What would you do (job related)?

bloodiedathame

bloodiedathame

bloodiedathame

Soldato
Joined
11 May 2007
Posts
9,225
Location
Surrey
1) £40k at a prestigious company with good career prospects, 1.5hrs commute each way, 9:30 - 6:30 (8 hr day).

2) £40k at an ok company, good benefits (private dental and health), no real career prospects, 1.5hrs commute each way, 10 - 6 (7 hr day).

3) £38k at an ok company, not great career prospects and the job is slightly off at a tangent to what I enjoy, 20 mins commute, 9 - 6 (8 hr day).


PS The 1.5hr commute is likely to cost nearly £5k a year.

2 kids, wife, + mortgage to fund.
 
Last edited:
That all depends on your lifestyle & commitments, along with other factors about the jobs.

Are they the same type of roles?#
Do 2 & 3 have poor career prospects?
Do you have family or partner?
Are you bothered about the commute?
What are the costs of commuting?
Etc.

It's hard to say just on what you've given.
 
1 I think would be my choice, but I wouldn't discount 2, as it may be that there's a future MBO opportunity there for you if it's a smaller business. I would also argue that it's you that determines your career prospects, not the company you're joining.
 
That as well as the cost (train ticket?) makes 3 more appealing certainly.

You have to ask yourself whether sacrificing that time with your kids will be worth it in the long term. What would the longer game be if you took #1? Move on to a better job closer to your current home, or move closer to the office? Or just put up with that commute indefinitely and absorb the cost against (potential) higher earnings later on?
 
Looking at it this is my thinking:

If I went for #1, I'd aim to start at 830 or 8 so I could leave earlier and therefore get home earlier (probably miss some of the peak hours of commuting). Would you relocate? 3hrs is a lot to lose every day - would they be willing to subsidise travel costs?

#1 also means you have a better chance of earning some decent bonuses and get a decent pay rise too and puts you on the path to start earning decent money.

However, #3 you'd be better off financially and have more family time. It's only a couple of k less, and if you remove the commuting costs you end up pretty much better off.

So it's a choice between career progression, or family time. For me, it would be a tough call, but I'd probably go for #3.
 
Between 1 and 3 for me ... time is worth a lot.

However, with 1 being a prestigious company with good career prospects, it appears to be the sensible option.
 
bloodiedathame said:
That's the crux of it.

At the moment I'm thinking that you only see your kids grow up once, but you can build your career at any point.
Click to expand...

I think you've answered your question. :)

Unless you relocate for the good job, which is frankly only 2k more, but actually you'd end up earning 3k less than #3 because of the commuting costs, there's not a huge advantage to it, unless you're able to get a day working from home, or somehow reduce your commuting time, or change your work hours to suit family time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom