Would I be mad to do this?

rIcK

rIcK

rIcK

Associate
Joined
5 Jan 2004
Posts
1,698
I made a thread much like this 12 months ago....

I have 2 job offers on the table, both are senior positions:

One is permanent offers the better salary with the good potential to grow and even for promotion, 40 hours per week.

The second, is a 12 month FTC with good likelihood of renewal working for the BBC in R&D, ends up about £300 less per month after tax and is top of band ( so not sure where I stand for pay rises in the future ) 35 hours per week.

The wages are more of less the same per hour, simply put which do I go for based on what I have mentioned.
 
RaohNS said:
Go for one as working for the PBC is putting you in a dodgy position on these boards TVL threads.

Plus the PBC = evil
Click to expand...

I haven't got a clue what this even means.

Go for the permanent one with the room to grow and progress, unless there's something extra special you've not mentioned about the other one then the only plus side I can see is 5 hours less a week which is nothing.
 
May have been better situated in the Careers and Development thread.

It's a tough decision and a gamble based on job security i guess. I have a colleague who's partner works at the BBC, and i don't think they get full permanent contracts until they've covered a number of years. It makes it easier for BBC to move people around projects that way.

On the other hand, how financially secure is the other company offering you a position? Are they in a growing market etc, making lots of sales...
 
The other company is a particularly large car rentals company and growing well, so no issues of the company going under etc.
 
tom_e said:
I haven't got a clue what this even means.

Go for the permanent one with the room to grow and progress, unless there's something extra special you've not mentioned about the other one then the only plus side I can see is 5 hours less a week which is nothing.
Click to expand...

One must opt for one. As one would be in a tenuous position on overclockersuk forums given this forum has a TV Licensing thread filled with ones who opt to abstain from paying ones TV License.

One must note that the BBC equals evil.
 
Personally I would always go for the more secure prospect i.e. the 40 hour per week job, it all depends on what you'd enjoy more though really.
 
More money + permanent + better options = win for me

The only draw of the BBC job you seem to mention is less working hours and in any senior position the amount of working hours is a bit of a guideline rather than reality in any case.
 
Cosimo said:
That does look interesting working in the forefront of broadcasting technology, does the other job offer technical challenges?
Click to expand...

Its the entire implementation, deployment and infrastructure side of this (Openstack mainly) though both roles are similar in this area.
 
I need to decide this more or less now, thanks for the opinions guys.

I made the choice NOT to work for the BBC around 12 months back, the role wasn't anywhere near as good as this one on offer. I know that this department is difficult to get in to and in the end £300 a month can be made up by random contracting work if I need it.

Secondly this department has its own autonomy compared to the rest of the BBC and I feel it would also do wonders for my CV in the future.

I have a gut feeling telling me to go for the BBC R&D position so I think that is what I will do here. I always seem to do well at interviews and I am good at what I do, so I have no problems with at worst needing to find further work in 12 months. I seem to have a habit of doing it every year at the moment anyway....
 
Last edited:
R&D for the BBC is an incredibly fulfilling role, and is what sets them apart from other broadcasters. I say go for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom