January 7, 2010

Got no hat upon my head, no shoes upon my feet

In a recent WSJ roundup of best and worst jobs in terms of environment, income, employment outlook, physical demands, and stress, "newspaper reporter" came in at 184/200, behind bricklayer, dishwasher, and machinist. Thoughts?

According to the survey, reporters still have it better than stevedores and roustabouts.

Labels: , , ,


Blogger Tony said...

First off, I hate doing the dishes, so the list must be bunk.

Second, the list amuses me because of its ... frankness in naming careers. I can't help but laugh at mention of some jobs, and that for almost any of them you can make a comment like "well at least we beat X" or "what, we're below Y?"

More seriously, having looked through the methodology, I would think that hiring outlook must have been the biggest charge against reporters. Also, it looks as though "contact with the public" pushes a job down the list. I find it to be a perk, despite the grousing we reporters often do.

I think one of the hardest parts of the job is how impossible it is to shut it off when walking out the door each day. Maybe that goes both ways: when things go well or when it's tiresome the feelings linger.

The job is also thankless. Maybe? Got a great call today from Will Wile (I didn't believe Chase when he said that name), who wanted to praise a rather simple snow/sidewalks story that I wrote. I made sure he knew he could call anytime.

I'll poke at the topic in one more way: I think it's tricky to measure the job overall because it often presents some overwhelmingly large concerns. Ethical questions, workaholic tendencies, believing the pay is inadequate for the work/stress/skill. Those balance, for me, against a pretty much day in and day out satisfaction with the work I do.

January 7, 2010 at 11:56 PM 
Blogger JHitts said...

Much bullshit here. Are they really going to tell me that Homer Simpson's job is better than mine? (You'll notice that nuclear plant decontamination technician comes in at No. 165.) I mean, sure, newspaper reporters work shitty hours for shitty pay, but it's not like we're mopping up nuclear waste spills or working in lead smelting plants. Shouldn't "daily danger of tasks completed" also be under consideration?

I'm curious as to how someone who is a choreographer or actor has it worse off than a dishwasher— though, thinking about it, there are probabaly many dishwashers who are aspiring actors.

Finally, why is "farmer" No. 161 but "dairy farmer" fourth from last at No. 197? Is it that much of a drop-off? And is it even that much of a difference?

January 8, 2010 at 2:40 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dairy farmers have to shovel poo.

-- J. Dunn

January 8, 2010 at 8:30 AM 
Blogger K. Janke said...

Nothing wrong with a little dairy cow poo. I was raised with it in my neck of the woods. It's high in fiber and a good source of...brown.
Although, I did once step in a hot one (well, it was lukewarm) wearing flip-flop sandals. And that was the day I decide, gee, I want to be a bank teller/barista. Of course, I clean bathrooms frequently at Starbucks, so there is still a chance of putting ones foot in it. Hence the "no flip-flops" rule in the Starbucks dress code. It's nice to know someone in corporate is still planning ahead.

January 9, 2010 at 5:21 PM 

Post a Comment

<< Home