herbie@polaris.UUCP (Herb Chong) (02/25/86)
I just found out that for the past month or so, all news articles posted from polaris have been trashed so none of these (maybe) made it out into the world. bear with me if these are repitions. Herb... ================== Subject: Re: job -> graduation -> long vacation -> work References: <1418@rayssd.UUCP> <957@mako.UUCP> <452@mot.UUCP> <73@calma.UUCP> <283@l5.uucp> <78@calma.UUCP> <302@l5.uucp> <86@calma.UUCP> <153@intelca.UUCP> In article <153@intelca.UUCP> kds@intelca.UUCP (Ken Shoemaker) writes: >I can actually think of a couple of reasons why an employer would like >someone to start in the fall, rather than in the summer. The most >important is that you would be one of a smaller group, and therefore >lessen the impact of all the NCGs and summer students starting in >June (by not being a part of it). since it has been a month and this topic is still making the rounds, i thought i'd put my $0.02 worth in. i think some employers don't like people who go for a vacation and then look for a job. they prefer someone who looks for a job and arranges to start after a vacation. the implication is that the person who goes first and then looks doesn't plan ahead very much or is VERY good and knows they can get a job any time. an interview may distinguish the two, as can the resume. by inference, the person who doesn't plan ahead for a career isn't likely to plan ahead during work. of course, this may be utter nonsense, but still, a resume is not much criteria for hiring someone, and an interview isn't really either. Subject: Professionals, Professionalism and Overtime References: <1418@rayssd.UUCP> <957@mako.UUCP> <452@mot.UUCP> <73@calma.UUCP> <794@sfmag.UUCP> <217@pluto.UUCP> <68@uscvax.UUCP> <953@celtics.UUCP> <1255@sdcsvax.UUCP> In article <1255@sdcsvax.UUCP> jc@sdcsvax.UUCP (John Cornelius) writes: >Professionals don't charge overtime, they just charge a lot and use whatever >time it takes to get the job done. They also typically carry their own staff >with them. I illustrate with: <... deleted stuff...> >One might deduce from this that most programmers are not professionals and one >would be quite correct. The term professional has little to do with the quality >or value of work produced by an individual but rather the manner in which he >pursues his business. Indeed, a mandatory requirement for being a professional >is that he be in business rather than being employed by others in an unrelated >business. An attorney who draws a salary from a computer company is not a >professional, he is an employee. Likewise a programmer becomes a professional >when he 1) sells his services to several other entities, 2) he carries his own >tools, 3) he performs his services for several clients simultaneously, and >4) his charges are unrelated to the actual work the he himself performs. I >suppose that a last requirement might be a license proferred by a State >licensing board although that usually doesn't come about until there are too >many unqualified individuals in the marketplace. As yet, that is not the case >with programming. there is also a major attidute difference. a professional is responsible for their work. as i understand the Canadian law regarding professionals, the person must be a member of a government chartered agency or association with the authority to act with the power of the law in enforcing the rules and regulations of the association. for the MD's, it's the Hippocratic Oath and additional things. for Engineers, it is the Engineering Code of Ethics. there is assumed that there is a certain educational standard to be met too. Ryerson Institute of Technology in Toronto gives out BSc's in Engineering, but the Association refuses to recognize the education as adequate for admission without examinations in all engineering areas. Waterloo is recognized and so i have to take only the Law and Ethics exams. the difference as i understand it is in the social responsibilities of the association. i am almost qualified to be a Professional Engineer in Ontario, Canada. The main thing i'm missing is the one year's work under the supervision of a P. Eng. and successfully passing the exams on Engineering Law and Ethics. for all the trouble i go through, i get a small certificate and a rubber stamp that has my name and P. Eng. on it. if i have my P. Eng. and i stamp anything i produce with it, i can be held personally responsible for what i approved or did, REGARDLESS of who paid me or who i did it for, or whether anyone with more authority approved it who is also a P. Eng. (they'd be responsible too). it is this area of personal responsibility that makes the most difference. people who have their P. Eng. take those letters very seriously, as do licensed MD's and lawyers admitted to the Bar, etc.. when a person is prosecuted for illegal use of P. Eng., MD, or whatever, it is the Crown vs. XYZ. because of the legal requirement for personal responsibility for the recognized professions in Canada, it is extremely unlikely that programmers will be recognized as professionals in the legal sense of the word. why do i think so? here's an example and i think it is not an isolated incident. when i was a co-op working for a western canadian resources company, i was asked to help by a fellow co-op to unofficially help prepare some charts for use by the engineers in construction of a new natural gas pipeline running from Northern Alberta to the US. the chart was supposed to show how thick the original plastic sprayon coating had to be so that when it had hardened, it would meet government safety standards for thickness. although sprayed on evenly, it dripped and ended up thinner on top than sprayed. they wanted to know the optimal thickness for a given pipe diameter. a whole series of test were run and the points plotted. the problem was to interpolate the points for pipe diameters that were not tested. a perfectly reasonable request, but the data was not smooth. in fact, it was downright ragged, nearly random. the co-op before had done the graphs requested simply by connecting the points using a cubic spline. only problem was, the interpolated values made no sense and no-one complained. my co-op friend was asked to do it again for a different type of pipe. since i have a fair statistics background, i was brought in to consult. again, the results made no sense and also nothing was known about the points except their values. were they averages of repeated experiments? no-one knew. i tried to dig up more information, but since i was unofficial, i couldn't ask too many people. the official co-op didn't want to ask questions and complicate things. the previous co-op had done it and no-one raised a fuss, so why should she? after all, all she had to do was prepare some nice charts and put some lines on it somewhere. as long as they looked okay, that was all that mattered. as soon as she said that to me, i refused to help any further. for all i know, the engineers in the field looked at the chart and said nonsense and put on a lot for extra safety margin. and co-op students every four months could be still turning out these meaningless charts which everyone ignored because they made no sense. most other CS types i've had to work with have had the same attitude. of course, i could be all wrong, but there you have it. Herb Chong... I'm still user-friendly -- I don't byte, I nybble.... VNET,BITNET,NETNORTH,EARN: HERBIE AT YKTVMH UUCP: {allegra|cbosgd|cmcl2|decvax|ihnp4|seismo}!philabs!polaris!herbie CSNET: herbie.yktvmh@ibm-sj.csnet ARPA: herbie.yktvmh.ibm-sj.csnet@csnet-relay.arpa, herbie%yktvmh.bitnet@wiscvm ======================================================================== DISCLAIMER: what you just read was produced by pouring lukewarm tea for 42 seconds onto 9 people chained to 6 Ouiji boards.