Impulsively Quit Job with ~9 months F You Money - Scared

[PuckDaddy14]

Don't rush into another conventional job. You may end up making less and putting up with the same grief, just a different view. Use this time to really evaluate what you want to do. Making 3k a month isn't too difficult. Even if you make half that, that 30k will last a lot longer. If you dont mind physical work, start cutting grass or pressure washing driveways, decks, etc.. You can bill $65 an hour and have the flexibility to take days off to plan your next move. Or grab a courier job. My buddy makes $800 a week and has an old van with 200k miles on it. Sell the condo and go work as a crew hand on a yacht for a couple of months. Come back and share your adventures with your GF while you shack up at her place. Just dont sit at home and freak yourself out. Get out there and work without the pressure that it has to be your lifelong profession.

I know its difficult to not second guess your decision. But, you just did what a ton of people on this board don't have the guts to do without a major stash.

I'm jealous!

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts.  This is all interesting and good advice, especially with summer full on now.

[PuckDaddy14]

Are you by any  chance in the Seattle area? If so, then you probably don't need to worry too much --  I had coffee with a friend of mine who is in development the other day, and she was saying people are scrambling to fill development jobs. Lots of money floating around and not enough people to stay on top of it.  Might be hard to get something at the level you were at, though.  But your expenses are low, so you might want to look for a better fit with lower pay.

Given the salary level, I would originally have guessed you were in NYC or SFO, but the housing costs don't make sense.

I am in DC.  Lots of non-profits here.

Yeah, that was my other thought.  Lots of jobs there, too.  I'm sure you'll land on your feet.  Great that your girlfriend is so supportive.

You probably know about the PND jobs database already, but just in case:

=&attr_tags_job_type_lk[]=&attr_tags_location_lk[]=district+of+columbia&search_text=&btn=&day_filter=0]http://philanthropynewsdigest.org/jobs?attr_tags_org_type_lk[]=&attr_tags_job_type_lk[]=&attr_tags_location_lk[]=district+of+columbia&search_text=&btn=&day_filter=0

Is the board aware of how the CEO's attitude is running things into the ground?  Hopefully your leaving will send a strong message.

Thank you for sending this job board.  I was not aware of it.  Much appreciated.

While I have gotten great support from donors, partners, competitors, vendors, consultants, staff, and the old CEO...I have not heard from a single board member.  It is surprising but who knows what he is telling them.  Staff has been texting and calling (some in tears) saying his lying about things. 

I am not the first senior staffer to leave under his regime: two directors (one two weeks ago), Chief Compliance Officer, and CFO.  Meanwhile, he has brought over "cronies" from his last organization every time someone leaves.  The donors are not happy he is basically just filling spots from another non profit without looking for the best talent available. Whether donors would contact the board or not remains to be seen.

[PuckDaddy14]

Hello Mustacians,

I have some updates and wanted to get some input as I am unsure what to do next:

As a reminder, I walked out of my job at $165k four weeks ago. 
Not being in the rat race for the last four weeks has strengthen my resolve to exit for good (or last least to be working from home).
Girlfriend moved in today so our expenses will be much more under control now that we have one domicile. 
I have $34k in a taxable investment account (post Brexit)
I have $83k in an IRA.  ~$45k is being rolled over to that account.  Hopefully most of that was preserved since the transaction was initiated pre-Brexit. 

1) I have a firm job offer at $120,000 to do government relations/advocacy/policy (little experience in GR and advocacy, organization would be taking a chance on me but I am sure I can do it and I have a policy background so this is just putting that in action) and fundraising (very experienced in one of their fundraising programs, little experience with their other programs) at a disease specific non-profit.  It would be a VP position doing fundraising and government relations which could at best set me up to run a small non-profit in the future or at worst ensure I would have employment in the DC area until I retire. 

According to the organization's 990s from 2013 and 2014 the Sr VP of GR and VP of GR (two different people in the last couple years) made $145k.  They were only doing GR but had a lot more experience than me in that area.  They were not doing fundraising. 

2) I could potentially have another job offer at $175k plus a large bonus.  That job is currently hindered by a 12 month non-compete.  The board of the other foundation is worried about hiring me because of it.  However, events unfolding in the next couple weeks could render that non-compete either waived or the other foundation could realize it is unenforceable.  This job would be in a very specific kind of fundraising that does not ensure employment as it could potentially go away in 1-5 years.

3) A donor from my previous foundation seems to think I could take over his job being the relationship manager for all of the foundations.  I do not know a salary range but I assume it would be in the $200s or very close with lot of benefits.  Caveat here is that I would have to fly to California from DC for a week once a month.  That is best case scenario.  This position is moving slowly however and there is no guarantee.

What say you Mustacians? 
Do I take the bird in hand and set myself up for a sure thing long term?
Do I negotiate and try to get closer to $140k?
Do I put this current offer off and wait out the other two potential opportunities, knowing I will likely lose this one? 

I believe the best thing to do is just take the offer in front of me but I am worried about leaving money on the table if I don't wait for the other situations to play out.  That is why I am seeking some advice.

Thank you!

[Cassie]

I would take the offer in hand and then if you get offered one of the others and want it then take that too.  One time when I had interviewed at 2 companies one hired me. The other where I really wanted to work was slow at offering but did 2 weeks later and I took that one. It all worked out.

[mozar]

One firm offer and two semi offers in a month? You are in high demand. You shouldn't worry about negotiating for higher. You may or may not lose the first offer, but you can keep all of them in play and pit them against each other until the best one wins.

[PuckDaddy14]

For position #1, do you know why there has been so much turnover in that position the last couple of years?  Losing two senior people in rapid succession, who were doing a job less complex than what they are asking you to do, is a red flag for me.  Also, how are the organizational finances overall?  120k sounds like a lowball offer given what prior incumbents were paid and again considering the fact that they want you to do extra things besides just government relations.

I am unsure about that.  Guessing that it is because of the nature of GR people to seek out the next best thing.  I was thinking of asking the CEO this in my reply to the offer. 

For position #2, what kind of future potential career development would this specialized (but less secure) type of fundraising bring you?  Does it make you significantly more marketable?  If not, I would pass on that one -- a $55k annual premium is not worth the loss of longer-term security position #1 brings (assuming you actually enjoy the whole DC vibe and want to stay there longer term).  But definitely let position #1 people know that you have another offer in a much higher range.

Future career development is limited to pharma jobs, which are not really available in DC.  It is very niche and under a lot of scrutiny right now.

I do not enjoy the DC vibe at all and wish I could move to Colorado.  My GF is here for her family and job and says she won't live someone where our (future presumably) kid could only see its grandparents a couple of times a year. 

Position #3 sounds like it would take a long time to work out.  The monthly bicoastal travel thing can also become a serious drag -- and there is likely to be scope/expectation creep and you will probably end up travelling a lot more than one week a month (that happened to my DH and was one of the reasons he ultimately quit).

Agreed, I think it would get old quick.  The guy who is leaving the job keeps telling me what a great job it is though.  I will talk to him more to get specifics and salary range.  I just can't see doing that long-term.

Thanks.  Do you have a blog or anything?  I like reading about people who have actually achieved FI.  Being 36, unmarried and no children...but going down that path finally...and with only $125k in an IRA...I can use all the inspiration I can get.

[boarder42]

still amazes me what "non Profits" pay people to work for them. 

that aside i'd take the job on the table now and then jump to one of the other 2 if they come around.

[randymarsh]

still amazes me what "non Profits" pay people to work for them. 

Paying someone 200K to direct fundraisers that bring in millions is a pretty good return.

[boarder42]

still amazes me what "non Profits" pay people to work for them. 

Paying someone 200K to direct fundraisers that bring in millions is a pretty good return.

People running non profits should do it for free IMO. Save your money support yourself then ask others to help the less fortunate. Just my opinion. And I run a non profit charity event.

[tweezers]

still amazes me what "non Profits" pay people to work for them. 

Paying someone 200K to direct fundraisers that bring in millions is a pretty good return.

People running non profits should do it for free IMO. Save your money support yourself then ask others to help the less fortunate. Just my opinion. And I run a non profit charity event.

Running a charity event on a volunteer basis is much, much different than running a major non-profit organization.  Are you suggesting that UNICEF, the Bill Gates Foundation, the American Cancer Society, etc. should be run by volunteers?? 

[boarder42]

still amazes me what "non Profits" pay people to work for them. 

Paying someone 200K to direct fundraisers that bring in millions is a pretty good return.

People running non profits should do it for free IMO. Save your money support yourself then ask others to help the less fortunate. Just my opinion. And I run a non profit charity event.

Running a charity event on a volunteer basis is much, much different than running a major non-profit organization.  Are you suggesting that UNICEF, the Bill Gates Foundation, the American Cancer Society, etc. should be run by volunteers??

Yep. Why I don't donate to charities where CEOs get paid. It's a charity. You're asking people to give you money to support a cause. See Susan g komen suing others for using a pink ribbon to raise awareness for breast cancer while they dont come close to the American red Cross and their leader still makes more and has the funds to sue others trying to raise for the same cause.

Again this is all just my opinion if you see differently that's fine. A non profit should be run by volunteers top to bottom. People shouldn't be profiting off of donations intended to help those left fortunate. If anything they should make a living wage.

Again just my opinion. You have every right to think differently 

I mean what's the goal of a non profit. To help someone or something and to raise money for that specific thing. If I were to work for one my taking a salary more than I needed to sustain my life would be detrimental to the goal of the non profit. Every dollar I take and don't immediately give back over what I have to spend to live hurts the people the charity is meant to help.

[randymarsh]

still amazes me what "non Profits" pay people to work for them. 

Paying someone 200K to direct fundraisers that bring in millions is a pretty good return.

People running non profits should do it for free IMO. Save your money support yourself then ask others to help the less fortunate. Just my opinion. And I run a non profit charity event.

What about people working at a perpetual nonprofit org? They're only supposed to be retirees? I used to work at a non-profit and I left because they refused to pay me any where close to market rate. If an org wants to pay say 10% below market but offer more PTO, that's a trade I'll take. But paying me 30%+ less while constantly adding more responsibility to my plate? No way.

There's a good Ted Talk about this. Most people hate of the idea of people working at nonprofits making a "high" salary. Even though they'd easily make that same salary or more in private industry. Shouldn't the people working to reduce crushing poverty or end disease make a lot of money? VP at UNICEF makes 100K and it's outrage. VP at Bank of America makes 100K and it's no big deal.

[boarder42]

Yes one isn't operating as a company accepting donations to help other people. One is a for profit with shareholders to answer to.

I just personally feel it's ethically/morally wrong to ask people for money to help others and accept a large salary.

If you really like non profit work take the 30% higher pay.  Fire then go do what you love.

[LeRainDrop]

still amazes me what "non Profits" pay people to work for them. 

Paying someone 200K to direct fundraisers that bring in millions is a pretty good return.

People running non profits should do it for free IMO. Save your money support yourself then ask others to help the less fortunate. Just my opinion. And I run a non profit charity event.

Running a charity event on a volunteer basis is much, much different than running a major non-profit organization.  Are you suggesting that UNICEF, the Bill Gates Foundation, the American Cancer Society, etc. should be run by volunteers??

Yep. Why I don't donate to charities where CEOs get paid. It's a charity. You're asking people to give you money to support a cause. See Susan g komen suing others for using a pink ribbon to raise awareness for breast cancer while they dont come close to the American red Cross and their leader still makes more and has the funds to sue others trying to raise for the same cause.

Again this is all just my opinion if you see differently that's fine. A non profit should be run by volunteers top to bottom. People shouldn't be profiting off of donations intended to help those left fortunate. If anything they should make a living wage.

Again just my opinion. You have every right to think differently 

I mean what's the goal of a non profit. To help someone or something and to raise money for that specific thing. If I were to work for one my taking a salary more than I needed to sustain my life would be detrimental to the goal of the non profit. Every dollar I take and don't immediately give back over what I have to spend to live hurts the people the charity is meant to help.

I'm a bit at a loss here.  Non-profits account for about 10.3% of all private sector employment in the U.S. (http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2014/ted_20141021.htm)  You would expect all of those workers to simply work for free?  And all staff at non[profit hospitals should also work for free?  I think that is totally unrealistic.  There is no way that the organizations would be sufficiently staffed in that case.  Yes, that would help us to weed out a bunch of the crappy non-profits that really shouldn't be in business, but I think it would also end up taking down a lot of the worthy non-profits, as well.

[LAL]

DH is 38 and spent a year doing a career change.  He just accepted an offer today at a dream job and is supremely happy.  We moved a little earlier than expected and made burned through our "ef/moving fund".  We saved about 3 years in cash just in case things went really wrong and now he's back to making it work.  We're probably 5 years from FIRE and if we had stayed put it would have happened.  But a year burning through our money was worth every penny.  Also we still have healthy stash and FU money for him to walk away whenever he chooses.

FWIW he left a very well paying job last year and is about to sign off on making even more.  He was underpaid in his last job anyway so it's pretty much a lateral move financially.  But he's happier and that's the most important thing.  We moved without anything cross country, 2 kids 3 and 5, and me not having worked in 5 years.  We took a big gamble and it paid off. 

A friend (who also career changed later in life) just emailed him today and said 'when you look back, the shift/change seems minute or easy, but when you are in the midst of it, everything is amplified and harder than it really is."  Good luck!

[boarder42]

still amazes me what "non Profits" pay people to work for them. 

Paying someone 200K to direct fundraisers that bring in millions is a pretty good return.

People running non profits should do it for free IMO. Save your money support yourself then ask others to help the less fortunate. Just my opinion. And I run a non profit charity event.

Running a charity event on a volunteer basis is much, much different than running a major non-profit organization.  Are you suggesting that UNICEF, the Bill Gates Foundation, the American Cancer Society, etc. should be run by volunteers??

Yep. Why I don't donate to charities where CEOs get paid. It's a charity. You're asking people to give you money to support a cause. See Susan g komen suing others for using a pink ribbon to raise awareness for breast cancer while they dont come close to the American red Cross and their leader still makes more and has the funds to sue others trying to raise for the same cause.

Again this is all just my opinion if you see differently that's fine. A non profit should be run by volunteers top to bottom. People shouldn't be profiting off of donations intended to help those left fortunate. If anything they should make a living wage.

Again just my opinion. You have every right to think differently 

I mean what's the goal of a non profit. To help someone or something and to raise money for that specific thing. If I were to work for one my taking a salary more than I needed to sustain my life would be detrimental to the goal of the non profit. Every dollar I take and don't immediately give back over what I have to spend to live hurts the people the charity is meant to help.

I'm a bit at a loss here.  Non-profits account for about 10.3% of all private sector employment in the U.S. (http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2014/ted_20141021.htm)  You would expect all of those workers to simply work for free?  And all staff at non[profit hospitals should also work for free?  I think that is totally unrealistic.  There is no way that the organizations would be sufficiently staffed in that case.  Yes, that would help us to weed out a bunch of the crappy non-profits that really shouldn't be in business, but I think it would also end up taking down a lot of the worthy non-profits, as well.

i thought someone may go the hospital route.  my opinion resides solely in those companies that dont actual produce something like a hospital or cancer research facility its the org's that just "raise money" see united way or susan g komen etc.  i mean the united way states all they do is funnel money down to other community orgs at a cost of 10% which apparently is "super cheap"... or i could just give money straight to the community org's i'd like to support and not fund your worthless company since youre just a middle man taking a cut.  same with susan g komen(this is a whole nother world of awfulness that is this org. that i dont want to get into) i can just give straight to a cancer research facility. 

[plainjane]

still amazes me what "non Profits" pay people to work for them. 

Paying someone 200K to direct fundraisers that bring in millions is a pretty good return.

People running non profits should do it for free IMO. Save your money support yourself then ask others to help the less fortunate. Just my opinion. And I run a non profit charity event.

Running a charity event on a volunteer basis is much, much different than running a major non-profit organization.  Are you suggesting that UNICEF, the Bill Gates Foundation, the American Cancer Society, etc. should be run by volunteers??

Again this is all just my opinion if you see differently that's fine. A non profit should be run by volunteers top to bottom. People shouldn't be profiting off of donations intended to help those left fortunate. If anything they should make a living wage.

I'm a bit at a loss here.  Non-profits account for about 10.3% of all private sector employment in the U.S.

i thought someone may go the hospital route.  my opinion resides solely in those companies that dont actual produce something like a hospital or cancer research facility its the org's that just "raise money" see united way or susan g komen etc. 

Part of my problem with the idea that non-profits should only be run by people who don't need the money is that you end up with a certain type of person running and working at them (predominately older white upper/middle class), which does not represent the clientele of the charity.  Perhaps producing a safe space for POC fleeing domestic violence counts under your rules?  But they need to raise money too.
[edited for typo]