Dear Integrity Transcription, - Just FYI:

I commend you for putting something in the compensation field on your MT Jobs ad, because believe it or not, this is NOT a hobby for almost everyone who does it.  It is a job requiring a good bit of skills and knowledge and expertise, and we expect to be compensated for it accordingly!  Although we are obviously not expecting to get rich, or we would have chosen a different field, 7 cpl is hardly "competitive per line rates."  It is low pay, and you know it.  To any companies reading this, anything below 9 cpl for experienced MTs is not competitive, and that terminology is very deceptive, "Integrity."  I'm not saying you should raise your pay, but I am saying you should change your terminology, like to just a straight start at 7 cpl, or 7 cpl forever but plenty of work.  Is honesty so hard?  As for the other companies who post ads on MT Jobs, leaving the compensation field blank is the equivalent of leaving a blank on a chart note as far as I'm concerned.  I want to know that you will only pay 6 cpl BEFORE I spend hours taking your tired old tedious tests.  Is it so very hard to understand that we work to make money?  Don't you?  Why is it so taboo?  It's no secret to anyone.  No wonder so many people need antidepressants.  The "rules" deceptive people make up to serve themselves will drive you absolutely batshit crazy!

Post A Reply Reply By Email Options

Edit/Delete Message

Report this message

X CLOSE

• Dear Integrity Transcription, - Just FYI: (Views: 3394, 2017-04-04, 7:52 am)
  • RE: Integrity - MT55 (Views: 2369, 2017-04-04, 10:03 am)
    • Not to - Mention (Views: 1905, 2017-04-04, 10:32 am)
  • I work for Integrity - LongTimeMT (Views: 2431, 2017-04-04, 2:36 pm)
    • I worked there for 3 years also - and I do not agree (Views: 2000, 2017-04-04, 9:49 pm)
  • From Integrity HD Owner - Paula Whisenhunt (Views: 4089, 2017-04-05, 3:53 pm)
    • Then your pay rate is not - competitive (Views: 2053, 2017-04-05, 4:43 pm)
    • My response - to yours (Views: 2259, 2017-04-05, 10:45 pm)
      • Wow, how rude. - sm (Views: 2040, 2017-04-06, 3:57 am)
        • Response - smh (Views: 1947, 2017-04-06, 6:50 am)
          • Something is wrong if you didn't think - this statement (Views: 1614, 2017-04-06, 3:21 pm)
            • It Was - Not (Views: 1336, 2017-04-07, 7:03 am)
            • Too many - Double negatives (Views: 1242, 2017-04-08, 10:33 am)
      • To my response - I enjoyed your post - Thank you (Views: 1552, 2017-04-06, 12:39 pm)
      • Response - All I can say is, (Views: 1438, 2017-04-06, 1:02 pm)
    • Ya know, if I were the owner of this company - just sayin....sm (Views: 1922, 2017-04-06, 5:10 pm)
      • rude - ex-MT (Views: 1349, 2017-04-09, 8:04 am)
        • To rude - ex-MT (Views: 1328, 2017-04-09, 3:48 pm)
        • Not a lawyer... - Crabby (Views: 1249, 2017-04-15, 1:48 pm)
    • testing for Integrity HD - mt2 (Views: 835, 2019-07-22, 4:48 pm)
  • I'd just like to add - binca (Views: 624, 2019-07-08, 3:24 pm)

• Latest Posts
• Unanswered
• Top Viewed
• Most Discussed
• Most Liked