Lost my job, what are my options?

[startingout]

A mass layoff at my company caused me to lose my job, and I have a dilemma on my hands. DH and I are in our mid 30s with 2 kids, and I have hit my lean FIRE number. We share all finances, but he's not Mustachian and we never fully merged all of our financial accounts. In other words, my personal retirement, checking, and investment accounts have hit my lean FIRE number. (DH also has slightly more than that in financial assets in his accounts.) DH has always maintained he'll keep working until retirement age, or beyond, so he plans to carry our health insurance.

My options now are either to find another job or be a SAHM. The job market is dismal. But, DH wouldn't be too happy with me being a SAHM unless I agree to try for another baby. I do love kids, but I'm not fully on board with another one at this time. So, now, I feel pressured to find another full-time job. Not just any job, but it has to be a high-paying job or else it wouldn't be worth it for me to work. Because we have to afford our well-compensated nanny, who we're all attached to, especially the kids.

I know this situation sounds bizarre, but what should I do?

[GilesMM]

I would stay home and raise the kids if I were you. Does your spouse not want what is best for the kids?

[startingout]

I would stay home and raise the kids if I were you. Does your spouse not want what is best for the kids?

We have a great nanny and work(ed) from home, so he doesn't agree that one of us staying home would be best for the kids. Plus, he said he likes our equal marriage, where we both contribute approximately equally to childcare, chores, and income.

[GilesMM]

I would stay home and raise the kids if I were you. Does your spouse not want what is best for the kids?

We have a great nanny and work(ed) from home, so he doesn't agree that one of us staying home would be best for the kids. Plus, he said he likes our equal marriage, where we both contribute approximately equally to childcare, chores, and income.

Sounds like you have a relationship issue to sort out before you would know if you have any "options".  I'm surprised he thinks the kids are better off with a nanny than their mom!

[Moustachienne]

My question is what do you want to do?  Consider that and then talk with your husband about what's best for you, him and the family. Lots of angles to consider and no right answer. Think of this as an opportunity to consider a variety of options.  What's the vision for you as individuals and as a family?  There will need to be compromises but no one should feel forced into roles that feel wrong. And having another child should feel very right not just "not wrong"!

Good couples counseling might be a way to have these conversations.

[Moustachienne]

Maybe consider posting this dilemma in the Welcome or Ask A Mustachian thread to get a lot more eyeballs on it?

[Metalcat]

There's a lot going on here.

How are you feeling about your discussions about this with your husband?

You mention a lot of what he thinks, but it's not his career, and he certainly doesn't get to dictate that you have to have another kid, that's actually really worrying to me.

Also, things aren't black and white, it's not a matter of you having to dive back into your career while your particular job market is total shit vs being a SAHP, this dichotomy is in both of your heads. The fact is that an entire world of professional possibilities is open to you.

You have time, you have money, you have endless options. So what do you want to do with your life? What does your optimal life/career look like?

Do you feel like you have the autonomy and respect in your marriage to explore what your best options would be?

Just so you know, this isn't a bad situation. At all. You have every resource you could possibly need to move forward in the best way possible. This isn't a crisis, but it is a time to reflect, think more broadly about your options, and work *with* your partner on revisiting your collective vision for what you both want from your life and future.

This isn't a problem that needs to be fixed. This is a prompt to do some serious deep diving into what you want your life to be.

[charis]

But, DH wouldn't be too happy with me being a SAHM unless I agree to try for another baby.

Your spouse doesn't want you to stay home to take care of your current kids unless you "agree" to have another?  I hope I don't need to point out how concerning a relationship dynamic that sounds like. 

You have posted repeatedly about your desire to FIRE.  You say your husband wants things to stay "equal" but what you are really saying is that he wants you to keep working to equally fund the expensive lifestyle that you both have set up and grown accustom to/dependent on.  The plain fact is you simply don't need a nanny right now.  It doesn't matter how emotionally attached you/your children are, the nanny is a business arrangement that will have to come to an end at some point.  Most kids go through multiple caregivers in childhood, I promise you that they will be okay. 

It seems like you are using the nanny as a crutch to avoid change, whatever that turns out to be.

[former player]

I'm tempted to say that although your husband wants "an equal marriage" he should not ignore the possibility that he could also get an equal divorce.

About having another child: is there something in his past or current thinking that makes him think raising three children is a full-time job but raising two is only a part-time job?  Because I'm fairly sure that no-one who actually does the job of raising children thinks like that.  Or is he really hankering after a third child and using this as the excuse?  Is he running towards or away from family dynamics in his past?  There is probably a lot to explore behind his statement about a third child - although if he expressed it as something of an ultimatum, which is how it comes across in your post, I would find it easier to have a blazing row than an exploratory conversation.

charis is right about your nanny: however much you are all attached, at heart that is a business relationship which is tertiary to the relationship between spouses and the relationship between parents and children.  If what is best for you and your children is for the nanny to lose their job then that is a business decision that is made as a result of the business decision that caused you to lose your job.

It sounds to me as though the job layoff is recent?  I think you should give yourself a bit of time to consider your next steps, possibly using the upcoming Christmas holiday as an excuse if necessary.  Three or four weeks of decompressing, taking in what's happened and getting used to having a longer stretch of not working than usual may give you a better idea of the shape you want your life to take.  And hopefully will give your spouse some time to come to terms with options for the shape of his life that he hadn't previously considered.

[Villanelle]

Collect unemployment (assuming US-based, and you qualify) for a couple months.  Get through the holidays and decompress.  Then start up conversations with your DH about this.  But it sounds like you had preferences and yet you are sort of subjugating all of those to DH. What is the middle ground?  Is there some compromise here?  Could you look for a part-time or from-home job? 

You and DH have never agreed on major elements about your life and FIRE. It seems you've always had desires and you'd suppressed them because of what he wants.  Are you afraid to stand up to him?  If so, why?  And why does what he wants and envisions for a future hold more wieght than what you want.

This is not a new problem or issue.  It's just a new current-event in the same problem you've had for years.  The questions and answers are still the same. 

And, if you don't really and truly and enthusiastically want a third child, don't have one.  That seems kinda like a manipulation on your husban's part.  He wants another child so he's dangling that as a carrot, when really it is extortion so you can have what you want.  You continuing to work really has nothing to o with a third kid, yet he's tying them together.  In fact, logic would dictate that because a third kid is more expensive, that would be the decision that would require you to go back to work, not the other way around.  So it is a manipulation:  you give me the kid I want and I give you the retirement you want.   He's framing it as compromise, but it doesn't sound like that's what it is, especially given your very long history with the FIRE and child-rearing issues. 

[YttriumNitrate]

The advice you received in this August 2020 thread still seems to be applicable.
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/should-i-retire-now-to-be-a-sahp/msg2678361/#msg2678361

Thanks for helping me realize that being a SAHP is not what I want long term. I feel burnt out from working. I haven't had a real vacation since 2018. Mostly due to having a new baby and then the pandemic. I've had days off, sure, but they have not been satisfying or relaxing.

[Financial.Velociraptor]

@startingout

Yikes!  Your relationship dynamics with DH are a much bigger issue to me than work/career.  You got some good advice here on that level I think, already.  I've never been married and the "equal marriage" sounds good on paper, and like it doesn't really exist if DH is more in charge of how many children you have than you are!

Finally, MetalCat beat me to the punch on this (she usually does!)  Your options are not 'binary'.  There is a whole spectrum between high powered corporate career and SAHM.  You could work something at a lower level of seniority, low stress, and a straight 40, no OT. You could work part time.  You could work two part time jobs totaling 30 hours a week between the two.  You could volunteer.  You could go back to school for Master's or terminal degree.  Or go to culinary school to reinvent yourself as a master chef or something else with a creative element.  You could take something entry level in a whole new career path that appeals to your core values (EL money is clearly not going to hurt you if you take something making 35k/year).  You could start a business or a couple/three side hustles.  What I'm saying is, even if you don't have your FU money number, you have your "I have a world of options available number."   Don't be trapped by the school->work->social security->die paradigm.  You have basically "won the game" and get to write a new game with rules that favor you.

[Financial.Velociraptor]

The advice you received in this August 2020 thread still seems to be applicable.
https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/ask-a-mustachian/should-i-retire-now-to-be-a-sahp/msg2678361/#msg2678361

Thanks for helping me realize that being a SAHP is not what I want long term. I feel burnt out from working. I haven't had a real vacation since 2018. Mostly due to having a new baby and then the pandemic. I've had days off, sure, but they have not been satisfying or relaxing.

@startingout just saw the above from YttriumNitrate.   I've been asked by a number of people for advice relating to burnout.  People knew I was burned out when I went FIRE and that I've dealt with all the associated emotions and found a solution that 'worked for me'.   They have a misconception on how "mentally together" I am (switching to a life where you get 'enough' sleep is a game changer). 

I have what I think is really good advice on this matter that sort of applies even if you aren't burned out.  It has certainly been useful to several people.  Do a personal Core Values Exercise.  https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-d&q=how+do+i+determine+my+personal+core+values  I'm sure since you have the discipline to meet one of your "numbers" that you were an above average performer in your job.  But it is clear you were not a SuperHero that management couldn't live without.  To be a superstar you have to be passionate about what you do.  That comes from doing work that conforms to  your personal values.  Your burnout is evidence that you were doing something that wasn't the right "fit', else you wouldn't have been able to get enough!

There are lots of resources available a google search away on discovering your Core Values.  Do that.  Then take ACTION.  Build a life that is consistent with those core values.  That probably means at least a partial reinvention of yourself and even  your self-identity.  (That process is a little "ouchy" but worth it!) 

Oh yeah, if you have done this before - do it again.  We evolve as people, including our values.  You have to pivot every 5-7 years or you will turn even a dream career into a rut.

[startingout]

Thanks for the responses. I know the disagreement sounds concerning on face value, so I mentioned the numbers and separate accounts to prove that I know I can't be forced to do anything.

I clarified with DH and he said I could be a SAHM if I end up not finding a job, but he wouldn't be super enthused about it. Most of that is because I contributed almost half of the income, so it would be a huge adjustment for the family. Part of it is also because while I'm a good mom and a good cook, I have little interest in cleaning or organizing. So our place is likely to be as messy as it is now or messier, yet with much less income coming into the household. He does most of the cleaning now.

I know there's suggestions of me experimenting with different career paths, but DH and I have mostly agreed that it wouldn't be worth it for me to take a job under $100k. We want to keep our nanny in case I get another job quickly. It takes months to find a new nanny; daycare can also take months to wait for an opening in the right age group. I would rather stay home than work a job and send our baby to daycare. There's nothing wrong with daycare, but she hates being left behind and won't even tolerate being left with the child minders at church for 1 hour. I've also experimented a lot career-wise already, and hated all but my current path.

[reeshau]

The job market is dismal.

Others here have been following your story for some time.  I haven't, so I apologize if this missed out of context.  But, 3.7% unemployment isn't dismal--it's better than the Fed's full employment target.  It's the single metric that may keep them from beginning to reduce interest rates.  What specialty / geo do you work in to classify it as this?

It sounds to me like when people call current interest rates "high."  Yes, in the context of post-2008.  But not in any other context.  But this analogy is almost stretched too far, because the unemployment rate now has few equals, even in recent history.

[startingout]

The job market is dismal.

Others here have been following your story for some time.  I haven't, so I apologize if this missed out of context.  But, 3.7% unemployment isn't dismal--it's better than the Fed's full employment target.  It's the single metric that may keep them from beginning to reduce interest rates.  What specialty / geo do you work in to classify it as this?

It sounds to me like when people call current interest rates "high."  Yes, in the context of post-2008.  But not in any other context.  But this analogy is almost stretched too far, because the unemployment rate now has few equals, even in recent history.

I work in tech, which has been bleeding jobs all year long, if not longer.

[deborah]

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/07/tech-jobs-are-still-the-most-in-demand-says-employment-market-expert.html

[Financial.Velociraptor]

I know there's suggestions of me experimenting with different career paths, but DH and I have mostly agreed that it wouldn't be worth it for me to take a job under $100k.

You need 100k in cash or 100k in "expected value"?  Would you take a position in a startup at a low base that included meaningful equity?   For the right type of person, startups are dream work spaces.  There is little structure, huge amounts of autonomy, and nothing is ever stale.  For the wrong type of person, it is their perfect version of hell.  No structure, no supervision, inconsistent messaging from management...   If the big corporate thing burned you out, the startup environment might be invigorating. 

[reeshau]

A bit fresher data on tech employment, as of the November statistics, released on Friday:

"The unemployment rate for tech occupations fell to 1.7%, less than half the national unemployment rate (3.5%)."

This, again, when the Fed's target, the rate of "full employment," is 5%.

I don't say this to invalidate your personal observations, but to open your eyes to possibilities.  Yes, big tech has laid off.  But they are also hiring.  Like all things tech, maybe you need to pay attention to a rotation in specialty (e.g. AI) or look at other geographies or remote.  @Financial.Velociraptor 's question is a good one, too.

[Villanelle]

It's a bit unclear to me what you actually want.  Is the ideal for you to not go back to work at all, not have another kid, ditch the nanny, and also not increase at all your current level of housework, and contribute less money to the family finances? 

How are your finances currently split? (I suspect this has been covered in one of your previous threads, but don't want to dig through to find it.) And would you say the house and kid work is currently pretty close to 50/50? 

It seems to me like, if you contribute half the family expenses (which isn't the same as income, so I'm not sure?) and now you can't, then it's pretty reasonable for your DH not to be on board with you staying home, unless maybe canceling the nanny makes up for most of that shortfall. Are you willing to pick up any additional workload that would save money? 

I know you and DH have never really agreed on FIRE, but did you ever come to an agreement, even a begrudging one, on what it would look like?  What metrics needed to be met for it to happen, what the finances or household responsibilities would look like, or anything else?

[Turtle]

Tech jobs don't generally hire in December, but depending on your specialty, they might pick up after the first of the year.  You can afford to be choosy and wait for something that's a good fit, though. 

At the very least, take some time to decompress.  It seems like this is also a good time to have some in depth discussions with your spouse about goals and budget. 

[startingout]

There's actually more to this story. Back in late 2014 or early 2015, I first found out about FIRE and was instantly hooked. I see that my first post on here was in January of 2015. I tried looking for another Mustachian to date, but did not meet one. I started dating my husband shortly afterwards. He was frugal compared to most people. Our first dates were either free or cheap, and we split the bill. For example, we went hiking one time and ate at Panera another.

I told him my FIRE plans within a few months of dating, with exact financial targets for my goal of retiring in my mid-30s. He said he was not interested in joining me in FIRE, but would support that goal so long as I would take care of any kids. That seemed fine. Now after detailed conversations with him, I realize he was going along with my plan in a "we'll see" way. I've been talking about it all year long, but he thought it was merely me venting about my job instead of being serious.

My friend says I should have gotten the 2015 agreement in writing.

[Metalcat]

There's actually more to this story. Back in late 2014 or early 2015, I first found out about FIRE and was instantly hooked. I see that my first post on here was in January of 2015. I tried looking for another Mustachian to date, but did not meet one. I started dating my husband shortly afterwards. He was frugal compared to most people. Our first dates were either free or cheap, and we split the bill. For example, we went hiking one time and ate at Panera another.

I told him my FIRE plans within a few months of dating, with exact financial targets for my goal of retiring in my mid-30s. He said he was not interested in joining me in FIRE, but would support that goal so long as I would take care of any kids. That seemed fine. Now after detailed conversations with him, I realize he was going along with my plan in a "we'll see" way. I've been talking about it all year long, but he thought it was merely me venting about my job instead of being serious.

My friend says I should have gotten the 2015 agreement in writing.

Um...this sounds like a major marital alignment problem.

It doesn't sound like he understands/respects your motivations at all, and that's a huge issue.

[Villanelle]

There's actually more to this story. Back in late 2014 or early 2015, I first found out about FIRE and was instantly hooked. I see that my first post on here was in January of 2015. I tried looking for another Mustachian to date, but did not meet one. I started dating my husband shortly afterwards. He was frugal compared to most people. Our first dates were either free or cheap, and we split the bill. For example, we went hiking one time and ate at Panera another.

I told him my FIRE plans within a few months of dating, with exact financial targets for my goal of retiring in my mid-30s. He said he was not interested in joining me in FIRE, but would support that goal so long as I would take care of any kids. That seemed fine. Now after detailed conversations with him, I realize he was going along with my plan in a "we'll see" way. I've been talking about it all year long, but he thought it was merely me venting about my job instead of being serious.

My friend says I should have gotten the 2015 agreement in writing.

It sort of sounds like both of you saw a major potential conflict but didn't want to lose the relationship, so you found a bandaid that you both were willing to look at as a solution, and walked down the aisle. 

He never really wanted you to FIRE, and you never really wanted to be a homemaker.  (I'm guessing that "take care of the kids" probably meant more than just driving them to soccer and overseeing homework.  Especially since in previous threads, you've talked a lot about division of household labor.  It seems he meant "be a homemaker and housewife, so the vacuuming and dishes and Christmas shopping and cooking are yours".  That's what a lot (I'd wager most) people say when they sum it up a "stay home with the kids".  Any woman (and a couple men) I know who "stays home with the kids" phrases it about like that, but does all those other things as that's usually the role of the SAHP.  So I'm guessing that's what your DH meant.  And it sounds like, if you said you'd stay home with the kids and pick up the majority of the household and emotional labor stuff, he'd go for that, even if he didn't get his third kid. He does most of the cleaning now, and probably feels that if you are staying home, you should be picking up most of that, not just taking care of the kids.  But you don't want that. (which, to be clear, is completely reasonable and understandable, but so is him not wanting to work FT and still do 50% of the house stuff.  So neither of you is wrong or unreasonable, but your stances put you in opposition.)

So I'm not sure that getting it in writing in 2015 would have helped, unless it made each of you get more specific about what you actually wanted, meant, and were willing to agree to.  You have been on fundamentally different pages about this stuff since a few month into dating, and kicking the can down the road for years. It sounds like you saw a friction point in your relationship and were worried about what would happen it you icked at it, so you came to a vague, rushed agreement on it so you could avoid a potential rupture. 

I agree with MC that he doesn't seem to understand what you actually want.  Do you understand what he wants?  If he were posting in a message board somewhere with his version of the story, what would it be?  Other than the "third kid" thing, he actually seems fairly reasonable to me.  Just a different version of reasonable than yours. 

What is the compromise?  What's the middle ground for you?  Usually that might be something like part-time work, but you've [both of you, from the sounds of it] have made the nanny a non-negotiable in this, which you say takes that option off the table.  Once you dig to really understand his motivations, what can you do to move in that direction, partly, that doesn't entirely disregard your motivations?  What can you ask from him that moves you closer to yours, but doesn't pull him too far?

As a side note, if I ever got to a point with my spouse where I was thinking maybe I should have gotten something in writing, I'd be terrified about the state of my relationship and getting into counseling ASAP. (Yes I know you said "your friend" says it, but you wouldn't have mentioned it if you didn't see some truth or value in it.) 

[charis]

As a side note, if I ever got to a point with my spouse where I was thinking maybe I should have gotten something in writing, I'd be terrified about the state of my relationship and getting into counseling ASAP. (Yes I know you said "your friend" says it, but you wouldn't have mentioned it if you didn't see some truth or value in it.)

This should be more than a side note.  This sounds like a major miscommunication that could alter the course of your lives - I would run to a marriage counselor.

[Metalcat]

As a side note, if I ever got to a point with my spouse where I was thinking maybe I should have gotten something in writing, I'd be terrified about the state of my relationship and getting into counseling ASAP. (Yes I know you said "your friend" says it, but you wouldn't have mentioned it if you didn't see some truth or value in it.)

This should be more than a side note.  This sounds like a major miscommunication that could alter the course of your lives - I would run to a marriage counselor.

I actually think individual counselling would be better at this state.

Marriage counselling works when two people can perceive a problem and both want to work on it. I suspect that neither OP nor her DH really perceive what the major problem is.

When I meet people who are in marriages with unhealthy dynamics, I almost always push the person to seek individual counselling first to work through what boundaries and expectations are healthy, what aren't, what patyer s they have that are making them feel okay with whatever is not actually healthy in their marriage.

When two people know exactly what the dynamic problems are, it's pretty easy to address. But when you have a marriage that seems to have some foundationally concerning structures and neither seems to perceive them as an issue? That's a hell of a lot harder for couples counselling to address.

[MrsSpendyPants]

Can your husband's salary support the nanny?  We hit our leanFI number so I quit and will be managing our rentals.  I did not want to be a stay at home mom so we're keeping the nanny and just not saving anymore for the time being.

[charis]

Can your husband's salary support the nanny?  We hit our leanFI number so I quit and will be managing our rentals.  I did not want to be a stay at home mom so we're keeping the nanny and just not saving anymore for the time being.

The OP has made it clear that he wants her to keep contributing equally to their income or stay home with the kids.  That is the crux of the issue.

[FireLane]

I have to agree with the other comments. This isn't a financial problem, it's a relationship problem.

OP, you said you've already hit your lean-FIRE number. Your husband has at least as much in his own accounts, and he intends to work until standard retirement age. You have enough money to do anything reasonable you want to do with your lives. That's a huge milestone; most people never even get that far. But now you have to resolve some deeper questions about what you want when you're no longer driven by the necessity of earning a paycheck.

What you disagree about is what you want your life together to look like. He wants you to either keep working or have another kid. You want to FIRE and have more leisure. Neither of those life choices is wrong, they're both reasonable things to want, but they're not compatible with each other.

This is a problem the two of you have to solve together. You can't be pulling in different directions, or you'll start to build up resentment for each other.

You really need to sit down with him and have a serious talk about the direction of your lives. What does each of you imagine your life will look like in 5, 10 or 20 years? What compromises is your husband willing to make? What compromises are you willing to make?

Ideally, you would've had a talk like this and come to some agreement before getting married or having kids. But late is better than never. The longer you put it off, the harder it's going to be.

[lhamo]

Agree with those suggesting therapy -- I would also recommend working on yourself a bit more first before starting anything as a couple.

Do you have enough cash reserves that you could be out of the workforce for 6-12 months and keep the nanny?  Would your SO be supportive of you using this time to figure out a longer term plan?  Maybe you could use the break to explore other interests that might lead to employment that is more balanced/enjoyable to you as you move through the small kids chaos stage of your life. 

[The Beebsta]

There’s a lot in here that I won’t comment on as others have addressed it.

One sticking point seems to be the cleaning. A compromise could be that you get a cleaner. It will be much cheaper than a Nanny.

As for the third child. If you don’t both want a third child, you don’t have a third child, it’s that simple. My SO would have loved a third child but that was never something I wanted, so it didn’t happen. You can’t (or at the very least absolutely should not) have a child you don’t wholeheartedly want. It’s a recipe for disaster for everyone involved.

[tj]

I have to agree with the other comments. This isn't a financial problem, it's a relationship problem.

OP, you said you've already hit your lean-FIRE number. Your husband has at least as much in his own accounts, and he intends to work until standard retirement age. You have enough money to do anything reasonable you want to do with your lives. That's a huge milestone; most people never even get that far. But now you have to resolve some deeper questions about what you want when you're no longer driven by the necessity of earning a paycheck.

What you disagree about is what you want your life together to look like. He wants you to either keep working or have another kid. You want to FIRE and have more leisure. Neither of those life choices is wrong, they're both reasonable things to want, but they're not compatible with each other.

This is a problem the two of you have to solve together. You can't be pulling in different directions, or you'll start to build up resentment for each other.

You really need to sit down with him and have a serious talk about the direction of your lives. What does each of you imagine your life will look like in 5, 10 or 20 years? What compromises is your husband willing to make? What compromises are you willing to make?

Ideally, you would've had a talk like this and come to some agreement before getting married or having kids. But late is better than never. The longer you put it off, the harder it's going to be.

They live in a 6000 square foot McMansion.  Their double her lean fire wealth may be less than their debt.

[WorkingToUnwind]

It's not really clear to me what you want. Do you want to downshift to a part time job, or switch to being a SAHM? Does your FIRE money cover your half of the household expenses? I see no problem with being a SAHM and splitting household duties. Depending on SO's workload, of course. If he's working 60 hours a week, it's probably not fair to expect him to do 50% of the household stuff. A housekeeper could solve a lot of angst about cleaning though. Anyways, I'm just really curious as to what you'd truly like right now and what your fire money actually covers.