I've been feeling very restless and generally undervalued by my current employer now for a few months so I've started to investigate my options to move. My current work is with a specialist construction subcontractor.
Now I've got a couple of options following interviews and I'm feeling a bit lost as to which would suit best.
Option 1
Identical segment of the industry - direct competitor to my current employer
Offering a significant pay rise (nearly 70%)
Commute would be a 15 minute walk each way
Modern city centre office with plenty of space, communal areas etc (obviously not a big deal currently but construction seems hugely resistant to adopting remote working as a permanent thing)
Use same software, methodologies etc as my current employer
Option 2
Main contractor based in Civils - significant more variation in projects
Lesser pay rise (25%) but a more rounded package i.e. gym membership, health/dental insurances etc
Flexible working a given, commute is a 45 minute drive each way but this would be 2-3 times a week at most. Typical out-of-town business park offices so nothing around.
Same software again, but different processes and more levels of approval being part of a national group vs current and opt1 employers both being family owned.
Now, in terms of financial situation I'm currently in the mid 30s salary wise, so opt1 is a huge boost to our household income and one that I'd be amazed if my current employer even contemplated matching (and regardless, I doubt I'd accept anyway) and will go a long way towards setting us up financially i.e. buying a house. It's also a job I know I can do well, albeit I'd expect to be busier than current. Option 2 has much less financial gain, but arguably could be a better long-term bet due to being a much more varied role at a significantly larger company, thus offering more in the way of future progression. That being said, there's nothing to stop me going for something like this again in the future anyway.
So basically, I'd be happy to work for either. Both are small teams within the department that seem to have a good dynamic and the ethos of being given a job and left to get on with it without being micromanaged. Any opinions from anyone on which way is a better consideration?
Now I've got a couple of options following interviews and I'm feeling a bit lost as to which would suit best.
Option 1
Identical segment of the industry - direct competitor to my current employer
Offering a significant pay rise (nearly 70%)
Commute would be a 15 minute walk each way
Modern city centre office with plenty of space, communal areas etc (obviously not a big deal currently but construction seems hugely resistant to adopting remote working as a permanent thing)
Use same software, methodologies etc as my current employer
Option 2
Main contractor based in Civils - significant more variation in projects
Lesser pay rise (25%) but a more rounded package i.e. gym membership, health/dental insurances etc
Flexible working a given, commute is a 45 minute drive each way but this would be 2-3 times a week at most. Typical out-of-town business park offices so nothing around.
Same software again, but different processes and more levels of approval being part of a national group vs current and opt1 employers both being family owned.
Now, in terms of financial situation I'm currently in the mid 30s salary wise, so opt1 is a huge boost to our household income and one that I'd be amazed if my current employer even contemplated matching (and regardless, I doubt I'd accept anyway) and will go a long way towards setting us up financially i.e. buying a house. It's also a job I know I can do well, albeit I'd expect to be busier than current. Option 2 has much less financial gain, but arguably could be a better long-term bet due to being a much more varied role at a significantly larger company, thus offering more in the way of future progression. That being said, there's nothing to stop me going for something like this again in the future anyway.
So basically, I'd be happy to work for either. Both are small teams within the department that seem to have a good dynamic and the ethos of being given a job and left to get on with it without being micromanaged. Any opinions from anyone on which way is a better consideration?