Author Topic: Is simultaneously (and secretly) working 2 full time remote jobs good for FIRE?  (Read 6676 times)

wageslave23

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1752
  • Location: Midwest
If you are salaried, then you are by definition not getting paid by the hour.  Most employers and employees don't understand that.  My employer is an idiot at times, but I will never forget this one meeting...
A couple of my coworkers complained that they were working longer hours and that I was leaving early at times.  My boss printed out a report that showed everyone's production numbers for the year and handed it them out to everyone in the company.  He said all that matters is production, if it takes you 30hrs a week or 60 hrs a week it's irrelevant.  I had the highest production numbers in the company.  He asked those who had complained about amount of hours worked if they had any questions or comments...crickets.  if your job is based on production and you are producing what your employer expects you to, then what else you do with your time is irrelevant.  Good employers realize this, f*ck bad employers.

dividendman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1899
What do you do if they both have a meeting at 9am?

If it's anything like the jobs I've had one or both meetings are probably useless, so just skip them and do actual work.

Plina

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 663
Have technical problems!

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 17376
If you are salaried, then you are by definition not getting paid by the hour.  Most employers and employees don't understand that.  My employer is an idiot at times, but I will never forget this one meeting...
A couple of my coworkers complained that they were working longer hours and that I was leaving early at times.  My boss printed out a report that showed everyone's production numbers for the year and handed it them out to everyone in the company.  He said all that matters is production, if it takes you 30hrs a week or 60 hrs a week it's irrelevant.  I had the highest production numbers in the company.  He asked those who had complained about amount of hours worked if they had any questions or comments...crickets.  if your job is based on production and you are producing what your employer expects you to, then what else you do with your time is irrelevant.  Good employers realize this, f*ck bad employers.

With some jobs, this is easily demonstrable and with others it isn't.
So yes, for jobs with discrete deliverables where the employee has no other responsibilities, this is exactly the kind of job where taking on a second job would be doable because it's self evident that the person is meeting the demands of each job.

Not all jobs are so neatly organized though. I've frequently terminated my highest producers because they were overall terrible employees, but that's because they were roles where production rates depended on a lot more than individual effort and skill.

It's really convenient to assess staff when there's a clear, measurable, 1:1 ratio of skill and effort to outcome. It's often not so nice and tidy though.

Also, although being salaried means not being paid hourly, a salaried worker can still be contractually obligated to be working during certain hours.

I agree with you that there's generally WAY too much emphasis put on controlling employee time, but it's not as cut and dry for all job roles as just looking at measurable product output for an individual.
Sometimes it is, but often it isn't.

Chris Pascale

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1335
I have four and a half hours of meetings today. Schedules would start to conflict imo.

When I first started my career out of college, maybe I could have done it, but two entry level jobs in my career pay less than I make now. And then I would have two sets of coworkers.

Schedules would start to conflict, in your opinion, for *your* kind of job, but not all jobs are like yours.

DH has a high level government job and as I said, he could absolutely do this if he was contractually allowed to because he has influence over meeting times.

But yes, a big caveat I said earlier is that it only makes sense if someone has no desire to move up in their particular field, because the extra effort could go towards upward mobility.

However, some industries don't offer as much income in upward mobility as having a second job would. It depends on the industry. So in some industries, it's much more lucrative to do more lower level work more efficiently than to move your way up.

As I said before, the world of jobs is enormous. You cannot make generalizations based on one type of career.

Buddy of mine in a government agency was driving with his boss. She was managing contracting jobs for her fencing company between the hours of 8-430.

blackomen

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 209
  • Location: Former Californian in Dallas
  • Antifragile since 1983
    • Gimme Serendipity (a Stumbleupon Clone)
Looks like there's an entire community dedicated to this pursuit: https://news.yahoo.com/community-secretly-working-2-full-120044389.html

They even have a set of guidelines to (hopefully) stay out of trouble: https://overemployed.com/12-rules-for-working-remote-wfh/

Morning Glory

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4865
  • Location: The Garden Path
Looks like there's an entire community dedicated to this pursuit: https://news.yahoo.com/community-secretly-working-2-full-120044389.html

They even have a set of guidelines to (hopefully) stay out of trouble: https://overemployed.com/12-rules-for-working-remote-wfh/

I read the article after reading this thread. Some of the vignettes made me a bit sad, especially the guy who works 100 hrs/week between his two jobs and never sees his kids. He makes 500k/year. He could quit one of them and have a sane family life, but he doesn't want to.  The others said they were just bored and wanted to fill their downtime; the idea that the only thing they could think to fill it with was more work made me a bit sad too. I would understand doing this short-term to get out of debt but doing it out of boredom or to fund lifestyle inflation just isn't healthy or sane.

Zamboni

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3882
My job has "conflict of interest" rules and an online system for self-reporting income from other employment. The guideline seems to be it's okay as long as it's no more than 1 day per week of effort for the other employer and as long as there are no conflicts of interest with your full time job. If they found out you had income not reported to this system, then I imagine you'd be given the opportunity to rectify it . . . that's just how things work around here. It's kind of like being in congress. There are definitely some pretty high profile people who do report sometimes very high income from additional employment, but then claim it is for only one day per week of work, flouting the system in a "world's worst kept secret" kind of way.

Villanelle

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6651
My last regular FT job was salaried so it's not like I was required to officially log 40 hours a week.  And I don't think I worked more than 25 hours most of the time.  I requested, several times, to have more departments to my desk, and it never happened.  So I pretty easily could have done a second job (had that job gone remote) and not worked much more than 40 hours a week, if I found a second similar job. 

Occasionally, I had to meet with a PI but that was generally mutually scheduled.  The only set thing was the monthly staff meeting.  Seems like it would have been pretty easy to pull off.

protostache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 903
I wonder how HR at the companies are not aware of this. If you made $100k at your first job, and $100k at the second, only the first $142,800 is subject to social security taxes so eventually there's going to be a refund for over-payment of SSI taxes.

I'm not sure an employer even CAN reduce your social security withholding if you tell them you make over the wage base limit because of another job, but either way you can claim a refund for an overpayment when you file your taxes.

The employer also kicks in 6.2% of the first $142,800, so even if the employee promtly files for a refund, there's going to be a tax irregularity for the employer.

In general employers have no relief or visibility into other employers when paying their portion of OASDI. Employees just claim the excess as a credit on their income taxes.

Sibley

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7428
  • Location: Northwest Indiana
It occurred to me that OP asked about SECRETLY working 2 FT jobs. If you have to do it secretly, then that implies that its not allowed for whatever reason.

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 17376
It occurred to me that OP asked about SECRETLY working 2 FT jobs. If you have to do it secretly, then that implies that its not allowed for whatever reason.

Perhaps, but I can think of many scenarios where I don't want one employer to have knowledge of my other work.

My last employer was not privy to my other side jobs.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 23128
  • Age: 42
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
It occurred to me that OP asked about SECRETLY working 2 FT jobs. If you have to do it secretly, then that implies that its not allowed for whatever reason.

Perhaps, but I can think of many scenarios where I don't want one employer to have knowledge of my other work.

My last employer was not privy to my other side jobs.

What scenarios?

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 17376
It occurred to me that OP asked about SECRETLY working 2 FT jobs. If you have to do it secretly, then that implies that its not allowed for whatever reason.

Perhaps, but I can think of many scenarios where I don't want one employer to have knowledge of my other work.

My last employer was not privy to my other side jobs.

What scenarios?

Well, my perspective is that by default most people don't necessarily want their employers having access to their personal and financial information that's unrelated to their job with them. So that's why I can think of many scenarios where someone wants their life outside of one job kept outside of that job.

It's the same way a lot of people here are so hesitant to have their bosses find out that they are FI or close to it.
A lot of people who have side hustles don't share the details with their employer.

As I've said from the beginning, if the person is committing fraud, that's a terrible idea, but if they aren't violating a contractual obligation by holding a second job, then I just consider it maintaining basic privacy if they don't want to share the details of their life outside of work with their employer.

Villanelle

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6651
It occurred to me that OP asked about SECRETLY working 2 FT jobs. If you have to do it secretly, then that implies that its not allowed for whatever reason.

Perhaps, but I can think of many scenarios where I don't want one employer to have knowledge of my other work.

My last employer was not privy to my other side jobs.

Right.  Most people don't want their employer to know if they are job hunting or interviewing, either.  That doesn't mean it is breaking a rule or isn't allowed.  It just means they fear it might hurt the way their employer views them.  I can absolutely see an employer who finds out someone has two jobs suddenly finding fault with their work, feeling projects should be completed more quickly, etc., when they were fine with everything before that, simply because they now perceive things differently. 

For that matter, people sometimes don't tell an employer they are pregnant (until it's obvious) because they fear it will affect perceptions and limit opportunities.  Does that mean that they are doing something wrong by getting pregnant?  Of course not.  But they know that news like that can change the way a boss treats an employee. Same with being unhoused, being part of a military family, being a military reservist, and probably many other things. 

Metalcat

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 17376
It occurred to me that OP asked about SECRETLY working 2 FT jobs. If you have to do it secretly, then that implies that its not allowed for whatever reason.

Perhaps, but I can think of many scenarios where I don't want one employer to have knowledge of my other work.

My last employer was not privy to my other side jobs.

Right.  Most people don't want their employer to know if they are job hunting or interviewing, either.  That doesn't mean it is breaking a rule or isn't allowed.  It just means they fear it might hurt the way their employer views them.  I can absolutely see an employer who finds out someone has two jobs suddenly finding fault with their work, feeling projects should be completed more quickly, etc., when they were fine with everything before that, simply because they now perceive things differently. 

For that matter, people sometimes don't tell an employer they are pregnant (until it's obvious) because they fear it will affect perceptions and limit opportunities.  Does that mean that they are doing something wrong by getting pregnant?  Of course not.  But they know that news like that can change the way a boss treats an employee. Same with being unhoused, being part of a military family, being a military reservist, and probably many other things.

Exactly, if we reframe "secrecy" as "privacy", it casts it all in a very different light.

Chris Pascale

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1335
It occurred to me that OP asked about SECRETLY working 2 FT jobs. If you have to do it secretly, then that implies that its not allowed for whatever reason.

Perhaps, but I can think of many scenarios where I don't want one employer to have knowledge of my other work.

My last employer was not privy to my other side jobs.

Same when I was in private sector. I started off at one job coming in early and staying late, but every promise for every benchmark was broken, so when I lucked into a job writing ad copy for a company in CA, my early/late/lunch hours were spent doubling my income from another source.

I gave the boss a few chances to make things right, but it really just wasn't how he did business. Like, he was incapable of enriching others.

After I left he asked me to do some contract work, then shafted me on the first invoice. A few months later he called to see if I could help with a client I'd brought in that wanted some updated paperwork. And then a year later he called to say he was shutting the company down and was worried that the warehouse manager would leave before the very last day and asked if I'd be waiting for a call to run the warehouse so as to ship out the last orders (since NYS law said he had to give everyone 60 days notice or 60 days pay if he was just going to shut down with no notice).

Now, when he said 60 days pay I sympathized because that was $100k in payroll every 2 weeks, but when I later read in a trade journal what he'd sold the place for I just thought, shit, dude, you can't throw them a fucking crumb like 2 months severance?

And that was just it: He couldn't.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2021, 07:56:17 AM by Chris Pascale »

clarkfan1979

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3352
  • Age: 44
  • Location: Pueblo West, CO
I taught at a 4-year University from 2011 to 2015 that was more teaching oriented and not research based. The faculty salaries were not great. During this time, we hired a full-time faculty member that has a Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology. He had a full-time therapist job probably making around 75K. I'm not really sure how many hours is full-time for a therapist. The faculty salary was 62K. He decided to take the faculty job and do both. A full-time teaching load is 3 classes. He taught T/Th and did his therapy MWF. 

Many of the faculty were upset that he didn't quit his therapist job. They went to the Dean and complained. The Dean said there wasn't anything that he could do because faculty are allowed to work outside of the University.  I think his performance was about the same as everyone else. I think the other faculty were just jealous.

For these reasons, I would be very cautious to disclose side gigs to co-workers.

ditheca

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 309
  • Age: 40
  • Location: ST GEORGE, UT
My employer recently sent out a revised 'Code of Conduct' which says employees are expected to "devote time and attention to work during business hours."

It further explains that employees thinking about taking on additional employment or side-gigs "must disclose full details of the proposed work." Upon review, management and legal will "provide a conflict waiver" or deny it. Failing to comply with this process is a firable offense.

Refusing to sign the new code is also a firable offense.

Morning Glory

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4865
  • Location: The Garden Path
I taught at a 4-year University from 2011 to 2015 that was more teaching oriented and not research based. The faculty salaries were not great. During this time, we hired a full-time faculty member that has a Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology. He had a full-time therapist job probably making around 75K. I'm not really sure how many hours is full-time for a therapist. The faculty salary was 62K. He decided to take the faculty job and do both. A full-time teaching load is 3 classes. He taught T/Th and did his therapy MWF. 

Many of the faculty were upset that he didn't quit his therapist job. They went to the Dean and complained. The Dean said there wasn't anything that he could do because faculty are allowed to work outside of the University.  I think his performance was about the same as everyone else. I think the other faculty were just jealous.

For these reasons, I would be very cautious to disclose side gigs to co-workers.

He was probably lauded for staying current in the field. In nursing it's almost an expectation (you can do research or take a class instead if you want). My colleagues are quite open about maintaining their practice  I thought about taking a supplemental job at my old hospital so that I could meet this requirement and also get access to the company gym again, but decided to take a class instead. If I'd gotten this job 5 or 10 years ago I would have been more gung-ho about it I'm sure.

SpaceCow

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 114
  • Location: Michigan
I do two jobs at once, and have done so since early spring of 2021. So far, it has worked out. Both jobs have very different requirements.

Job#1
-Is 100% telework
-Is almost totally independent apart from occasional meetings.
-Can be done any time of day
-Success is measured by the completion of all required work prior to continually revolving deadlines.

Job#2
-Requires me to report in person 100% of the time
-Between 4 and 6 hours of all but the busiest days consist of downtime
-Most of the downtime is a necessary requirement due to the nature of the job. (I need to be there in case clients show up)

On the rare occurrence that I have a meeting or something that requires 100% undivided attention at a certain time with either job, I just use vacation time from the other job.

Most days I complete my work from both jobs in the 8 hours that I work onsite at Job#2. Both employers are very happy with my work and productivity. With this arrangement, I utilize two very different skillsets that I possess simultaneously, and it just happens to work out well in this situation. I don't expect this arrangement to be permanent, but it could likely go on for a few years.

dividendman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1899
My employer recently sent out a revised 'Code of Conduct' which says employees are expected to "devote time and attention to work during business hours."

It further explains that employees thinking about taking on additional employment or side-gigs "must disclose full details of the proposed work." Upon review, management and legal will "provide a conflict waiver" or deny it. Failing to comply with this process is a firable offense.

Refusing to sign the new code is also a firable offense.

Sounds like an easy problem to solve. Do the same things businesses do - sign the contract and then break it if/when it's more profitable to do so.

Firehazard

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 178
Before I FIRE'd, part of my job was HR.  Over the years I strongly suspected a few employees of doing two FT jobs simultaneously, mainly because of very poor sales results and the fact that they were next to impossible to reach during business hours.  All were remote employees in other states in sales positions.  We were a start-up company, and our sales dept was minimally supervised, sales contracts were usually sizable with long drawn out processes.  It typically took at least a couple of years for a person to get fired for poor sales performance.   A sweet gig for a sales rep without scruples to take advantage of.  But really it was the company's own fault for such lax engagement by management.