Comments on: Freelance Writing Jobs for Wednesday, April 16, 2008

By: anjeeta

anjeeta — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:35:35 +0000

This is about the NYC condo blogger..I have seen this ad posted again again and I do think the person who runs the blog is extremely finicky.. I applied to them the last time around and was asked to do a sample blog for them which kind of met expectations but then I was asked to do a more objective rewrite which I submitted and which according to me was quite in step with the other posts on the blog ..but then heard nothing ..and frankly I have not bothered to follow up .. its really not worth the trouble for only $50 for a 1000 words + images!

By: Jodee

Jodee — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:00:36 +0000

@ Theresa: You are most welcome!

@ Jeanne: That’s an interesting thought.

By: Jeanne Roberts

Jeanne Roberts — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 18:30:51 +0000

I have a delightful and perhaps frivolous answer. Someone out there is using pseudonyms to get a proofreading position with a company. This someone has used a past proofreading position to gain access to copyrighted material (proofreading would be a good way) for the purpose of reselling it. It’s easy to make up a name, harder to change one’s appearance. Other than this scenario, there is little reason to require a photo to qualify a proofreader’s competence.

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 18:21:28 +0000

:edit: Perhaps they wanted to make sure they didn’t try to hire someone they have previously fired??? Who knows. There’s a million possibilities.

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 18:20:19 +0000

Richard, Tish suggested that the site was requiring a photo on a job application was discrimination. I believe it was a request, not a requirement. I don’t remember them saying applicants who don’t submit a photo won’t get the job.

Not knowing is not a reason for flagging a post. Just because I can’t think of a legit reason that you would agree with doesn’t mean they can’t. It may have been a simple over-sight. Who knows.

But it’s too late now so it’s a moot point.

By: Richard

Richard — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:44:40 +0000

Ad was removed by the time I got there, but I agree with Tish, et al: what relevance do your looks have to your ability as a proofreader?

As far as flagging it…for that reason I can’t say I’d have a problem.

Matt, you’ve brought up an interesting point: can you think of a legit reason why they’d want to see a photo?

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 17:11:43 +0000

Tish, if they were using the photo to determine hiring based only on race or sex, I could see your point. Unfortunately, you have no idea why they want the photo, and flagging it for that reason alone is irresponsible.

My 2 cents.

By: Tish Davidson

Tish Davidson — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:58:54 +0000

I believe that requiring a photo on a job application violates US anti discrimination employment laws and that this posting should be flagged

By: Matt

Matt — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 16:47:45 +0000

Catherine, I’d send one in, but they prolly wouldn’t like it. In fact, it might even make them rethink that request. Some things just cannot be “un-seen”

By: Catherine

Catherine — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 15:53:33 +0000

Why on earth do they need your photo for the Experienced Proofreader/Editor job? Sounds weird to me… Would anyone actually send that LOL?!