My question: What's more important, protecting work life balance (keeping 7 on 7 off) or making a compromise to achieve early retirement faster (taking the management position)?
I guess this depends a little bit on the balance between the following four things:
- How quickly you want achieve FI/RE,
- How quickly you'd reach it in your current position,
- How much quicker you'd reach it in your new position,
- And your anticipated current happiness decrease from the new position
MMM has, in one blog post, mentioned that in his view, there is little point in busting your arse to aim for further pay increases beyond ~$100k, because at that point, the road to retirement is so quick anyway that furthering your salary increase actually gives diminishing returns on how quickly you can achieve FI - assuming a relatively efficient lifestyle - and therefore isn't worth the additional stress/responsibility of a higher position. So this is worth considering. I know I'm doing the equivalent of quoting the bible by saying that, though, of course!
Personally, I think this is something you have to figure out for yourself. If you love your work, then a huge bump in work hours won't seem as bad as if you absolutely hate it.
Have you read MMM's 'Shockingly Simple Math-...' article? Or whatever one has the chart showing you your savings rate vs. time to reach FI? Might be worth a read if not.
But to look at this another way - if you're asking me what I'd do myself - I'd stay as I am. I would view/consider this 7 on/7 off arrangement to almost be like semi-retirement. It might take longer to reach my full FI number, but considering my work schedule already looks like someone who's half FI, I wouldn't mind too much! Hope this rambling helps.
Edit: a word. Also, LAGuy made some great points.
