RE: head hunters
|From:||"Jonathan R. Oppenheimer" <email@example.com>|
Actually I try to reimburse my technologists with rewarding positions and
with the opportunity to grow as far as their abilities and ambitions will
take them. I do not pay the institutions that have trained me, because I was
willingly used by them in exchange for the knowledge and opportunities they
gave to me. I try to contribute to alumni and scholoarship associations
because I believe in the educational mission these entities serve.
Professionalism is alot more than keeping one's knowledge secret. (Actually
the best way to market professional services is to give away as much
knowledge as is necessary to convince the prospective client that one is
worth the money to get to that knowledge which is withheld). One thing that
certainly helps gain professional status is a state-regulated educational
degree and "license to practice" that requires significant time and expense
to achieve. While it is true that anyone can learn the same things as a
doctor or lawyer, one can only legally practice these professions by being
state licensed and by submitting to regulations that allow the license to be
revoked if the standards are not met. The state, for better or worse, has
decided that its citizen require protection from bad advice.
I certainly will not fault anyone for not trying to get ahead. (In fact, I
might fault someone for not trying to better oneself. But I also know that
one cannot be truly rich unless one is happy with what one has. . .) In the
end, only the individual can decide for himself was is desirable.
From: Barry Rittman [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 8:12 AM
Subject: Re: head hunters
I believe that knowledge should be free, however I do see your point.
I therefore suggest that it would be logical to carry this a step further.
honorable thing to do is for you to reimburse the technicians and
that gave you the training in specific techniques. Perhaps a surtax
<< Previous Message | Next Message >>