!! I have yet to vote for
    an any official because there has not been one that has impressed
    me. 
    
    Excuse my flame, it must be tax time again!!!!

    there is a theory that I subscribe to that the LESS money a person
    makes, the more work that person does(or is expected to do).
    Conversly, the more a person makes, the less that person does....
    
    which is more improtant to an organization, the LESS person or the
    more person?
    
    Another theory is that no job or posistion is more important than
    another.  Jobs are not important, they are necessary.
    
    Having worked for a half dozen companies, as well as the Military,
    I know one thing,  I can do my job if my boss stays home.  But if
    my secretary stays home, I might just as well stay home too because
    that posistion is necessary for me to do my work.  
    
    Secretary is no longer a accurate term....administrative specialist
    is better.
    
    Do not judge your importance to an organization by the monetary
    value placed on the posistion.  like someone said earlier, supply
    and demand.  There are just more people out there after secretary
    jobs than there are after so called high level jobs. 
                                                        

    Please excuse any possible flame that may be interpreted here:
    
    I get really annoyed when I hear these hidden socialists trying
    to say that a person is not entitled to the money that person makes.
     I happen to believe in the free market system with its supply and
    demand.  The reason that some positions get paid less, such as
    secretaries, is that there are many people that can do the function
    or at least pieces of the function.  With supply up, the wage will
    go down.  In the case of the actor, there are not alot of people
    who can do that job.  With supply down, the wage goes up.
    
    This country is built on free enterprise.  Just because a person
    makes alot of money, that person is not scum.  Rik, in the base
    note, says that people making alot of money simply have put the
    rules in place to favor themselves.  I don't see how, with the
    exception of politicians, he can justify this.  A person who works
    hard, and rises the corporate ladder, deserves everything he earns.
     He WORKED hard for that money.  He has every right to flaunt it,
    if he so desires.
    
    Sometimes, pure jealousy clouds our visions.  But some people will
    not be happy until they have taken from the people who have been
    successful and given that to the less successful persons.  I don't
    believe in a MAXIMUM wage any more than I believe in a MINIMUM wage.
     If we were to place a cap on what a person could earn, then where
    would the incentive be to work harder?  Why should a person bother
    to risk all he owns to start a new company or come up with a new
    invention?  There would be no gain, because a cap has been placed
    on what he could earn.
    
    Let us stop trying to look like Russia, and just stay the way we
    are.  We have the best system in the world, and I am proud to be
    a part of it.
    
    Ed..
    

    The question of "riches vs 'rags'" is one of great antiquity--
    consider Jacob fleecing (pun, pun, for those with Bibical knowledge)
    Esau out of his birthright, leaving old Esau without anything
    to live on.  
    
    The basis of Utopian societies--especially the Shakers--where all
    worked and all were treated equally, was a going concern in the
    18th and 19th century.  Supposedly.  Even the
    Shakers had levels of hierarchy where some did more hand labor than
    others, and the perks were better.  I guess that could be translated
    today into some jock earning in one week what a woman supporting
    3 kids on a secretarial salary won't earn in a year.
    
    The "supply and demand" theory is absolute in this country, and
    it has its good side.  But I wonder how long the "supply and demand"
    is going to be justified when the lower paying jobs in the service
    industry are manned --as they too often are now-- by semi-illiterates
    without a strong desire to work their tushes off for minimum wage
    while they serve those who earn outrageous sums for doing what appears
    to be da*m little hard labor.
    
    Marilyn
    
    
    

    FYI, 85% of the members of Actors Equity (their union) are unemployed;
    auditioning for ANY part, waiting tables, taking classes, trying
    to work with their agents, and doing most anything while they wait
    for their big break.
    
    flame off
    Judi
    

    Every person living in a capitalist, free enterprise system is
    subjected to certain economic constraints.  These constraints (or laws)
    apply to every piece of raw material (manpower included), service, or
    process which occurs under such a system.  
    
    These constraints include: the law of supply and demand (as previously
    mentioned), the rules of "Value Added", the economics of scale, the
    balance of risk-to-payoff; of responsibility and authority, and the
    maximization of return on investment.
    
    Your salary follows these rules, not some arbitrary figure that
    "They" impose on you.
    
    You reap the benefits.  If you think that you're being taken advantage
    of then quit.  If you think that your Value Added justifies a
    higher salary then find someone who'll pay you more.  If you're
    willing to take a high risk for a high payoff then do it.  If your
    responsibilty outweighs your authority then do talk to your boss.
    
    The "make the rich pay" attitude I've seen in this topic displays a
    defeatist, self pitying, welfare state mentality which churns my gut.
    It's not the fact that CEOs make millions that upsets people with this
    type of mentality, it's the fact that they're not a CEO.
    
    Don't complain about a system which gives you the freedom to use your
    initiative, intelligence or perseverence to turn a profit just because
    your situation, state of mind or attitude prevent you from doing so. 
    You're not here for handouts.
    
    John Galt where have you gone?
    
    Kris
    
    

    Re .11, I seem to recall you telling me that your father paid your
    way through college.  So that is what you had going for you.  You
    were lucky enough to have a father with the money and the inclination
    to send you to college.  Rik wasn't.  It would be interesting to
    me to see your I.Q. scores side by side.  
    
    Several people here have referred to Rik as a socialist, as though
    it were an insult.  The fact is that Rik has made use of talents
    he was born with to better his position in the company.  (He has
    what might be called "the gift of gab" which is useful for an
    instructor, and also happens to be a fairly intelligent individual
    as well.)  His concern for less fortunate human beings is not a
    reflection of any supposed lack of effort on his part to make his
    way in life.  He has only a high school diploma and yet he has managed
    to achieve a WC 4 job in the company.  It's not as though he were
    cleaning the bathrooms or emptying the waste baskets.
    
    Anyway, now that I'm done sticking up for a friend.  (You're welcome.
     It was nothing.)
    
    The fact that secretaries are grossly underpaid is not simply because
    of the laws of supply and demand.  It is the result of the sexist
    society we have lived in.  Secretaries are underpaid because it
    is a profession that has been overwhelmingly dominated by women.
     All professions that have been dominated by women are still underpaid
    in our society ..... secretary, nurse, librarian, school teacher,
    social worker, child care.  Our society has consistently valued
    whatever men have to offer in the way of labor more than that of
    women.  For the most part, the only women who are earning the same
    as men today are those women who have broken into the male dominated
    fields - engineer, doctor, dentist, lawyer, manager, truck driver,
    electrician, plumber, dock worker, carpenter, mechanic.  If supply
    and demand was the only issue, why are nurses grossly underpaid
    compared to doctors?  It is because most nurses are women and most
    doctors are men.
    
    Our society was set up for men to be the breadwinners and for women
    to get married, stay home and take care of the kids.  The only women
    who were expected to work were spinsters or widows or women whose
    husbands had abandoned them.  They were steered towards the more
    menial jobs because the white men intended to keep all positions
    of power for themselves.  It hasn't been many years since the argument
    for paying a man more than a woman was that he has a family to support
    and she doesn't.  And, this argument was accepted for years as being
    right.  Because of this history, most women are still stuck in the
    menial jobs.  These jobs are low paid because companies don't pay
    any more than they *have* to, so that they can make enormous profits
    and a very few people can become mega rich, while large numbers
    of people just barely get by in life.  You can call it whatever
    you want...capitalist, the law of supply and demand, whatever. 
    But, nothing you can call it will ever make it right.  The bottom
    line is you either care about your fellow humans or you don't. 
    Too many people today don't care.  You won't be happy until you
    see children starving to death in the gutters, and that is not what
    this country was created for.
    
    We are not talking about people who are too damn lazy to get out
    of bed in the morning.  We are talking about women who have worked
    hard 40 hrs. a week for years for this company and who still cannot
    afford to rent an apartment in Massachusetts.  This is not right.
     I can understand that somebody with a Ph.D. from Brown University
    deserves to make more money than me.  But, I can't understand why
    I can't make enough money to live on, and I can't understand why
    when compared to inflation, I have to make less money today than
    I was hired at 13 yrs. ago.
    
    Lorna
    

    re .13...it is not digital's fault that one cannot acquire affordable
    housing in this state.  If I were living in Maine while still working
    for DEC, my rent would be 1/2 of what it is here.
    
    13 years ago, I was making nothing while in the Air Force.  When
    I got out, 10 years ago, I had no civilian skills, but with only
    a
    high school education, I made it to where I am now, You can better
    yourself if you want to and don't blame your fate on such intangibles
    as you state in your reply.
    

    Re .14, are you a man or a woman?  That does make a difference.
     Also, just because you have "made it", why must your attitude be
    , "I'm successful, so screw you if you can't be."
    
    How can you dismiss centuries of sexism as not being valid?
    
    It is not DEC's fault what he rent is in Massachusetts but it is
    indeed DEC's fault that their secretaries are grossly underpaid.
     There is too wide a gap between what secretaries are paid and what
    most other jobs at DEC pay.  I am not saying that secretaries deserve
    to make what engineers make.  I am saying that the pay scale has
    remained ridiculously low, and for all that secretaries do for the
    rest of you, we deserve better.  You couldn't keep this company
    going without us.
    
    You say I could "better" myself if I wanted.  Obviously, the method
    for my doing this is not as clear for me to see, as it is for you.
     What exactly do you suggest I do to "better" myself?  By the way,
    the only way I need to "better" myself is financially.  

    So, now that you have so glibly stated that I can better myself
    let's get down to the details.  What job should I apply for that
    is the next step up from an admin. sec. (besides executive sec.-
    there are hardly any in the company)?  Once you suggest some job
    titles that a secretary could expect to be hired for in this company,
    could you tell me of any actual job openings??  Thanks.  I'm eagerly
    awaiting your assistance.
    
    Lorna
    

	 WARNING:  I don't mean to point fingers at anyone...I use the
	 word "you" in a generic sense and don't mean to blast anyone
	 sorry if it seems that way...

	 **************************************************************

	 
	 You want to know what *REALLY FROSTS ME*?  People with the
	 attitude that because I have a college degree and they don't
	 that I think that I am so much better than they are.  Someone
	 in another notesfile said "College degree, whoopie, a stupid
	 piece of paper."  I'm not better than anyone AND they are not
	 better than me...we just chose to take different routes.

	 Yes, I have a good job, yes I am paid VERY WELL considering
	 I'm only 23.  Yes, I have the opportunity to make a lot of
	 money before I retire.  And *YES* I worked my *ss off to get
	 it.  So WHAT if someone's father/mother paid for them to go
	 to college, do that mean his/her diploma is not worth the
	 paper it is written on?  Do you think college is the cheaters
	 way to get a good job?  I'm sorry, but its not like that at
	 all. WHY should you resent me if I have a degree?  I had no
	 money going into college my parents didn't really help me out at
	 all.  I worked my *ss off, I got scholarships; grants and
	 loans were not available to me cuz my dad made to much...that
	 didn't change the fact that I didn't get much from them at
	 all.   If you are SO DAMN worried about the fact that you
	 don't make enough....GO OUT AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!!
	 Just because you don't make lots of money does NOT mean that
	 you don't have to ability to make it...it just sounds like
	 you don't have the motivation to make it...

	 Why do you think actors and politians and such make so much
	 money?  They are MOTIVATED!  They didn't just sit back and
	 b*tch about the fact that they didn't have anything.  I'm the
	 firm believer that no one will get into a position of power
	 unless they somehow earned it...and they wouldn't hold that
	 position of power if they didn't deserve it...

	 I UNDERSTAND the fact that some people have had to struggle their
	 way up the ladder to reach a good position (ie, rik and
	 others) but my point is that they didn't need to.  Working
	 for DEC you have the opportunity to have DEC pay almost ALL your
	 costs to get a degree.  HOW can you let something like that
	 slip by without a flicker of an eyelash?

	 In other words...if you don't like where you are and what you
	 are making, spend your time and your energy doing something
	 about it instead of b*tching and telling us (degreed people)
	 that we don't deserve to be where we are just because we
	 chose a different road than you did.

>>>>>     "I'm successful, so screw you if you can't be."

	 The beauty of this country is that you CAN be what you want
	 to be... If you have the real desire and the motivation to make
	 more money, then you will find a way...
	 
>>>>>    How can you dismiss centuries of sexism as not being valid?

	 using sexism as a reason for not being able to succeed is
	 *IMHO* just a 'cop out'...  I have never once ran into
	 problems of this sort and I am woman engineer...if that's not
	 ideal breeding grounds for sexism I don't know what is...

	 
>>    So, now that you have so glibly stated that I can better myself
>>    let's get down to the details.  What job should I apply for that
>>    is the next step up from an admin. sec. (besides executive sec.-
>>    there are hardly any in the company)?  Once you suggest some job
>>    titles that a secretary could expect to be hired for in this company,
>>    could you tell me of any actual job openings??  Thanks.  I'm eagerly
>>    awaiting your assistance.

	 you could begin by taking some courses (which DEC will
	 reimburse you for) in an area that you are interested
	 in...you are NEVER too old to learn...(I graduated with a 64
	 yr old woman...her degree was in Mechanical Engineering).
	 All it takes is motivation...if you want it, you can have
	 it...

	 kathy    

    Kathy, 
    
    You don't understand much of what I was trying to say.  Even though
    in .15, I did ask .14 to suggest *jobs*, that's *jobs*, not college
    courses, it was only because he told me I could "better" myself.
    
    My main concern is not to for Lorna St.Hilaire to get a "better"
    job.  My main concern is for working conditions and pay to improve
    for the secretarial profession.
    
    Is that too much for people to understand?
    
    Everytime I have ever gone into a notesfile and stated that I would
    like to see the payscale for secretaries raised, someone comes in
    and tells me to get a better job.  Don't you see?  Those are two
    different issues!  Even if I do get a better job, the payscale for
    all the other secretaries will still be too low, and that is what
    I want to see changed.
    
    I never said that you do not deserve to get what you get.  I never
    ever suggested in any way that college is an easy way out or a
    cheater's way.  You dreamed that up yourself, Kathy!  I don't want
    you to lose anything that you have worked so hard to gain.  All
    I want is a little more money and a little more recognition for
    the hard work I have put in as a secretary for DEC over the past
    13 years.  Kathy, the pay scale for secretaries is ridiculously
    low.  My pay raises have not even kept up with the rate of inflation.
    That is not fair.  I think these issues should be addressed and
    changed by management and personnel.  We need secretaries.  You
    need a secretary.  Even if I'm not a secretary anymore, others will
    be, and they deserve to get a fair wage.  You get a fair wage. 
    Why shouldn't we?  We don't deserve as much as you.  But, we damn
    well deserve more than what we're getting now.
    
    I don't agree with you that sexism is a cop out.  Sexism is very
    real.  You are 23 and have a college degree in engineering and a
    high paying job.  That is wonderful.  You have worked hard and you
    are intelligent enough to have achieved this.  For a 23 year old
    woman with an engineering degree to tell me that she has not seen
    sexism, is to me, a joke, Kathy.  What do you know of what other
    women, older than yourself, without your advantages have gone through?
     
    When I was your age I didn't even know what a computer engineer
    was.  And, I'm not *that* old.  I haven't reached menopause yet!
    The experiences of people in this world are so diverse.  How can
    you judge everyone else by your own very limited and very positive
    experience?
    
    All I want is for the pay scale of secretaries in this company to
    be raised a little bit.  Why does this make you so angry?
    
    Lorna
    

    Lorna has a valid point that I think is being overlooked.  A secretary
    is basically underpaid because it is traditionally a job that is
    held by women.
    
    If we look at the skills that are required of an Admin. Secretary
    we realize how these have changed over the years.  They are expected
    to be proficient in many software products especially the All-in-1
    softwares.  They manage the schedules and activities of several
    managers.  A secretary with good communication skills can be a the
    backbone of an organization.
    
    I loved being a secretary.  I would give anything if I could go
    back.  It isn't right that any job should not pay enough for a person
    to have a simple home and a dependable car.
    
    We have reduced the secretarial position so that very few people
    are willing to perform those tasks for the wages offerred.  And
    in so doing we have people who are earning high salaries doing tasks
    that could be done for half their pay.  
    
    That does not make sense!

Hi Lorna :->

For those you don't know me, I worked my way through college, so I have a
worthless piece of paper, which got me a good job.  I'm a SWEII, and I don't
need a secretary. :->  (who do you do a smiley with a tongue sticking out?)
But I do think secretaries are underpaid.

There is certainly something to be said for John Galt; for the idea that if you
want to 'make it' that you can do it.  But the weak point is that even if you
think you are worth $$$, if there are other people who think they are worth
less, you are not going to get $$$.  So the problem really is that you and other
people like you accept less money then you are worth. 

How do you do that?  I don't know.  John Galt in Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged was
faced with a similiar problem.  In AS, industrialists, as a class, were not
valued.  They all eventually took themselves off to a valley in the rockies and
formed their own society, and the rest of the world went to hell in a communist
handcart. 

But that won't work untill secretaries as a class are fed up with the treatment
that they are getting.  I think that when that happens, you will find a lot of
people doing their own secretarying.  Then secretaries will be out of a job. I
certainly think that I can do without a secretary, but then again, I've always
wanted to do-it-yourself. 

Socialism, though, is certainly not any better then the current system. The
problem isn't really that a few people are making megabucks.  The problem is
that most people don't value themselves enough.

"Why do you think actors and politians and such make so much money?  They are
MOTIVATED!"

I don't believe that motivation is the key.  All the motivation in the world
won't help you if you can't find a place in society to hook onto.

There's a saying that goes on something about unrewarded genius and hard work
being a universal...

Myself, I'm at the point where I don't see how any additional schooling or
'motivation' is going to advance my career or life....  So what's the next step?
Right now I'm consolidating my place in life.  I don't feel like working my head
off to get ahead like the paramounts in Atlas Shrugged, especially since I don't
feel that there is any surety of reward in it.  So why bother?

Jim.

    
    
    Lorna,
    
    Thank you for putting into words what I've been thinking for the
    last 10 years.  I've been a secretary for that long, 5-1/2 
    years with DEC.  
    
    I enjoy being a secretary (most of the time, I know there isn't
    a perfect job!), and I'm good at it.  What's wrong with bringing
    up the fact (as you've been doing so well, Lorna) that this company
    could not function without secretaries.  I've heard alot of lip
    service over the past several years of how vital our positions are.
     So, what's wrong with enjoying what you do, knowing you hold a
    vital position within the company,and expecting enough compensation
    to be able to live with reasonable comfort?  Like Lorna, I don't
    expect to make as much as someone who has worked their way through
    college, but it sure would be nice to be recognized-monetarily-for
    doing this job that I hear time and time makes us the "backbone" 
    of the company?
    
    Yes, if we wanted to be rolling in the dough, we could take classes
    and get promoted and all that.  I know that.  I've thought of that.
    I LIKE what I do.  DEC NEEDS secretaries.  They perform IMPORTANT
    functions that some of our higher paid execs couldn't even start
    to do (I've seen it)....and not because they're menial tasks, either!
    I've seen different level managers and such go running in a panic
    because they didn't even know how to log in to a system, never mind
    actually run the reports they needed!  Who bails them out??
    
    I'm not trying to make secretaries out to be "Super Person", but
    it's high time we got some recognition similar to what is taken
    for granted in other positions.  Sales Reps do a great job and they're
    treated to a weekend away by DEC.  Yet, there isn't enough money to give
    me a raise that'll keep up with the cost of living?  Something isn't
    right!    
    
    If you choose to be an Engineer, Sales Rep, Manager or whatever -
    good for you.  I really mean that.  The company and society is in
    your favor.  You have a great chance at getting everything you want,
    not because it's handed on a silver platter, but at least if you
    work hard and do well you'll get recognized.  It's too bad that
    people in professions like mine will have a much tougher time.
    We shouldn't have to just "grin and bare it".  We shouldn't have
    to find another job if we really like what we do, in order to make
    a decent living.  I don't think there is a secretary out there that
    expects to make $70,000 a year (wouldn't it be nice, tho?? :^) ).
    I do know that there are secretaries out there that bust their butts 
    40 hours a week or more and have a very tough time financially.  
    Should we really have to "suffer" with this just because this is 
    what we chose to do, or what we're good at?
    
    Sorry...this has gotten a little lengthy....I could probably go
    on forever!
    
    Regards,
    
    Cherie
    
    
    

    
    First, I agree with .8
    	Hi ya Ed!
    
    Now, how to raise the pay scale for secretaries?
    
 	Secretaries are paid what they are because the skill level
    demand is what it is.  A secretary does not have to know calculus,
    cobol, or architectural design.  You can go take some typing, filing,
    and shorthand classes and in a year have the skills necessary to
    be a top notch secretary.  How long does it take for an engineer
    to acquire the skills necessary to do his job?  What about job
    demands?  A senior executive who screws up stands a higher risk
    of losing his job than a secretary who gets yelled at for his/her
    mistake.
    
    	Some people want to take the easy route to riches.  Hey, if
    you can do it, more power to you.  But the doctors and lawyers who
    have been through ten plus years of education deserve what they
    get.  So does a secretary.
    
    	I will give you one clue as to why a secretary's pay scale won't
    be comparable to say an engineer's.  If you don't do your job, I
    can pretty easily find someone else who can.  If I have an engineer
    who won't do his job, I've got to find someone else, and they're
    alot more in demand than secretaries.  So why should I pay you $35,000
    a year when I can get someone else tomorrow for $20,000?
    
    	Pissing and moaning isn't going to help.  If you think you can
    change the laws of supply and demand, be my guest.  If it were me,
    I'd opt for the courses DEC reimburses, and move into a field where
    the financial rewards are better.
    
    	Those who have, have.  Those who don't waste too much time pissing
    and moaning about those that have, instead of doing something about
    it.
    
    More than my $.02!
    
    Gene
    
    
    

    
    re. last
    	"Redefine the job so that less people fit the criteria."
    
    Sorta like, require a college degree?
    
    That would work....
    
    	But try to tell an engineer that his/her secretary makes more money
    than him/her.....
    
    If a
    secretary's/janitor's/streetsweeper/customer_service_representative's
    etc.etc.etc. and on and on....
    	makes a higher pay.....
    what do you think the
    engineers/lawyers/consultants/doctors/customer_service_rep's_boss's
    pay will be.....????
    
    Gene

    Someone should smell the roses....
    
    The supply of secretaries is down...look in the jobs book...there
    are many openings for those positions.  There is a job in our group
    that has been open for two years and has been filled by temps.
    
    Basic skills...typing, shorthand and filing.  I guess that you have
    never had a secretary that can take a document and produce a
    professional looking paper, with graphs, various type sets and 
    using the latest printers.  Secretaries do program, WPS-PLUS requires
    programming skills.
    
    A good secretary is valuable and worth a living wage.  The problem
    is the powers to be refuse to recognize this.  And in so doing they
    are cutting off their nose to spite their face.  When I get to work
    I will post the wage range for an Admin. Secretary.
    

    
    
    So.....
    	
    	the same question remains....
    
    What are YOU going to do about it???
    

  I can definitely see where Lorna is coming from.  I got my raise a few weeks
ago and was really happy with it.  Like a lot of people I then did some
financial refiguring to see how much I can save now etc.

  Two days later I was talking with our lobby receptionist about work etc. and
my eyes got opened up sooo much.  This is someone who's about 24 years old,
a single mother with a two year old boy.  Her pay?  $7.00/hour.  How in the hell
are you supposed to live on your own, much less trying to support a kid -- who
of course then needs child care if mom is working -- on $280 a week, less taxes.

  I don't really care about the capitalist supply and demand philosophy; we
saw (roughly) how far you could take that approach in the book "The Jungle."  It
is not unreasonable to have some sort of minimal salaries that give people
enough money to live on.  In Mass, $7/hour doesn't cut it.

  As for the value of secretaries, I've worked in groups with great secretaries
and in ones with people who were "average."  The difference is incredible.  Esp.
since its the secretary who often has a lot of the administrative contacts and
understands how the company works better than the manager does.  And maybe could
even do a better job than the manager.  Or some engineers I once knew.

  {God, can't even get through the conference once before new notes crop up ;^}

  Maybe.  But what I'm really suggesting is that the worth of "the job they do"
is sometimes sorely underestimated.  But there's something more insidious at work
here, IMHO.  Ever notice how many TAGs there are in DEC?  Ever wonder that the 
total benefit package of these TAGs might be considerably less than full-time
DEC employees?  That's where the real crime is.  Real easy for the corporate
power structure to "discriminate" against people in this subtle way which in
affect makes it very difficult to support yourself.  And it may be one reason
why all companies, contract companies included, should have to pay health
benefits for their employees.  

    First, I have only made it through reply .20
    
    I have been reading how underrated secretaries are and how underpaid.
     I happen to think that many of the functions that secretaries do
    are being automated away from them.  I don't happen to believe that
    a secretary, in the traditional definition, is still truly necessary.
     After all, how many people send their memos and letters to the
    secretary to be typed, like in the old days?  How many people have
    the secretary do anything for them except answer the phone (which
    could and probably should be handled by an answering machine or
    whatever, since it is soooo menial and easily automated).  I agree
    that the secretaries for some managers are expected to do decidedly
    non-secretarial things, such as generate reports, etc.  I would
    not consider that being a secretary.  I would consider that being
    an analyst.  As such, why does that person not simply look around
    the company for an analyst position, which might have better pay?
     They would be doing similar work and getting better pay.
    
    The company pays different categories comparably with other companies
    in this industry.  Thus, if they don't have to be overly higher
    than they are in any job category, they won't.  Computer programmers
    will not get alot more money if the industry doesn't justify it.
    
    People.  Stop b*tching.  If you don't like where you are for whatever
    reason (duties, pay, manager, etc.) then FIND ANOTHER JOB.  DEC
    is always encouraging people to keep their options open.  If people
    truly don't like the pay of secretarial work, then they should move
    on.  If enough people do this, then just as McDonald's has had to
    increase the pay of its hamburger-flippers, DEC and other companies
    will have to increase the pay of secretaries.  Until this happens,
    don't blame anyone but yourself for being underpaid.  This goes
    back to supply and demand.  Apparently there is enough supply to
    make up for the people who are moving out of secretarial work. 
    Either that, or the functions are being automated.
    
    When I started in the working world 9 years ago, I used to give
    the secretary my memos and letters, and other tasks.  I depended
    on the secretary.  Today, I am not even allowed to ask the secretary
    to do ANYTHING for me except answer the phone and sort the mail.
     Why then should I consider myself dependant on such a position?
    
    Ed..
    

    1.  Secretaries perform a very necessary function.  We cannot do
        without them.
    
    2.  DEC will not take care of you.  They will pay ALL OF US as little
        as possible, all companies are like that.  They are in business
        to make money for the company, not us. 
    
    3.  Anyone can do anything.  If you have been a secretary for 13
        years that does not mean you can't do something else.  YOU CAN
        DO ANYTHING YOU SET YOUR MIND AND HEART TO.
    
    4.  If I had kept the first job I got after I got out of the service,
        my salary would not have quadrupled in the last 8 years....and
        I don't have ANY college.  I decided what I wanted and I went
        after it.  (editorial note here.....I had to greatly improve
        my salary as I got divorced and my ex is a foreign national
        who cannot read or write english, although she can in 3 other
        languages.  I tried to get her to go to school but Ehglish is
         very hard and she thought she was stupid, so she is still
         making $5.00/hour.  She is not stupid, no one is.  But
         she set limitations upon herself and if she thinks she can't
         better herself, then she can't.  So I pay her $200.00 per
         week, buy all my kids cloths etc.  I know a woman, especially
         with kids needs more than what a seccretary makes.  The person
         deserves it, the posistion might not.  
    
    4.  I apologize to anyone out there if I offended then in my earlier
        note but I feel we all must take charge of our own destiny.
        I am not saying we can get ahead without the help of others.
        ""it's not what you know, but who you know""     
                                                        

    Re .32, I agree that the role of the secretary is definitely changing.
     Although, I certainly do a lot more than answer the phone and deliver
    mail.  However, as all secretaries know, it is typical of individual
    contributors to overlook the fact that secretaries are hired to
    work for managers, and those managers do keep us busy doing tasks
    for them.   
    
    However, as technology advances, the role of the secretary is changing.
     (Actually, I hope that someday in the future there will be no
    secretaries because nobody deserves this thankless job :-).  Nobody
    deserves to hear the compassionate replies of such noters as Gene
    Salois.  I bet you're real concerned about the homeless, too, Gene.
     What's your suggestion for them?  Buy a house?)
    
    Before, the position of secretary is completely automated, however,
    there may be an interesting period of time when only women with
    extremely low I.Q.'s will take such low paying jobs.  That should
    be rather amusing.  Nowadays, there are women with all types of
    intelligences levels (and even educations - studies show that 20%
    of secretaries actually *have* college degrees but have been unable
    to find jobs in their field of study) who have wound up being
    secretaries due to all sorts of various backgrounds in their lives
    and varying lack of opportunity due to such diverse things as divorce,
    being born to poor parents, being born 35 or more years ago when
    young girls thought they could be housewives married to working
    class men, etc.  Some very intelligent women (such as myself -
    :->)have wound up as secretaries, and it has been a great benefit
    to industry to have our brains and our help for such minimal wages.
     In the future all intelligent young girls (such as my daughter)
    will refuse to work as secretaries for such low pay.  They will
    know enough (because parents like myself) have enlightened them,
    to go to college and be ready to support themselves (and not waste
    time trying to find a husband to do it for them).  Therefore, the
    secretaries will all be really stupid women and you guys will deserve
    it.
    
    Eventually, the job will go away, and it deserves to.
    
    In the meantime, what about women like myself, caught in the
    transition.  Someone suggested that we just "look around" and find
    ourselves another job.  Now, just how easy is it for a 39 year old
    woman who has worked as a secretary all her life, to get hired for
    a WC4 position at DEC?  How many such positions are available, and
    would anyone even give us an interview?  You make it sound so easy.
     Is it?
    
    Isn't part of the problem the fact that doors were never open for
    women without college desgrees to advance?  Why is it that men without
    college degrees all make more money than secretaries?  There are
    many questions that men such as Mike Z., Gene Salois, and Ed Fultz
    don't want to examine.  
    
    I think that since the role of secretary is changing, and since
    that was caused by high technology, then I think that the high tech
    industry should retrain us so we'll be more technically oriented,
    change our job titles, and our pay scales.  Then we'll be more help
    to the technical people we support, plus we'll be happier with our
    jobs because we make more money.
    
    BTW, I do think that all people who are willing to work 40 hrs.
    a week should get paid what it takes to live in the state they work
    in.  Of course, I believe that.  Why should anyone be expected to
    work for less?  Why should anyone be expected to be a dedicated,
    loyal employee for less than it takes to live?  You men don't want
    a democracy.  You men want a feudal system.  
    
    Also, you are ignoring the fact that the discrepancy is *too* great!
     Engineers in my group make over $60K a year, *technicians* without
    college make over $40K a year - twice what I - the secretary make.
     This is not fair!
    
    Why are most technicians men?  Because nobody ever taught those
    things to women my age!  Nobody ever, ever told us we would have
    to learn anything technical to earn our living.  They told us we
    had to cook, sew, have babies and clean the house.  You can't earn
    sh*t for doing that stuff!!!  (unless you're beautiful and then
    some rich *sshole will marry you, and then other men will criticize
    you for taking advantage of the poor guy)
    
    Let Digital retrain me to be a technician.  There's no programs
    like that at DEC!!
    
    Also, another aspect of this "we deserve the pay" argument that
    bothers me is this.  If somebody is born with an extremely high
    I.Q. and can do calculus, etc., etc., very easily, and another person
    is born with an average or even slightly below average I.Q., and
    no matter how hard they try they *can't* figure out higher math,
    why is it the you high I.Q. types always think you worked so hard
    for what you got?  You didn't work any harder.  You were just born
    with a  higher I.Q.  It was *easier* for you.  Why should the rest
    of us go without just because we weren't gifted with a genious brain?
     I think you genious types with your higher math ability should
    have a little bit more compassion for the people on this earth who
    didn't happen to be born with such high I.Q.'s.  You people were
    lucky.  You should want to help the rest of us.  You should want
    to make things better for everyone in America, not just a fortunate
    few.  
    
    Lorna
    

    One more thing.  I don't know if this is true because I haven't
    verified it.  But, I was told yesterday that the average raise for
    WC 2's in DEC in 1988 was 3%, while everyone on welfare in
    Massachusetts got a 4% increase.
    
    I thought that was rather interesting.
    
    To, (whatever) Carroll, maybe it's a good thing for most of you
    that I don't honestly believe I can accomplish whatever I want.
     If I had that much faith in myself I'd be out there in the world
    causing havoc like Emma Goldman did!  I'd be trying to make this
    country a fairer, more just place to live.  The human race deserves
    better than the survival of the fittest philosophy most of you
    subscribe to.  We should have been more civilized by now.
    
    Lorna
    

    	One thing I'm curious about:  If an engineer (such as myself)
    	came into this file and said, "I don't think that engineers,
    	as a group, make as much money as we are worth," do you think
    	that people would start screaming at the person for saying
    	it (telling the person "GO OUT AND BE A DOCTOR IF YOU DON'T
    	LIKE WHAT ENGINEERS MAKE and ***QUIT YER DAMN BITCHING***!")
    
    	I don't think so.  I think people would say things like, "Why
    	do you think so?" or "Do you have some sort of figures on how
    	we compare to other fields with comparable educational
    	requirements" or "I agree.  Engineers are worth much more than
    	they are paid."
    
    	Screaming at someone who is on a lower status level than yourself
    	(merely because they have the "gall" to express an OPINION about
    	the wages they earn) sounds awfully classist to me.
    
    	Does one have to be a certain status in this company to be allowed
    	opinions and/or complaints about how they are treated?

    	RE:  .38
    
    	What, no SCREAMING about "QUIT YER DAMN BITCHING?"  Well, that
    	would be different.
    
    	Personally, I think people would discuss it instead of just
    	telling others to shut the hell up.
    

    Silly you.  You searched on the uncensored word.  You will find
    "People.  Stop b*tching." in .32.
    
    						Ann B.

    Re .38, you know, Mike, I'm going to remember your sympathetic and
    understanding response to the problem of secretaries being underpaid.
     In fact, I'm going to remember it the next time you enter a complaint
    in womannotes or somewhere and I'll make sure I enter an equally
    understanding and sympathetic response.  You never once stopped
    to think that maybe there might be some validity to anything I had
    to say, and I'm going to make sure I never give you that consideration
    either.
    
    I seem to remember a recent complaint of yours in womannotes where
    you complain about women manipulating men by withholding sex.  Well,
    I'll tell you something, Mike.  Women don't withhold sex from men
    in order to manipulate them.  Women withhold sex from men when they
    aren't interested.  Maybe you should just try harder.   I think you're
    just going to have to put a little additional effort into making
    your personal life more satisfying.

    A little lack of understanding always makes for interesting results.
    
    Lorna
    

    I was going to stay out of this one, but:
    
    	Some facts.  As a SWE, I didn't make anywhere near 60K,
    like your sample engineers.  Not even 40K, like your techies.
    I have a college education and have worked for DEC since '81.  I
    switched to writing last May, and the pay is similar.  Raises were
    between 3.5 and 4.5% for all the writers and engineers who have
    discussed raises with me.  Many of us are in the boat you're in,
    despite education.
    
    	Regarding secretaries - I think the job title should change.
    There are still some secretarial tasks - supplies, phones, paychecks
    - but it seems that many times when I expect secretarial support,
    it is not there.  However, the tasks you are talking about don't
    fall under the traditional "secretary" title.  
    
       Jobs: with the skills you mention and a few programming courses 
    you could look at programmer/analyst jobs.  You'd have to make the move
    to take those courses.  Taking courses says you're motivated
    to do what it takes to prove yourself.  Even if the courses don't
    add to your knowledge (which I think they would), the fact that
    you were persistant enough to take them would add to your credibility.
    Heck, courses were one of the things on my "to do to reach next
    level" list when I was a SWE - it's not going to be less necessary
    for you!
    
    --Louise

    Re: .42
    
    Fight about it in Womannotes, don't go dragging the argument around.
    
    Re: in general
    
    A friend of mine graduated with a degree in English from an Ivy
    League college.  Her first job?  As a secretary, making $10,000
    a year.  That's about $200 a week *before* taxes.  She now works
    in publishing, which of course still doesn't pay nearly what I'm
    making in the computer industry.  We techno-weenies are pampered.
    
    My group was without a secretary for several months, so we certainly
    appreciate the one we have now.  She's mostly our manager's secretary,
    so she handles a lot of administrative things.  For the rest of
    us, she takes care of travel arrangments, supplies, ordering
    documentation and other ordinary but necessary details.  One term
    used for what she does is "administrative support" and I'd say it's
    accurate.
    
    I think it would be awfully interesting if every secretary took
    Secretary's Day off.  Or maybe the week around Secretary's Day.
    Kind of like a strike, only secretaries don't have a union.  (Do
    they?)  I'm sure they'd get paid a lot better if they did.  (Let's
    not turn this into a "unions -- good or bad?" note.  In general,
    I don't like them, but they're useful in certain situations.)

    I have been reading these notes, and trying very hard to keep cool.
     I hope I succeeded.
    
    Lorna,
    
    I here a great deal of bitterness in you.  I think that may be clouding
    you to the many opportunities which lie out in the company just
    waiting for you to go get them.  For example, have you not heard
    of the NTP (Network Training Program), PTP (Programmer Training
    Program), or OTP (Operator Training Program)?  I am sure that these
    are just 3 of many training programs available in the company. 
    I know that to get into the PTP, you have to take a test and if
    you pass, then you take something like 6 or 8 weeks of training.
     After the training, you are then assigned as an associate programmer.
     This is just one way for you to get ahead.
    
    Another way for you to get ahead would be to look very hard at the
    many skills you say you have.  Sit down and do like all others who
    want to move to a new job - put together a resume.  Then look in
    the jobs VTX.  No manager is going to deny you an interview just
    because you are a secretary now.  Rather, if you write your resume
    intelligently, you could very well stun the person before you ever
    meet him/her.  For example, if you do take notes from your manager
    and put together reports, then you could say something like you
    do analysis and consultation.  That would not be a lie.
    
    As stated earlier, there are steps THAT YOU MUST TAKE to get ahead.
    
    Also, for the record, I am not making anywhere nere $60k, so I don't
    know who these people are of whom you speak.  But it sounds like
    I am in the wrong group.  Also, I have heard that around the company,
    regardless of wage class, the normal raise was in the 3% range.
    SO YOU ARE NOT BEING DISCRIMINATED AGAINST.  We are all being held
    to low raises.
    
    If you feel you need assistance in looking for better opportunities
    in the company, then speak with personnel, or you immediate manager.
     Tell them you have skills to offer, but don't really know how to
    go about presenting them to possible new managers.  I am sure they
    would be very happy to help you.  What the h*ll, give it a try.
     You may be pleasantly surprised.
    
    Ed..
    
    P.S.  And yes, I am a compassionate person.
    

    Ed,
    
    Using your vaunted compassion and your [underpaid] technical
    skills, explain to me how you would automate the following
    secretarial functions:
    
    I am try to find <x> to see if <x> has <foo>, which I need.
    <x>'s phone doesn't answer, and <x> isn't in ELF.  (Perhaps
    <x> isn't at Digital at all.)
    
    How is the secretarial task of answering <x>'s phone, figuring
    out when <x> will be available, ior who else might have <foo>
    to be implemented?
    
    I need to make a business trip.
    
    Who will explain to me what steps I need to take?  How do I
    locate this person?
    
    These are what I use "secretaries" for.  Clearly, they are misnamed.
    But money is the bottom line, and "secretaries" -- who just `happen'
    to start out as young, lower-class women -- are not paid very much.
    In fact, all "secretaries" get paid about the same amount AT ANY
    COMPANY IN A GIVEN GEOGRAPHICAL AREA.  Can you say, "It's not really
    a conspiracy."?  I knew you could.
    
    						Ann B.

    Rat Hole Alert!!
    Rat Hole Alert!!
                               
    Let's get the facts straight.
    
    I am an entry level wage class 4 accountant. My pay scale is between
    24.5K to about 32K. What is the secretarial pay scale? Maybe it's
    too bad wage class 2 people did not get involved in JEC. That will
    change all wage class 4 job classifications. Maybe you could suggest
    a similar program. We will all be affected in April. 
                                                         
    The typical 80's secretary knows electronic spreadsheets, puts together
    presentations, wears the hat of "diplomat". Does some budgets. Wow,
    this sounds like my job. Maybe I should stop writing now.
    
    Also, Lorna, I see your points. I write resumes on the side. Drop
    me a line if you want help.
                                                             
    We're all here to help each other. Please, not so serious.
    
    Kate
    

SKILLS OF SECRETARIES
	 I don't mean to sound like secretarial work is menial and/or
	 that secretaries don't work their *sses off, but the plain
	 and simple fact is that...people coming out of high school
	 right now have virtually the same experience that secr.'s do.
	 My brother who is 14 yrs old right now can do word
	 processing, spreadsheeting, types about 80 wpm, etc etc.  He
	 in no way wants to be a secr. but these days the computers
	 and software are COMMONPLACE in most schools around the
	 country, and even more common in homes around the country.
	 The plain and simple fact is that if Lorna (using you just as
	 an example) quit her job today, there would be hundreds of
	 people that could easily take her place.  Now, until there is
	 a shortage of people to take that place, the pay scale will
	 never go up...in economic terms...its simple supply and
	 demand. When supply is high, cost is low...the basis of free
	 enterprise.

	 Look at the nursing situation (at least out here)... People
	 quit going to nursing school because nurse's pay was so
	 low...now hospitals are offering nursing positions with twice
	 the salary a nurse would have made five years ago...they
	 cannot find the people to hire.


HOW TO GET THOSE EXTRA $$$
	 What I have been trying to point out is there is only ONE WAY
	 for secr. to get more money... Supply must go DOWN!  (Again
	 basic free enterprise--you must have learned it in high
	 school).   For Lorna (and others) to do their part to make
	 wages higher for secrs, they MUST move on to a different
	 profession.

	 I believe that those secr that don't want to change jobs (ie,
	 take classes, further their education to get there) really
	 understand what I (and maybe Ed, but I can't speak for him)
	 am trying to say.. You MUST reduce supply in order to ever
	 increase wages....

	 we live in a free enterprise system...we choose to live here,
	 we must abide by its rules....or move, I suppose....

	 k

    
    I feel that jobs traditionally filled by women, especially young
    women, have been undervalued.  A non-secretarial example:
    
    Company X had a hard time dealing with women (one of the reasons
    I left - as a manager in a sometimes predominantly female group,
    I had more battles with them than I care to recall).  They gave
    an especially hard time to females in hourly positions.  When
    a female graphic artist made management aware of the lack of job
    paths and opportunities in her area, and offered drafts of 
    intermediate and senior level job descriptions, she was verbally
    slapped down.  Then she was told, "If you want to get ahead, you
    can aspire to be a technical writer."  Translation:  you and your
    job aren't worth much to us.  This was a skilled and innovative
    person, relied upon by the entire department to give visual life
    to our ideas.  Needless to say, she left the company rather quickly
    and went on to form a successful contract and consulting graphics
    business.  The company wound up spending many more dollars in
    contract art, lost time on production schedules, recruiting, and
    training, than they would have by being open to discussion and
    reevaluation.
    
    I guess what I'm saying here, is that this isn't just an individual
    problem (as Lorna pointed out) but a repeated message to a valuable
    segment of our work force.  If companies don't remain flexible to
    changes in job skill demands, they will pay for it indirectly by
    handling turnover and the attendent discontinuity.  The Northeast is
    faced with a shrinking workforce and the successful companies 10 or
    15 years from now are the ones who have the most to offer to employees
    in terms of money, respect, and recognition.
    
    Ron

    	One thing I have never understood is why so many people assume
    	that absolutely ANYONE can get a job as a secretary (as though
    	so few skills are required that anyone who doesn't know how
    	to do anything can jump right into a career as a secretary.)
    
    	That isn't true!
    
    	When I was a young single Mom with no education (and almost
    	no working skills,) I would have LOVED to be able to get a
    	job as a secretary, but I was not nearly qualified.  Instead,
    	I had to put myself through college by working "minimum wage,
    	minimum skill" jobs until I got my lucky break by being hired
    	by PBS as a "clerk" (i.e., something much LESS than secretary
    	at this particular studio.)  After that, I was "discovered" to
    	be picking up so many technical/engineering skills on my own
    	time from some friends in Engineering that a manager "drafted"
    	me into a job in the studio as a camara operator within a
    	few months.  By the time I finished college, I was able to get
    	a job as a full-fledged Video Engineer at both a cable station
    	and another PBS studio (and thus, my career was launched.)
    
    	Oh, by the way, the year before I joined Digital, I took my
    	college degree and my 5 years in television engineering and
    	production (plus some time doing chip-level troubleshooting
    	on computer memory boards) to a large company who promptly
    	ushered me into a typing test.
    
    	Well, I flunked the typing test, so I never even got an interview.
    	A year later, Digital hired me as an engineer.  (That was only 7 
    	years ago.)

    	Oh, I almost forgot.  I've noticed a few engineers talking about
    	needing more money, so I've decided that you should become
    	doctors and lawyers instead.
    
    	I'm checking into schools for you, and I will let you know
    	when you can start.
    
    	Now don't anyone start telling me that you LIKE being engineers,
    	or that you don't WANT to go through a major career change at
    	this point in your lives.
    
    	Surely you're not going to just sit there and do nothing when
    	I've figured out for you what the best thing would be to do
    	with your lives?
    
    	(Tongue very, very, very, VERY firmly planted in cheek, I hope
    	you know.)  :-)

    re .48
    
    Yes, part of what I am trying to say is exactly that.  In order
    to get pay to go up, you have to somehow get the supply to go down.
     If secretaries (to use an example) are unhappy with their pay,
    then they should (and will if unhappy enough) move on to greener
    pastures.  There is a management philosophy that states that money
    by itself is not a motivator.  BUT, money can be a de-motivator.
    (I think this was Herzberg).  What this means is that just giving
    a person a raise will not necessarily make him/her like their job
    better or do better at it.  But not giving a person a deserved raise
    or cutting pay will cause a person to be unhappy in their job and
    possibly do poorer at it.
    
    So, please do consider approaching your manager, or at least personnel,
    if you are truly ready for new opportunities.  As I said earlier,
    many of the tasks described are not what I consider a secretary
    as doing, they are what I consider an analyst as doing.
    

    Ed..
    

    Ask any Engineer from Boeing what they're worth when the supply exceeds
    the demand... you'll get a few stories.
    
    Marge

    Ummm, if our secretary were to get up and walk out on my group I'd hate
    to think of the consequences by bringing in those any one of those
    100's of unskilled people who could "walk in and do her job."  It
    simply would *not* work.  I know.  I've been there.  There's a lot
    of things that an administrative assistant does that aren't always
    apparent to us engineering types.  Until you do without it.  Then you
    bitch and moan about "why can't we get someone good in this position."
    
    As a side note, as a general case I'd find it a much greater hardship
    to lose our secretary (due to illness or vacation) than my manager.

"I've noticed a few engineers talking about needing more money, so I've decided
that you should become doctors and lawyers instead."

Odd, I hadn't noticed any engineer saying that here...  are you off on another
snipe hunt? 

RE: Superior IQ

While I may have a high IQ (I don't know).  I don't think I was "born" with it.
I and my parents put a lot of time and effort into developing my IQ.  I don't
believe that this means that other people can't do things that I can do.
Anything I can do I expect anyone else to be able to learn to do.  Maybe it will
be harder for some people, but IQ is hard to get.  It's jsut a different path.

I failed the whole series of college calculus the first time around.  I got
A's the second time.

"I feel that jobs traditionally filled by women, especially young women, have
been undervalued." 

There are a lot of good points in your note.  But there is also the other side
of the coin.  Most positions which women are in have a certain amount of
flexibility which many men do not have.  It's a lot easier for a woman to say
they have to leave work to take care of a sick child then it is for a male. They
may get flack for it, but the boss is most likely to think 'what did I expect?'.
If I man does it, there would be serious consequences at promotion time. 

RE: supply & demand

Let's face it.  With all the women entering the job market these days,
*EVERYONE'S* real pay is going to go down because of the law of supply and
demand.  Not only that, but now the government taxes the work which women used
to do at home, and typically we pay others to do the work we used to do when the
wife worked at home.

The solution?  Let's half of us quit and go back to working at home.  I for one
would like it.  Quit paying taxes for transfer programs and defense.  Can you
say "economic upheaval"?  I knew you could.  Watch the measured GNP take a nose
dive.  Watch the tax base of the cities, towns, and governments disappear.
Watch the price of housing come back down when nobody will pay the rediculous NE
prices.  Watch the saleries of those who do work go through the roof.

I must be dreaming :-)  But it ain't against the law (yet)!

Jim :-) 

>>    Ask any Engineer from Boeing what they're worth when the supply exceeds
>>    the demand... you'll get a few stories.

	 my father was laidoff in '70 from Boeing (electronics
	 engineer)...he was immediately offered jobs from several
	 different companies... sure it was hard on him, but he did
	 have some place to go... other's are not so fortunate....

	 k

RE: .35:

Reading your reply (and many others) reminded me of the situation
of a close friend of mine.  She is working as a secretary, and
hates it, for a number of reasons.  She is also a single parent.
For the last two years, she has been taking the following steps
to change her situation:
	- researched possible careers
	- chose one that she thinks she will like
	- started taking college courses at night, training
	  for her new career choice
	- looking for a different temporary job, to get her
	  through this transition
	- moved in with relatives to save money for school
	  (her company does not offer the educational benefits
	   that DEC does)

Obviously, her life is no picnic right now, and before she started
this plan, she wasn't sure that she could do it.  In fact, she says 
that the only thing that keeps her going is knowing that she is 
working toward a goal and a better life for herself and her son.
She is an inspiration to me (even though I am happy in my career
choice), and I add her story in hopes that she may inspire others
in a similar situation.

Sarah

         A thought from a little different view...[I hope]
         
         I hear everybody agreeing in here [mostly],
         you are just discussing different solutions to the
         same problem. Some notes are realistic and suggest
         methods to get out of the predicament...some are
         empathetic and address the moral issue of undervaluing
         women.
         
         I occaisionally give seminars for women seeking
         managerial positions, and this dichotomy is very
         close to a topic I discuss..."Why Men Make Better
         Managers...and What To Do About It"...
         
         FLAMETHROWERS ON HOLD FOR JUST A SEC>....
         
         Simply put, [since I am not being paid to amuse an
         audience...grin], men are better managers because
         they make decisions [on the whole] based on fact
         "untarnished" by the more subtle attributes of the
         value of a human being.
         
         Women NEGOTIATE...Men MAKE DECISIONS...sorry I cannot
         take total credit for that statement, it is a rather
         well-documented politico-socio phenomonum.  When
         women negotiate, they make [on the whole and ON THE
         SURFACE] less money for a company.  Negotiation takes
         time, resources, and you must be willing to give
         something away to negotiate in good faith. Decision
         making is swift, solitary, [except in rare group
         management cases], and requires no commitment to
         give anything away.
         
         I do not agree, however, that leaving your chosen
         profession is the only why to goose the gander...
         
         Some of the things I suggest to women who are looking
         at management...[or for more money] are:
         
         	Document what you "really" do versus what your
         	JD "says" you do. Include % time spent at
         	each function.
         
         	Get a copy of JD's that "appear" to be what
         	you are aiming for...correlate those Job Duties
         	with what you do.  If you lack a certain skill
         	that keeps turning up, go get it.
         
         	Don't talk generalities...your boss is an
         	expert at that type of hype...gather real
         	data from your peers...and present it a 
         	format that supprts your position. The 
         	anecdote about the graphic artist is classic!
         	That's the kind of material you need...
         	with actual figures plugged in.
         
         	Time your presentation to match your boss's
         	mood and schedule. You are running his "life",
         	you know when he is most relaxed and supportive,
         	talk to him then.
         
         	Practice your speech in front of friends,
         	peers, your mirror!! until you can do it
         	cold with no um's and er's and no hesitation.
         	We are selling ourselves as professionals
         	and 90% of that is done with mirrors...you
         	gotta "look" like you deserve a promotion
         	or more money...not just "be" that way.
         
         	He's [not many with female bosses are there?]
         	going to say NO the first time. You know him
         	well enough to know that...Take NOTES! Write
         	down his objections, then come back the next
         	time and address them specifically.
         
         	NEVER apologize for asking for what you are
         	worth in the first place...and let him
         	know it.
         
         	AND...MOST IMPORTANT...use that skill we
         	have..NEGOTIATE.  He may *truly* be eco-
         	nomically unable to give you a *raise*.
         	Top level amangement frowns on paying
         	*any* pay class more than 5% over the
         	market range...so...if you can't get
         	money, be prepared to offer alternatives:
         
         		More vacation
         		More flexible hours
         		More challanging duites [that
         			will provide you with
         			more skills, which...]
         		Reclass of title
         
         	Have a whole list of what you want and prioritize
         	it.

         I *do* agrre that as women we have to be "proactive"
         in this...the system was not built by folks who were
         interested in the finer points of "truth, justice,
         and the American[sic] Way"...it was built by the
         old-boys who wanted to make a bunch of money.
         
         Learn their game...and play it better...and when
         you get where you are going, remember to look back
         over your shoulder at your sisters and offer them
         a hand.
         
         [end_sermon]...sorry folks I get a bit hot about
         equal pay for equal work...BTW you could support
         the federal pay equity bill....%^>
         
         [sigh]
         
         Melinda

    I have a better idea - let's ALL take a break for a while.  This
    discussion has simply turned into a shouting match, with various
    people taking pot shots at each other.  There's a lot of heat,
    and very little light.
    
    I've disabled further replies to this topic while I sort out what
    should happen to it.  Constructive comments are welcome by MAIL
    to me.
    
    					Steve

    I've also set a few replies hidden while I sort out this mess.
    There's far too much name-calling going on here for my tastes.
    
    				Steve

Please be patient - I haven't yet had the time to sort this note out.
It will be reopened soon.

			Steve