Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Considering a change of job


hepcat

Recommended Posts

I have a job offer on the table and I’m having a hard time deciding if I should accept it. Maybe the Huddle professionals can offer some insight.

Both jobs are similar in the work I would be doing, so that’s been a hard factor to consider.

Job # 1: Post-startup Software company with 1200 employees hiring like crazy. Work on a small team of 10. Nice guys on the team, but slightly boring. Bland office environment, cubicle farms, suburban outdoor environment. Company offers “unlimited” PTO and one work from home day each week. Pays 20% more than Job 2. 20-25 minute highway drive from my house.

Job # 2: Large public university. Work on a team of 25 across a large academic environment. Newer chic office environment in hip downtown area with a wide mix of types of people as coworkers. Strong learning culture and work with current technology. Accrue one day per month of PTO and Sick days. Pays 20% less than Job 1. Job is a 10-15 minutes drive from my house on back roads.

Mainly having trouble deciding because Job 2 is low stress, offers strong job security, and is closer to my house. Money wise Job 1 wins by a long shot. So basically do I roll the dice on a job I might be bored with for the money or take a lesser paid but more convenient and less stressful job.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, KSpan said:

You summed it up pretty well in your last paragraph, though I'd be interested to hear which one you think most aligns with your greater career goals.

Ultimately though only you can decide what you value most.

Career wise it's a really tough call. The work is very similar. The support network is much better at Job 2. The team is mostly in house all the way up the chain whereas at Job 1, I'd have to rely on outside vendors and finding my own solutions to problems. So I guess less hand holding, more having to dive into issues on my own. I guess I'm just nervous to leave the security I have now.

I accepted Job 1 today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, ARSEN said:

Think 5 years from now.  Which job opens more doors?

Job 2 probably looks better on a resume just because a large university name is very recognizable. 5 years from now is hard to predict because the team is so new and the technology changes quickly. I’m going to a job with more streamlined tech so I’m maybe ending up in a situation to work more in the private sector for the rest of my career, which isn’t necessarily a bad thing 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take Job 2 since it will provide you with both happiness and job security (economy will eventually tank again). It's hard to find both. In the long-term, you will likely receive promotion/pay bump.

I took a job a year ago with 20% increase in pay and no long-term security, but I'm still living as if I were still on my old salary. I accepted an offer for a job with slightly less pay, but way more in terms of long-term security and better benefits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Squirrel said:

Which has better upside potential? If you are under 40 job 1 looks better. If you dont care about and just want a stable job then job 2.  

Job 1 has massively more potential. Fast growing company and joining a small team that is supporting new offices sprouting up all over the country. Potential to get in on the ground floor of something and move up into a management role

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Davidson Deac II said:

I won't say which one you should take, but I will say if you have a family to support, Job 2 is probably the better option.  If you can afford to take some risk, then do what you want to do.  

I am getting married in Feb. No kids yet. The income level of Job 1 would make that a more realistic possibility. Job 2 barely pays all my bills.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Yeah and I am doubtful he can offer that consistently. I don’t have many years left at my age and in my view we have wasted two and this whole exercise with him was always a three year minimum.  I am out on that with a guy I don’t believe in, and never believed in, it has sucked. To me it is a costly detour off the right track. Years.    But I am not so rigid that I can’t see excellence. He needs to display it though, consistently before I change my outlook.  
    • No, when I said rage, I meant rage, which only applies to certain fans on this board. Your timeline of trying to assess whether he is the future or not is really tied to the discussions surrounding his second contract. If this team is going to commit to some monster contract while he has shown nothing but glimpses of brilliance would be deservedly worrisome, so the clock is genuinely ticking for him to settle into something resembling his final form. Perhaps a best case scenario is that he plays well, the team succeeds, but he does so with a more limited role that makes the rest of the league view him as a game manager, and his second contract value reflects that. Then he continues to improve and becomes a bargain comparatively while not handicapping the team around him, and we enter an era of consistent championship competitiveness that the fanbase has craved for decades and has never really experienced before. But that requires many, many things to go right and for Bryce himself to facilitate that if he ends up being the quarterback of the future.
    • Exactly. And the flame throwers as well, get location benefits from not going all out. But they have it in reserve.  Not sure how much Greg had but he was an artist.  There was a YouTube I came across last year or maybe even 2023 and I don’t how to even find now but it had two NFL QBs I want say one was Carr from the Raiders but I don’t really remember  The point of it is they stood side by side throwing identical distances to identical targets. Radar gun was used.  They threw the normal effort (not all out) and it was measured etc. Then they were asked to throw their ‘fastball’. They were missing and most often they were missing high. It demonstrated the same principle.    edit: and applying that to arm strength, give me the guy that doesn’t need max effort to have good velocity. The margins are so narrow with less velocity in tne NFL the defenders can Close on it and this is a league where they value down to the 100th of a second level. It is that tight 
×
×
  • Create New...