The Money Mustache Community
Learning, Sharing, and Teaching => Ask a Mustachian => Topic started by: cash2001 on May 14, 2018, 05:33:49 PM
-
Hi everyone- I am having a difficult time deciding if I should take a job offer (going from 38k to 55k) but no longer able to work remotely? The new 55k job is only 2 miles from my house and quite a bump in salary that I have been hoping for. My current job allows me to work from home 3 days a week and other cities every once in awhile (flexibility benefit not for conferences) which is great for quality of life. The new job does not- it will primarily be 40 hours a week in the office ugh. I am 32 years old and do not plan on relocating anytime soon. Thoughts?
-
Hi everyone- I am having a difficult time deciding if I should take a job offer (going from 38k to 55k) but no longer able to work remotely? The new 55k job is only 2 miles from my house and quite a bump in salary that I have been hoping for. My current job allows me to work from home 3 days a week and other cities every once in awhile (flexibility benefit not for conferences) which is great for quality of life. The new job does not- it will primarily be 40 hours a week in the office ugh. I am 32 years old and do not plan on relocating anytime soon. Thoughts?
I don't know what city and what line of work you are in, but I would look for something that pays even more. If that's hard to find, i would take the 55K job for now.
To me, WFH benefit only matters if it's 100%. Then I could work from a Caribbean island, Spain or Portugal or something. If I have to stay in my current expensive city, WFH 3 days a week would be nice but not something I would accept for a lower salary.
-
I should add that I live on an island and have no interest in relocating
That's fine then, seems like an easy decision.
-
I would take the 55k job that is a huge bump, and a 2 mile commute is 10-15 minutes by bike.
-
Easy decision. Take the office job for the $17K annual pay bump.
-
it's probably enough of money that I would take the new job, but it really depends on where you are in your FI pursuit. I am close enough in my situation that I would take less pay to work from home more.
If it's only a short bike ride away, I think I'd take the new job.
-
What the differences in responsibility? Is the new job going to make you miserable, or would it be fine aside from having to be in the office?
-
The biggest reason to work from home (for me) is to avoid a long/stressful commute and the associated costs. At two miles from home, you're still going to avoid this even going in to the office.
-
If WFH and salary are the two main variables and all else is more-or-less equal then I'd take the 55k job. A 2 mile commute via bike should take ~10 minutes, very quick and easy.
-
2mi is super sweet.
I've negotiated 1 day WFH and hope to add another 1-2 to that over the next year.
My WFH benefit is killing my 1.5+ hour RT commute each day. If I was 10mi or less, I'd just bike and not care about WFH.
-
With a short commute and a 45% increase in salary, that's a no brainer to me. Take the new job, unless it's an awful job you don't want (but why would you have applied?)
-
With a short commute and a 45% increase in salary, that's a no brainer to me. Take the new job, unless it's an awful job you don't want (but why would you have applied?)
Absolutely. That is a massive salary increase.
-
it's probably enough of money that I would take the new job, but it really depends on where you are in your FI pursuit. I am close enough in my situation that I would take less pay to work from home more.
If it's only a short bike ride away, I think I'd take the new job.
This. If you are close to FI, then maybe the salary (and savings gains) aren't as important as your happiness with work and working conditions. If you are just starting out, then a huge increase in pay should help you quite a bit.
Maybe there's flexibility to go back to your old job if the new one doesn't work out for some reason. If that's a possibility, then it's even more of a no-brainer to try out the new job and higher pay.
-
There's no way I would agree to go in 5 days a week for $17K more a year. It all depends on your circumstances. For me, two wfh days are two more days a week I get to see my husband, because those days I work from the city where he lives.
-
Keep in mind we're not talking about going from 100k to 117k. 38k to 55k is a massive jump and could dramatically accelerate FI if that's the ultimate goal (and if the OP is not very close already).
-
I would go for the salary bump, given the short 4 miles commute per day.
It does require you to be at an office. That partly sucks (cubicle/open office) and partly provides you with free coffee/tea, copying, printing etc. As well as a positive social interaction with (some of) your colleagues.
At home you can probably do some homely tasks in between your work, like hanging up the laundry. But you will sooner reach FIRE with a significantly bigger income. Just don't fall for lifestyle inflation.
-
Keep in mind we're not talking about going from 100k to 117k. 38k to 55k is a massive jump and could dramatically accelerate FI if that's the ultimate goal (and if the OP is not very close already).
A similar percentage bump from $100k would be nearly $145k.
This is a HUGE jump in salary.
-
I'd do it in a heartbeat! My initial answer was going to be 'no way!' until I saw the amount of the raise. I work from home 100% myself, and wouldn't consider changing for $17k/year... but my baseline is higher.
My current position wasn't intended as a work from home job. After a few years of proving myself, I was able to negotiate the work from home deal. I think it has cost me a bit in raises since then, but so worth it!
-
Keep in mind we're not talking about going from 100k to 117k. 38k to 55k is a massive jump and could dramatically accelerate FI if that's the ultimate goal (and if the OP is not very close already).
A similar percentage bump from $100k would be nearly $145k.
This is a HUGE jump in salary.
I'd actually rank it higher than that.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/money-improves-quality-of-life_n_1434073 (https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/money-improves-quality-of-life_n_1434073)
There's a fair amount of evidence that moving up in salary when making below 70k per year is likely to result in more happiness than moving from 100 - 145k.
-
Keep in mind we're not talking about going from 100k to 117k. 38k to 55k is a massive jump and could dramatically accelerate FI if that's the ultimate goal (and if the OP is not very close already).
A similar percentage bump from $100k would be nearly $145k.
This is a HUGE jump in salary.
I'd actually rank it higher than that.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/money-improves-quality-of-life_n_1434073 (https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/money-improves-quality-of-life_n_1434073)
There's a fair amount of evidence that moving up in salary when making below 70k per year is likely to result in more happiness than moving from 100 - 145k.
I still think it has to be a very personal decision. I make just under $50k, but for me the freedom brings more happiness than the money would. If I were just under $40k, I suppose it would depend on how well I’d managed to make things work on that salary.
-
Keep in mind we're not talking about going from 100k to 117k. 38k to 55k is a massive jump and could dramatically accelerate FI if that's the ultimate goal (and if the OP is not very close already).
A similar percentage bump from $100k would be nearly $145k.
This is a HUGE jump in salary.
I'd actually rank it higher than that.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/money-improves-quality-of-life_n_1434073 (https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/money-improves-quality-of-life_n_1434073)
There's a fair amount of evidence that moving up in salary when making below 70k per year is likely to result in more happiness than moving from 100 - 145k.
I still think it has to be a very personal decision. I make just under $50k, but for me the freedom brings more happiness than the money would. If I were just under $40k, I suppose it would depend on how well I’d managed to make things work on that salary.
It would be a bigger factor for me if it was 100% remote, because then I could go other places and still work. The OP has to be in the office two days a week already, which means they can't just go to Australia for 3 months and keep working.
-
Keep in mind we're not talking about going from 100k to 117k. 38k to 55k is a massive jump and could dramatically accelerate FI if that's the ultimate goal (and if the OP is not very close already).
A similar percentage bump from $100k would be nearly $145k.
This is a HUGE jump in salary.
I'd actually rank it higher than that.
https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/money-improves-quality-of-life_n_1434073 (https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/money-improves-quality-of-life_n_1434073)
There's a fair amount of evidence that moving up in salary when making below 70k per year is likely to result in more happiness than moving from 100 - 145k.
+1 This definitely held true for me. As I just outlined in a recent case I took a huge huge pay cut to drop a "soul crushing" commute. Going from $52k to $75k was a Godsend. Going from $75k to $119 didn't bring even close to the same level of fulfillment. Just longer hours more responsibility and lifestyle inflation.
(http://)
-
You guys have been very helpful in giving me the kick in the ass to just suck it up and bring in more money for my ultimate goal of ER. I did fail to mention that my husband brings in 50k and we make about another 15k with side gigs. My husband does not have the choice of remote work so even with the option now, we can't go on our long trips more than once a year anyway....
OP: This new information changes the calculus. Instead of 45% increase,
your combined income goes up by 16%. If you're both already maxing out
tax deferred savings (IRA, HSA, etc.), then the net increase is even lower.
Which is not to say you shouldn't consider the new job, but there's less of
a reason to make a choice that may diminish your quality of life.