Evaluating job offers

[firedupready2go]

Dear Mustachians,


I am hoping for some assistance in evaluating two job offers. I’ll need to respond to each in the next week or so and appreciate your input and advice. The third option is remaining where I am.


Option #1:
$130,000
Director level title
Work remotely with travel on a monthly basis
6% 401K match after the first year, 5 year vesting
Small organization, but national in scope
No immediate opportunity for internal advancement, but would establish a national base from which to advance later

Option #2:
$140,000
Executive Director level title
Work in office daily
30 mile commute (60 miles round trip - could cost upwards of $4,000 per year in gas and related costs)
Less frequent travel (likely 5-6 times per year)
13% 401K match, immediate vesting and begins immediately
Large organization but local/regional in scope (with a very strong local reputation)
Could have internal opportunities to advance

Option #3: Remain with Current Employer
$96,000
Director level title
Work in office daily, minimal commute (4 miles)
Minimal travel
No 401K match
No opportunities to advance internally
Have only been with the employer for 18 months, so I’m worried about the perception of job hopping

I would love to know which option you would pick and why - and any advice on my job hopping concern. You can assume all benefits are substantially equal between the three. Thank you so much for your advice!

[PMG]

What about the nature of the work itself? How does each job align with your strengths and interests?  Which job/organization seemed to offer the best work/life balance that suits your needs?  Those are key pieces to this choice that don’t come across in the numbers.

[JAYSLOL]

Sounds like you are being underpaid by 30-40% at your current job, unless your current job is very comfortable, low stress and you enjoy being there, I’d go with one of the higher paid options, perceptions be damned.  Other than that, there’s not a huge difference money wise between the other two, so it comes down to which one you think you’d prefer. 

[AccidentialMustache]

18 months is an old-timer in tech in the valley. 3 years is a lifer.

Which is to say, give some thought if 18 months being job hopping is a perception problem of yours, based on your location.

I like longer stints than that, because the first 6 months are always learning learning learning and I don't feel productive and comfortable. I feel productive at 6 and comfortable at 12, generally speaking. I have also been told by managers that I hold myself to high standards. Part of that is learning the tech stack, part of that is learning the business, and part of that is learning company culture.

Personally I wouldn't worry about a shorter stint. If it is just one, it could be a bad match, it could be ready for promotion and no good opportunities, or a number of other things. If it is multiple 18 month or less stints, then I might worry.

[ATtiny85]

Without knowing anything else, Option 1. Remote work, some travel. Done. Assuming you want to change.

[MayDay]

I'd pick option 2. I don't care for remote work.

Job hopping depends on the whole resume. I hire quite a few engineers (NOT tech) and I pass on job hoppers. If you're 2-4 years out of college and you've been in 2 jobs fine. If you are a mid career professional and you've got a bunch of 2 year stints, nah, I'll pass.  That's obviously very industry dependent so I can't comment on if it applies in your case.

[firedupready2go]

I'd pick option 2. I don't care for remote work.

Job hopping depends on the whole resume. I hire quite a few engineers (NOT tech) and I pass on job hoppers. If you're 2-4 years out of college and you've been in 2 jobs fine. If you are a mid career professional and you've got a bunch of 2 year stints, nah, I'll pass.  That's obviously very industry dependent so I can't comment on if it applies in your case.

Some additional context: I’m 10 years into my career. I have had 4 employers with tenures of 2.5, 2.5, 3.5, and 1.5 years (the latter being my current employer). We’re about 40% of the way to FI and want to accelerate, which is a significant financial goal. My spouse works in a very stable job earning around $82,000. And as for the commute with option 2, it’s highway - but one that is often subject to significant traffic snarls.

[lucenzo11]

If this was me, I'd probably take one of the new offers. Both offer >30% more income which would exceed my threshold for making a move. As for which of the two, I'm pretty torn, but would probably go of the remote job because I currently work remote and prior to that was working in an office less than 10 miles away. Now I just cannot stand that thought of spending my time just to commute to work. However, the 13% 401k match is really tempting, it's about $10,000 more per year than then 6% match and getting that will really help with accelerating your savings.

While that's what I would do, this is really about you. Do you like/want to work remotely or do you like to be in the office? I'm assuming some remote work or at least a shorter commute is desired for you since you mentioned that as a factor.

As for the job hopping, I'm not experienced with this (working for 10 years, all at same company), but my general opinion at this point is that if you have two offers from other companies after less than 2 years at your current position then there isn't an issue with it in your industry right now. Yes, some future employers may not like it, but it's becoming more and more of the trend of having to switch jobs to move up in level or salary. With this hot job market, I think this is something that will get easily overlooked as long as you fill their needs. This may change if the job market cools off, but nothing to worry about right now.

I think some questions to ask yourself or answer here:
1. How did the two new offers come about? Were you approached or did you seek them out?
2. What prompted your last job change and what was it about your current position that was attractive to you? If it was non-financial, do your current offers also address this or did the promises of your current employer never come to terms?
3. Do you dislike your current job?
4. Have you considered trying to counter any of the offers or go to your current employer with these offers? I have mixed feelings on this as it can get annoying, but think if it's done properly and professionally, then it's a great way to see how much a company wants you and how flexible they can be, both now and in the future. Maybe Option #1 can increase their salary to match #2. Maybe #2 can give you one or two days at home a week. Maybe your current employer can increase your salary and convince you to stay. Some of these may not happen, but you don't know if you don't ask.

Best of luck, tough situation on paper, but overall you are in a great position to get what you want here.

[Dee18]

Does the 5 year vesting on Option #1 mean that you lose all employer contributions if you leave before 5 years?  If so, I would think that should eliminate Option #1 as you have not previously stayed at a job that long.

[JLee]

WFH buys a lot of flexibility, especially in director-level roles.  Also factor in the time spent commuting as well as the cost - if your 60 miles a day is an hour (which realistically is probably best case?) you're adding 12.5% to your weekly work hours for a ~15% bump in pay/401k match, so it's roughly flat on the money/time equation.

That said, the 401k vesting is probably 20% a year for 5 years, but that's definitely a financial factor.  13% match at 140k is awesome, and will let you stuff way more into a 401k than most people.

I would take #1, but I don't like commuting or working in offices (I'm hybrid now and would happily go full remote if it were possible).

[Rdy2Fire]

I would definitely take a new position and not even think about the 18 months. I say that because in tech no one cares that much and obviously it isn't concerning to the 2 companies offering you positions.

Knowing nothing really about the actual jobs

If you don't mind going to an office everyday and want to get to FIRE more quickly then I'd go for #2 because of the contributions/vesting, not the 10K more.

I like #1 because I'd prefer to not commute, deal with traffic, time, etc and think my time/freedom is worth more.

With that said, since you asked what would we choose and why. I'd choose to go back to #2 and negotiate. Something like I am very interested but have another offer 100% WFH and my current position is 4 miles from my home. I'd be very interested in taking the position if you'd be willing to make some concessions. Would I be allowed to work from home 2 days a week with the understanding that if I'm needed in the office on one of those days I'd be there. My guess is they would have SOME level of flexibility. Possibly the more important thing here, is based on how they deal with that question you may gain more insight into the company and their inner workings.

[RunningintoFI]

Just want to say that job hopping is not something I worry too much about.  If you have a good story to back it up, most people look right past it. 

For some context, I have switched jobs 4 times in a 3 year period now and have had no issues being in high demand throughout this period after the numerous transitions.  Granted, part of the key to this success was that I had a 6 year stint early in my career with one company so it showed that I'm definitely willing to be loyal to the right fit but no one ever gave it a second thought once I walked them through a really logical career progression. 

The key to any job hopping is having a great story for why you wanted to join any new organization.  Great stories usually involve - chance to try new skills, big passion related to the product or team, growth in capability, chance to utilize recent degree, chance to manage more people, etc.  Never money.  Sometimes you can get away with moving closer to family but it usually looks best to showcase that you solved new problems and were ready for new ones.     

[firedupready2go]

Does the 5 year vesting on Option #1 mean that you lose all employer contributions if you leave before 5 years?  If so, I would think that should eliminate Option #1 as you have not previously stayed at a job that long.

Great question. It’s a graded vesting schedule (20%/year for five years).