Satisfying "No, thank you" money stories

[AMandM]

Inspired by badger1988's quiet story on the Epic FU money thread https://forum.mrmoneymustache.com/welcome-to-the-forum/epic-fu-money-stories/msg2847828/#msg2847828, this is a place for the less dramatic, but still life-enhancing, power that comes from not being dependent on your job.

After being mainly a SAHM for the last many years, I took a part-time job teaching online last year. Due to Covid, DH's employer cancelled the employer contributions to the retirement plan, and the pay for this job just about made up for that; I set it up to go straight to an IRA. The actual teaching was great, but all the online infrastructure of assignments, power points, etc., turned out to take far more time than I expected. I wasn't getting enough sleep, the housework was total chaos, I was constantly stressed out about being behind on my various duties, and our family togetherness really suffered. So when they invited me to re-sign for the next school year, I said, "No, thank you."

Now the school year is over and having my time back is a joy. I can listen to the ball game on the radio with my father; I can read to the grandkids when they drop in; I've completed three long-standing repair jobs around the house; and the fridge, the stove, the microwave, and the toaster oven are all clean simultaneously. I am so much more at peace, people have even noticed just from casual encounters.

[MrGreen]

To me these kinds of stories are just as awesome as the "FU money" stories. The peace of mind that comes with empowerment is magical. :)

[bmjohnson35]

I have watched and listened to many people over the years who live in fear of financial insecurity.  Unfortunately, most continue to make the same choices that keep them in the same situation. As far as I'm concerned, Financial Independence is much more important than retirement.   

[Linea_Norway]

A small no-story. From 3 to 2 years back, I was the leader of the local road manage board. A job that knowone wanted. I was told every house had to contribute, so I did. But that was an incredibly stressful year.
At the next election, someone else was choosen leader. I was relieved to step down, but I remained secretary. The new leadercwas not familiar with computer use. Next year, I left completely. I still wtote the meeting notes for the yearly member meeting. Sent them over to the control readers for approvement. But didn't want to spend lots of time to collect signatures in person. I delegated that to the new board. For a year I heard nothing from any new board member. I had sent them the email and posword of our board email, but I doubted theyvread it. Then I moved to another town and was happy to leave it behind.

A year later, I got contacted by a person from my old street, telling me the board is not doing any job. He asked for the last notes. I sent him all I had, including that email access. He was going to take measures and clean up. Then he wanted to tell me about an old dragging issue that we had been discussing in the board for 2 years and ended with paying a member to build a fence. The guy on thenphone told me there was a new issue going on and that fence was not then end of the story. Then I said: no, sorry, I don't want to hear it. I am so happy to be done with this board and with the stress it involved. Don't drag me in to what is not my problem anymore. That worked and was respected.

[markbike528CBX]

Mostly just a PTF.

I'm FIREd and was sort of willing to help out the SemiBigCorp local office, but then I realized that I really didn't want to.
I realized that I also was not a reliable "emergency" guy, as I have "fitness for duty" issues if at a US Federal governed facility .
I called the local boss and told him the above. 

It was less a "No, thank you" than a "don't ask questions you don't want the answers to...." :-)

I felt relieved about not having to potentially have to explain this during a short notice call-out situation.
It is a win-win, as I'm OK and their better off not having a unreliable person on call.

[Freedomin5]

Several years ago, I was working for Company A. I was a top performer. I asked for a raise after 4 years with no raise and was declined. Another less qualified employee was promoted over me. A year later I asked again for a raise and was denied. I quietly started looking for other employment opportunities, all the while maintaining my top performer status.

A position came up at Company B, and I applied and got the job. I submitted my resignation to Company A, at which point, I got a call from the CEO asking me to consider staying. They asked the details of the offer I had received from Company B. Contracts are confidential but I shared the benefits package that is posted on Company B’s public website. CEO asked why I didn’t ask for a raise if I was unhappy with the pay and benefits. I told him about the emails I had sent to the head of HR asking for a raise and asked him to check with her to confirm. I also offered to forward him the email paper trail — he said it wasn’t necessary.

Within 24 hours, the head of HR sent me a contract offering to double my salary. I said, “No, thank you,” and am now happily working at Company B.

[begood]

Oh, I think my story fits here.

In the spring of 2018, a family friend asked me to help him out on a temporary basis as he scaled up a home-based, one-man business to an office-based business, with an eye toward growth. At the time, he needed help <10 hours per week, which suited my life because at that time, my focus was on self-improvement and wellness, specifically daily visits to a fitness center where I took a variety of mind-body classes. The hours fit well with that, and it felt good to help out a friend and learn something new.

When we moved into the office, he asked me to continue working with him 20 hrs/week, and I agreed, with the stipulation that I could still go to yoga and qi gong classes at lunchtime. He agreed and for awhile, it worked out. Then he hired two full-time people and the business grew and everyone got busier, and then he wanted me to work 30+ hr/week. He created a good environment, and I enjoyed the work and the people, but I'd been really clear on what I was willing to do, and he continued to push for more of my time. I settled for going to one yoga class and one qi gong class per week.

Then March 2020 came and we all stayed home for months. Most of our employees and the boss worked remotely, but since my job was primarily shipping, I couldn't do that from home. And then finally, in March 2021, he asked if I was ready to come back to work. In the meantime, he'd hired two more full-time employees, doubling the business, and bought the building he'd been leasing, and was renovating the work kitchen and two bathrooms. I told him, "No, thank you." He was shocked. He said he thought I might be bored. "Nope! I'm never bored," I said.

After a year away, I'm now fully vaccinated and the fitness center is open. I'm back to going to yoga classes, and the first qi gong class since the pandemic started is tomorrow!

[wageslave23]

A couple years ago I turned down a job that would have been a 30% raise but more stress and more hours.  My friends thought I was crazy, but I told them that I don't really need any more money.  The after tax increase wouldn't really change my life much at all, but having to work more hours would. 

[Nutty]

Good stories.  Keep them coming, please.

I was young and was leading a project with a contractor on warranty work.  At the end of the field data collection, they confirmed the diagnosis and offered me a traveling Field Technician position with a 20% pay raise.  A big jump for me.  After thoughtful consideration with the wife while holding our brand new baby daughter, the wife explained that if I wanted a traveling job that she would support the divorce.  She didn't want to be a single parent.  I was assured that I'd be home most weekends and guaranteed one weekend a month.  We declined the offer and spent every night at home as a happy family and I watched the short people bloom.

3 years later, I was talking with the contractor and he expressed his desire to have hired me.  Turns out a contract went bad in Taiwan and they spent 18 months there.  So much for being home one weekend a month.  Looking back, I'm glad I chose family.  Things really get clear with time.

[Loren Ver]

A few years out from FIRE my company was merging with another mega and then splitting.  During the split my job was moving to another state.  I am the main bread winner by a lot. 

DH is introverted and rather antisocial so making friends for him is a difficult long term process.  The friends he hangs out with now are the same ones he met in college with very few additions.

So when the "you may have to relocate to random other city" came up, our conversation consisted of
"DH, if we move to xx, will you make a concerted effort to make new friends?"
"Probably not, it sounds hard."
"I refuse to be your only friend, we aren't moving."
And that was that.

We could live off his income and let the stash grow if I couldn't find another job (any job), if need be.
I was able to transfer to another department and stay local.  A few years later we FIREd. 
Other than during COVID, we still meet with our college friends almost every Saturday and have since we were in college, almost 20 years now.

LV

[lifeandlimb]

When I first started my freelance business, I was always scared of losing potential gigs—even if they were terrible—due to minimal savings and needing to build a client base. Over time, I've built a small 'stache and kept my lifestyle manageable (affordable), so that terrible anxiety has lessened.

A few weeks ago a harried producer asked me to read a script for a job with barely any money or time. The creative brief was...horribly corny. Trashy characters and a rehashed story that I would be too embarrassed to tell anyone I'd worked on. I was getting ready to quote him an absurdly high rate and tell him he needed to double his allotted job time when he suddenly said never mind, he found someone to do it "at a discount." It was the first time I felt not a single pang of regret losing a gig...but I do hope the poor sod he hired can get by.

[jinga nation]

have turned down offers to move to larger companies (800+ one and a Fortune 500). I do not see any positive by moving.
Current situation is with a small engineering/IT company, very flexible working conditions between home and client site on as-needed basis.
Excellent work/life balance, benefits, very good, mature level-headed leadership with lots of growth opportunities (recently made lead on a project, and have couple of employees reporting to me, plus sub-contractors). Very good customer relationships.
The offers may pay a wee bit more, but I'd be just another cog in a large company, dealing with HR's annual goals/objectives nonsense, less time for technical work and more meetings and admin tasks. I worked for Fortune 500 companies from 2006 to 2017. Literally, cannot see a reason to rock the boat.
No, thank you has been a weekly refrain to these LinkedIn offers.
Also, my LinkedIn profile says I'm not open to offers, not looking to switch employers. Recruiters obviously not reading or ignoring that.

A lot of this positioning strength comes from having FU money, savings, rental income.

[AMandM]

I'm struck by how many of these stories involve saying No to work and Yes to family time. I feel sorry for people who don't have that freedom, and even more sorry for the ones who do but don't realize it.

[Wolfpack Mustachian]

I'm struck by how many of these stories involve saying No to work and Yes to family time. I feel sorry for people who don't have that freedom, and even more sorry for the ones who do but don't realize it.

This is so true. I said no thank you to a job where I would have actually moved away from a terrible job I was at for a 15-20% pay raise (with likely substantial raises coming soon after and lots of training for a new field that would have made me very valuable) because of the extensive - for me - travel requirement of 8-12 weeks out of the year. I didn't want to be away from my family for that long. I eventually ended up in a job with a much better quality of life, and I was able to say no thank you to the first job offer, knowing if I lost my job or got fed up and quit at the first company, it would be OK.

I also was able to help encourage a family member to switch from an old job to a new job with slightly less pay that was much better for them to be able to see their family as well, which was really exciting.

[simonsez]

Mine don't have anything to do with work but rather family time.  On my wife's side of the family especially, hardly any of her similarly-aged relatives have their financial lives together by most standards.  So if there is to be an extended leisure activity with those folks (e.g. renting a mountain cabin in Breckenridge to celebrate aunt's retirement), it means someone else is paying (usually my MIL and her sister, my wife's aunt).  I've noticed that her cousins will take the handout as well as the influence that comes with it.  Meanwhile, we politely and discreetly say No to having our share covered and thus weigh in on the decision making processes (meals, logistics, activities).  I don't blame any of her cousins for saying Yes to the subsidization as they are great to be around and enrich the overall experience (even if they don't have the money to do it on their own) but wife and I talk all the time about grateful we are to pay our own way and have input.  While well-meaning, the last thing I need is to be needled by my MIL or aunt about my/our own business or worse yet, for our vacation to be controlled to such an extent by others.  Yep, I admit I am a bit of a control freak myself but it is so satisfying to reflect on all the good times we have with family but it's on our terms (which can sometimes be hard when you're childless in your mid 30s).

[nessness]

My husband's company lost a big contract. My husband was given the choice between layoff and relocation to a part of the state we don't care for. We talked about relocating for like 5 minutes before deciding nope, we had plenty of savings to hold us over until he could find a new job locally, so he took the layoff. And good thing - he had a new, higher-paying job lined up within a week.

[jac941]

I have two.

A couple of years ago when I was looking for a job, I received an offer from a cool sounding company for $30,000 under market rate for the position. The job required local travel 2-3 days a week and overnight travel 3-4 days a month. I can afford to work for under market rate, but not at a for profit company with a ton of travel so I said “no thank you“. The hiring manager was astounded. He had never had anyone turn down a position before, so I politely provided the feedback that the pay was too low for the position in the current market - it was a New York City company trying to hire a San Francisco team at a NY pay scale. About three weeks later I got another offer from a different company that paid market rate and had no travel and had great work life balance which worked out great for me at the time so I promptly forgot the first offer. Six months later the company I declined to work for reached out to me to see if I was still interested in the position as they had been unable to fill it (shocker), and I got to tell them “no thank you” again.

A few years prior to that I had been working in this high stress burnout job and was pregnant with my second kid. I was *so* done with that job but was committed to sticking it out so I could get my maternity leave. When I was 34 weeks pregnant, the company laid off everyone in my department except for me. When my new boss (the old one was laid off) asked my plans for maternity leave, I told him I was taking the maximum amount of time legally allowed. He found someone to backfill the position in the next week and that guy got a 4 hour hand off from me before I went on leave (remember the whole department was let go, so there was no one else to help the guy out). Fast forward five months, and I went in to talk to the new guy / boss about my return to work. I told him I’d return 3 days a week if they created a new position for me and hired a replacement for me to train. They said no, I needed to come back full time to my old position, so I told them “no thank you”. The day before I turned in my keys, they met all my demands and I was able to come back on my terms. It was a sweet deal for a couple years.

[SwordGuy]

This was only a couple of years after we got out of poverty and solidly into the middle class.   The company I worked for decided to transition from COBOL to the Oracle relational database.    I had an opportunity to switch from being a programmer to a DBA (Database administrator).  There would be a good sized jump in pay and it sure was tempting.

But I thought about it.

As a programmer, if I wrote good code there was no reason for me to be on call.    Most of the time my work could be done during normal office hours.   

As a DBA, much of my work would have to be done off-hours, on weekends and on holidays.

Screw that.

It turned out to be a good long term career choice, too.    I continued to work to my strengths instead of transferring to a job that would quickly have bored me to tears.   I know this for a fact because back in 2010 I ended up having to take a DBA job for 18 months until I could get my position backfilled and switch over to a programming position.   It was boring as all get out.   

[Us2bCool]

I've had more "no thank you" moments than I can count, but I happened to have one just yesterday.

For background, I'm a trainer at a very large software company. Earlier this year we had a reorganization, and I now have a new boss who's in a different country with a very different culture than my previous manager. We had a call yesterday in which he told me that the product that's my primary focus (I literally wrote the book on it) will be moved to another team. This doesn't put my job in jeopardy; he just doesn't like the product and wants to push it off to someone else...most likely outside contractors.

I told him "I would very much like to continue working with ProductXYZ. If it moves to another team, I choose to move with it."

He looked surprised and then said, "Well, if that's what will make you happy, then we'll keep it here. Thanks for speaking honestly."

What he doesn't know is that I would probably just jump ship because I could retire right now, I stay because I enjoy my work.

[Effervescent]

Generally a good time to say "no, thank you" is when you're doing good work in a field that allows you to see the direct results of your work - e.g., an engineer, an attorney working directly with clients, sales, etc. - and you're asked to "move up" to middle management. My understanding is that this typically involves a 20-30% increase in salary, with perhaps 10-15 more hours per week of work. The problem is that while the increase in hours might roughly correspond to the increase in salary, you're moving away from something that you enjoy doing and that you can see is making a difference in the world, to working more on an abtract level working with numbers, telling people what to do, fixing others' mistakes, etc. To my mind this is a mistake that people make. Assuming I have health insurance and can pay the bills, I'd rather have the lower pay but better work/life balance. Moreover, the lower-paying job is likelier to result in a stabler, more productive output in the long run.

In my case, I work directly with people and can see the results of my work. A few years ago, I was offered more money to do work that would have resulted in a lot more stress and running around town. I turned down the offer and am still here in the same position years later, still productive, happy, and saving for FI. Meanwhile middle management at my company seems to engage in a lot of amorphous nonsense.

[Just Joe]

I'm struck by how many of these stories involve saying No to work and Yes to family time. I feel sorry for people who don't have that freedom, and even more sorry for the ones who do but don't realize it.

I was going to post something similar but you wrote it much more graciously.

The stories we read and hear IRL (or on social media) of people traveling on bumpy life paths make us sure we made good choices. Family over money. Slow and steady. Perhaps we are boring people but we are happy, boring people with a roof over our heads and money for a rainy day. ;)

[Adventine]

I'm currently on sabbatical as I adjust to life in the US. I have this clearly posted on my LinkedIn profile.

So it was a nice surprise when a recruiter reached out to me, with a job opening that was very close to what I used to do in the Philippines. The listed salary was respectable by US standards, and mindboggling by PH standards, which are the standards I lived with for the first 30+ years of my life.

I thought about it for a couple of days, discussed it with my husband, then sent a polite "no, thank you" to the recruiter. We don't need the money, I'm not interested in that kind of work any more, and I would rather continue my sabbatical.

[Aethonan]

I love all of these.  That is all. :)

[Chris Pascale]

Several years ago, I was working for Company A. I was a top performer. I asked for a raise after 4 years with no raise and was declined. Another less qualified employee was promoted over me. A year later I asked again for a raise and was denied. I quietly started looking for other employment opportunities, all the while maintaining my top performer status.

A position came up at Company B, and I applied and got the job. I submitted my resignation to Company A, at which point, I got a call from the CEO asking me to consider staying. They asked the details of the offer I had received from Company B. Contracts are confidential but I shared the benefits package that is posted on Company B’s public website. CEO asked why I didn’t ask for a raise if I was unhappy with the pay and benefits. I told him about the emails I had sent to the head of HR asking for a raise and asked him to check with her to confirm. I also offered to forward him the email paper trail — he said it wasn’t necessary.

Within 24 hours, the head of HR sent me a contract offering to double my salary. I said, “No, thank you,” and am now happily working at Company B.

You are a legend.

[clarkfan1979]

I was working at Jamba Juice in San Diego in 1998 at the age of 19. I was making minimum wage, which I think was $5.50/hr. at the time, but I'm not sure. I was offered an extra $1/hour to be a shift lead. I turned it down. The $1/hour wasn't worth the extra responsibility and stress.

A year later, I took a job waiting tables. Much more stress, but I was making around $20/hour (with tips). 

[CupcakeGuru]

Several years ago a company that I would love to work for, contacted me. The role was paying almost double than I was making at that time. During the interview they said that there was extensive travel, almost 2 weeks per month and/or sometimes working at client sites for months at a time (traveling M-Th, home on Friday and weekends). My kids were pre school and elementary school at the time. I told them on the spot, that I was not a good fit for the job.

I kept in touch with people at that company and in the next 10 years, they had 8 different people for that job. They all quit  due to the extensive travel requirements.

[MayDay]

Several years ago a company that I would love to work for, contacted me. The role was paying almost double than I was making at that time. During the interview they said that there was extensive travel, almost 2 weeks per month and/or sometimes working at client sites for months at a time (traveling M-Th, home on Friday and weekends). My kids were pre school and elementary school at the time. I told them on the spot, that I was not a good fit for the job.

I kept in touch with people at that company and in the next 10 years, they had 8 different people for that job. They all quit  due to the extensive travel requirements.

I just got contacted about an interesting job, same deal.  I told them to feel free to keep me in mind for other opportunities, but that 50% travel did not work for me.

Who takes these jobs?  It baffles me.

[CupcakeGuru]

Several years ago a company that I would love to work for, contacted me. The role was paying almost double than I was making at that time. During the interview they said that there was extensive travel, almost 2 weeks per month and/or sometimes working at client sites for months at a time (traveling M-Th, home on Friday and weekends). My kids were pre school and elementary school at the time. I told them on the spot, that I was not a good fit for the job.

I kept in touch with people at that company and in the next 10 years, they had 8 different people for that job. They all quit  due to the extensive travel requirements.

I just got contacted about an interesting job, same deal.  I told them to feel free to keep me in mind for other opportunities, but that 50% travel did not work for me.

Who takes these jobs?  It baffles me.

It baffles me also. These types of jobs almost entirely exclude parents or those who have other family obligations. If you are a single parent or have a spouse that works a non flexible job, you can't get a job like this ever.

[jinga nation]

Several years ago a company that I would love to work for, contacted me. The role was paying almost double than I was making at that time. During the interview they said that there was extensive travel, almost 2 weeks per month and/or sometimes working at client sites for months at a time (traveling M-Th, home on Friday and weekends). My kids were pre school and elementary school at the time. I told them on the spot, that I was not a good fit for the job.

I kept in touch with people at that company and in the next 10 years, they had 8 different people for that job. They all quit  due to the extensive travel requirements.

I just got contacted about an interesting job, same deal.  I told them to feel free to keep me in mind for other opportunities, but that 50% travel did not work for me.

Who takes these jobs?  It baffles me.

It baffles me also. These types of jobs almost entirely exclude parents or those who have other family obligations. If you are a single parent or have a spouse that works a non flexible job, you can't get a job like this ever.

I have co-workers who quit a 40H/wk D0D contractor job to take these corporate travel gigs with software/hardware vendors. Most of them quit the new company within 2 years, or transferred to another job that didn't require travel, for a pay cut. Either the travel got old and routine, or there were family issues due to absences, or health issues due to frequent eating out and lack of exercise, long days.

[scottish]

Several years ago a company that I would love to work for, contacted me. The role was paying almost double than I was making at that time. During the interview they said that there was extensive travel, almost 2 weeks per month and/or sometimes working at client sites for months at a time (traveling M-Th, home on Friday and weekends). My kids were pre school and elementary school at the time. I told them on the spot, that I was not a good fit for the job.

I kept in touch with people at that company and in the next 10 years, they had 8 different people for that job. They all quit  due to the extensive travel requirements.

I just got contacted about an interesting job, same deal.  I told them to feel free to keep me in mind for other opportunities, but that 50% travel did not work for me.

Who takes these jobs?  It baffles me.

People with an unhappy home life.   The ones I knew also had a drinking problem.

[FIRE Artist]

Several years ago a company that I would love to work for, contacted me. The role was paying almost double than I was making at that time. During the interview they said that there was extensive travel, almost 2 weeks per month and/or sometimes working at client sites for months at a time (traveling M-Th, home on Friday and weekends). My kids were pre school and elementary school at the time. I told them on the spot, that I was not a good fit for the job.

I kept in touch with people at that company and in the next 10 years, they had 8 different people for that job. They all quit  due to the extensive travel requirements.

I just got contacted about an interesting job, same deal.  I told them to feel free to keep me in mind for other opportunities, but that 50% travel did not work for me.

Who takes these jobs?  It baffles me.

People with an unhappy home life.   The ones I knew also had a drinking problem.

Also ,men who marry women who fall in line with traditional gender roles, who are willing to be stay at home wives to take care of the kids while hubby is away most of the time being the traditional provider.  My sister is the stay at home wife in that scenario, her husband is a national sales manager and is away most of the time. 

[Sibley]

Several years ago a company that I would love to work for, contacted me. The role was paying almost double than I was making at that time. During the interview they said that there was extensive travel, almost 2 weeks per month and/or sometimes working at client sites for months at a time (traveling M-Th, home on Friday and weekends). My kids were pre school and elementary school at the time. I told them on the spot, that I was not a good fit for the job.

I kept in touch with people at that company and in the next 10 years, they had 8 different people for that job. They all quit  due to the extensive travel requirements.

I just got contacted about an interesting job, same deal.  I told them to feel free to keep me in mind for other opportunities, but that 50% travel did not work for me.

Who takes these jobs?  It baffles me.

People with an unhappy home life.   The ones I knew also had a drinking problem.

Which came first? The unhappy life/drinking problem or the job?

[FINate]

Also ,men who marry women who fall in line with traditional gender roles, who are willing to be stay at home wives to take care of the kids while hubby is away most of the time being the traditional provider.  My sister is the stay at home wife in that scenario, her husband is a national sales manager and is away most of the time.

Can we please refrain from disparaging stay at home moms. Of course, no woman (or man) should ever be compelled or otherwise pressured to stay home and take care of the kids. But some moms want to. In other words, it's not something they are "willing to" do, as if it's negative. A big part of FIRE for me was having the opportunity to be at home to care for the kids.

[scottish]

Several years ago a company that I would love to work for, contacted me. The role was paying almost double than I was making at that time. During the interview they said that there was extensive travel, almost 2 weeks per month and/or sometimes working at client sites for months at a time (traveling M-Th, home on Friday and weekends). My kids were pre school and elementary school at the time. I told them on the spot, that I was not a good fit for the job.

I kept in touch with people at that company and in the next 10 years, they had 8 different people for that job. They all quit  due to the extensive travel requirements.

I just got contacted about an interesting job, same deal.  I told them to feel free to keep me in mind for other opportunities, but that 50% travel did not work for me.

Who takes these jobs?  It baffles me.

People with an unhappy home life.   The ones I knew also had a drinking problem.

Which came first? The unhappy life/drinking problem or the job?

I don't have the answer to that.    I think marital problems are very specific to the couple.     For example...  Relationship problems can develop if one spouse is travelling while the other struggles to deal with an infant.     Or one partner may decide to travel to spend less time around a failing relationship.

I've seen both instances.

[scantee]

Also ,men who marry women who fall in line with traditional gender roles, who are willing to be stay at home wives to take care of the kids while hubby is away most of the time being the traditional provider.  My sister is the stay at home wife in that scenario, her husband is a national sales manager and is away most of the time.

Can we please refrain from disparaging stay at home moms. Of course, no woman (or man) should ever be compelled or otherwise pressured to stay home and take care of the kids. But some moms want to. In other words, it's not something they are "willing to" do, as if it's negative. A big part of FIRE for me was having the opportunity to be at home to care for the kids.

The original comment doesn’t seem disparaging to me, just matter of fact. Maybe you’re projecting you’re own insecurities onto this comment. I agree there is nothing wrong with being a SAHP.

[Sibley]

Several years ago a company that I would love to work for, contacted me. The role was paying almost double than I was making at that time. During the interview they said that there was extensive travel, almost 2 weeks per month and/or sometimes working at client sites for months at a time (traveling M-Th, home on Friday and weekends). My kids were pre school and elementary school at the time. I told them on the spot, that I was not a good fit for the job.

I kept in touch with people at that company and in the next 10 years, they had 8 different people for that job. They all quit  due to the extensive travel requirements.

I just got contacted about an interesting job, same deal.  I told them to feel free to keep me in mind for other opportunities, but that 50% travel did not work for me.

Who takes these jobs?  It baffles me.

People with an unhappy home life.   The ones I knew also had a drinking problem.

Which came first? The unhappy life/drinking problem or the job?

I don't have the answer to that.    I think marital problems are very specific to the couple.     For example...  Relationship problems can develop if one spouse is travelling while the other struggles to deal with an infant.     Or one partner may decide to travel to spend less time around a failing relationship.

I've seen both instances.

I'm sure it can go either way.

And re the stay at home comment - it's a fact that having a stay at home partner enables the other partner to do more demanding/time intensive jobs. Such as jobs with high percentages of travel. It's not an insult to state that fact.

[mrsnamemustache]

Several years ago a company that I would love to work for, contacted me. The role was paying almost double than I was making at that time. During the interview they said that there was extensive travel, almost 2 weeks per month and/or sometimes working at client sites for months at a time (traveling M-Th, home on Friday and weekends). My kids were pre school and elementary school at the time. I told them on the spot, that I was not a good fit for the job.

I kept in touch with people at that company and in the next 10 years, they had 8 different people for that job. They all quit  due to the extensive travel requirements.

I just got contacted about an interesting job, same deal.  I told them to feel free to keep me in mind for other opportunities, but that 50% travel did not work for me.

Who takes these jobs?  It baffles me.

People with an unhappy home life.   The ones I knew also had a drinking problem.

Which came first? The unhappy life/drinking problem or the job?

I don't have the answer to that.    I think marital problems are very specific to the couple.     For example...  Relationship problems can develop if one spouse is travelling while the other struggles to deal with an infant.     Or one partner may decide to travel to spend less time around a failing relationship.

I've seen both instances.

I'm sure it can go either way.

And re the stay at home comment - it's a fact that having a stay at home partner enables the other partner to do more demanding/time intensive jobs. Such as jobs with high percentages of travel. It's not an insult to state that fact.

The way that it is written makes it sound like they are staying home because of gender roles rather than their own choices, and that is a disparaging assumption in my opinion (for the record, I’m a primary breadwinning working mom who has no desire to be a SAHP and thus am not being defensive).

[MayDay]

Several years ago a company that I would love to work for, contacted me. The role was paying almost double than I was making at that time. During the interview they said that there was extensive travel, almost 2 weeks per month and/or sometimes working at client sites for months at a time (traveling M-Th, home on Friday and weekends). My kids were pre school and elementary school at the time. I told them on the spot, that I was not a good fit for the job.

I kept in touch with people at that company and in the next 10 years, they had 8 different people for that job. They all quit  due to the extensive travel requirements.

I just got contacted about an interesting job, same deal.  I told them to feel free to keep me in mind for other opportunities, but that 50% travel did not work for me.

Who takes these jobs?  It baffles me.

People with an unhappy home life.   The ones I knew also had a drinking problem.

Which came first? The unhappy life/drinking problem or the job?

I don't have the answer to that.    I think marital problems are very specific to the couple.     For example...  Relationship problems can develop if one spouse is travelling while the other struggles to deal with an infant.     Or one partner may decide to travel to spend less time around a failing relationship.

I've seen both instances.

I'm sure it can go either way.

And re the stay at home comment - it's a fact that having a stay at home partner enables the other partner to do more demanding/time intensive jobs. Such as jobs with high percentages of travel. It's not an insult to state that fact.

The way that it is written makes it sound like they are staying home because of gender roles rather than their own choices, and that is a disparaging assumption in my opinion (for the record, I’m a primary breadwinning working mom who has no desire to be a SAHP and thus am not being defensive).

That's interesting because I didn't read it that way!

[Rural]

Several years ago a company that I would love to work for, contacted me. The role was paying almost double than I was making at that time. During the interview they said that there was extensive travel, almost 2 weeks per month and/or sometimes working at client sites for months at a time (traveling M-Th, home on Friday and weekends). My kids were pre school and elementary school at the time. I told them on the spot, that I was not a good fit for the job.

I kept in touch with people at that company and in the next 10 years, they had 8 different people for that job. They all quit  due to the extensive travel requirements.

I just got contacted about an interesting job, same deal.  I told them to feel free to keep me in mind for other opportunities, but that 50% travel did not work for me.

Who takes these jobs?  It baffles me.

People with an unhappy home life.   The ones I knew also had a drinking problem.

Which came first? The unhappy life/drinking problem or the job?

I don't have the answer to that.    I think marital problems are very specific to the couple.     For example...  Relationship problems can develop if one spouse is travelling while the other struggles to deal with an infant.     Or one partner may decide to travel to spend less time around a failing relationship.

I've seen both instances.

I'm sure it can go either way.

And re the stay at home comment - it's a fact that having a stay at home partner enables the other partner to do more demanding/time intensive jobs. Such as jobs with high percentages of travel. It's not an insult to state that fact.

The way that it is written makes it sound like they are staying home because of gender roles rather than their own choices, and that is a disparaging assumption in my opinion (for the record, I’m a primary breadwinning working mom who has no desire to be a SAHP and thus am not being defensive).

That's interesting because I didn't read it that way!

I didn't either. Just a statement that that sort of arrangement can enable that sort of travel.

[Captain FIRE]

I did read it that way.   Not enough to get my hackles up, but I took away a faintly negative tone so I was nodding my head when someone raised that point.  (Working mom, FWIW.)  I think it's the combination of "fall in line with" (I think of someone else laying down the law that they are need to get with the program or they'll be in trouble) and "who are willing" (sounds like someone else is pushing them/instigating it rather than it being their desire/choice).

[FINate]

Also ,men who marry women who fall in line with traditional gender roles, who are willing to be stay at home wives to take care of the kids while hubby is away most of the time being the traditional provider.  My sister is the stay at home wife in that scenario, her husband is a national sales manager and is away most of the time.

Can we please refrain from disparaging stay at home moms. Of course, no woman (or man) should ever be compelled or otherwise pressured to stay home and take care of the kids. But some moms want to. In other words, it's not something they are "willing to" do, as if it's negative. A big part of FIRE for me was having the opportunity to be at home to care for the kids.

The original comment doesn’t seem disparaging to me, just matter of fact. Maybe you’re projecting you’re own insecurities onto this comment. I agree there is nothing wrong with being a SAHP.

I bring it up because my wife got similar comments when she decided to stay at home with the kids. They were not neutral remarks on her choice, but instead underhanded digs. To fall in line is to conform to expected standards of behavior. In progressive circles this is not a positive, especially in the context of "traditional gender roles." Yet it was entirely her choice, staying at home was something she really wanted. Maybe it's difficult to see unless you've personally experienced it.

[DadJokes]

Several years ago a company that I would love to work for, contacted me. The role was paying almost double than I was making at that time. During the interview they said that there was extensive travel, almost 2 weeks per month and/or sometimes working at client sites for months at a time (traveling M-Th, home on Friday and weekends). My kids were pre school and elementary school at the time. I told them on the spot, that I was not a good fit for the job.

I kept in touch with people at that company and in the next 10 years, they had 8 different people for that job. They all quit  due to the extensive travel requirements.

I just got contacted about an interesting job, same deal.  I told them to feel free to keep me in mind for other opportunities, but that 50% travel did not work for me.

Who takes these jobs?  It baffles me.

There's probably a happy medium in there between 0-100%. Pre-pandemic, we traveled ~10% of the time, and I love those trips. I definitely wouldn't like 50% travel.

At my child's current age, 10% is probably that happy medium for me. When he starts school in a few years, I could see wanting something more like 20%.

[Zoot]

I bring it up because my wife got similar comments when she decided to stay at home with the kids. They were not neutral remarks on her choice, but instead underhanded digs. To fall in line is to conform to expected standards of behavior. In progressive circles this is not a positive, especially in the context of "traditional gender roles." Yet it was entirely her choice, staying at home was something she really wanted. Maybe it's difficult to see unless you've personally experienced it.

I had a similar experience when I changed my surname after I got married (I'm female).  It was the "traditional" choice, but I made it consciously and after much soul-searching on whether I really wanted to do it.  My husband, bless his soul, did not express one iota of preference on the decision, which he said should be entirely mine, although we did discuss logistical and practical outcomes of my choosing one way or the other.  The conscious choosing is often invisible when making a choice that is the "expected" behavior.

[scantee]

Also ,men who marry women who fall in line with traditional gender roles, who are willing to be stay at home wives to take care of the kids while hubby is away most of the time being the traditional provider.  My sister is the stay at home wife in that scenario, her husband is a national sales manager and is away most of the time.

Can we please refrain from disparaging stay at home moms. Of course, no woman (or man) should ever be compelled or otherwise pressured to stay home and take care of the kids. But some moms want to. In other words, it's not something they are "willing to" do, as if it's negative. A big part of FIRE for me was having the opportunity to be at home to care for the kids.

The original comment doesn’t seem disparaging to me, just matter of fact. Maybe you’re projecting you’re own insecurities onto this comment. I agree there is nothing wrong with being a SAHP.

I bring it up because my wife got similar comments when she decided to stay at home with the kids. They were not neutral remarks on her choice, but instead underhanded digs. To fall in line is to conform to expected standards of behavior. In progressive circles this is not a positive, especially in the context of "traditional gender roles." Yet it was entirely her choice, staying at home was something she really wanted. Maybe it's difficult to see unless you've personally experienced it.

I can see that. On the flip side there is a ton of judgement in conservative circles about mothers who work. Conservatives in my extended family made endless comments of the “why even bother having kids if you’re just going to work” type when I went back to work after having my first. I felt confident in my choice however so it didn’t really bother me. It is more of a reflection of their own insecurities than anything to do with me.

[FINate]

Also ,men who marry women who fall in line with traditional gender roles, who are willing to be stay at home wives to take care of the kids while hubby is away most of the time being the traditional provider.  My sister is the stay at home wife in that scenario, her husband is a national sales manager and is away most of the time.

Can we please refrain from disparaging stay at home moms. Of course, no woman (or man) should ever be compelled or otherwise pressured to stay home and take care of the kids. But some moms want to. In other words, it's not something they are "willing to" do, as if it's negative. A big part of FIRE for me was having the opportunity to be at home to care for the kids.

The original comment doesn’t seem disparaging to me, just matter of fact. Maybe you’re projecting you’re own insecurities onto this comment. I agree there is nothing wrong with being a SAHP.

I bring it up because my wife got similar comments when she decided to stay at home with the kids. They were not neutral remarks on her choice, but instead underhanded digs. To fall in line is to conform to expected standards of behavior. In progressive circles this is not a positive, especially in the context of "traditional gender roles." Yet it was entirely her choice, staying at home was something she really wanted. Maybe it's difficult to see unless you've personally experienced it.

I can see that. On the flip side there is a ton of judgement in conservative circles about mothers who work. Conservatives in my extended family made endless comments of the “why even bother having kids if you’re just going to work” type when I went back to work after having my first. I felt confident in my choice however so it didn’t really bother me. It is more of a reflection of their own insecurities than anything to do with me.

Sure, but that's not what we're talking about here. Two wrongs don't make a right. Whataboutism, and such.

[Sibley]

Also ,men who marry women who fall in line with traditional gender roles, who are willing to be stay at home wives to take care of the kids while hubby is away most of the time being the traditional provider.  My sister is the stay at home wife in that scenario, her husband is a national sales manager and is away most of the time.

Can we please refrain from disparaging stay at home moms. Of course, no woman (or man) should ever be compelled or otherwise pressured to stay home and take care of the kids. But some moms want to. In other words, it's not something they are "willing to" do, as if it's negative. A big part of FIRE for me was having the opportunity to be at home to care for the kids.

The original comment doesn’t seem disparaging to me, just matter of fact. Maybe you’re projecting you’re own insecurities onto this comment. I agree there is nothing wrong with being a SAHP.

I bring it up because my wife got similar comments when she decided to stay at home with the kids. They were not neutral remarks on her choice, but instead underhanded digs. To fall in line is to conform to expected standards of behavior. In progressive circles this is not a positive, especially in the context of "traditional gender roles." Yet it was entirely her choice, staying at home was something she really wanted. Maybe it's difficult to see unless you've personally experienced it.

I can see that. On the flip side there is a ton of judgement in conservative circles about mothers who work. Conservatives in my extended family made endless comments of the “why even bother having kids if you’re just going to work” type when I went back to work after having my first. I felt confident in my choice however so it didn’t really bother me. It is more of a reflection of their own insecurities than anything to do with me.

They are being rude, regardless of why, and you can (and should) shut them down. Up to and including choosing not to see them until they can at  minimum not say nasty things.

[oneday]

Back on topic: in 2019, I gave 7 weeks notice to my employer of 13 years. I had nothing else lined up. The last 4 had seen a different manager, whose supervisory style rubbed everyone the wrong way. I was burnt out, but wanted to stay thru year end, so as not to leave anyone in a terrible pinch (I'm an accountant).

Part of my resignation was notice that I wouldn't do certain tasks anymore. Boss tried to negotiate for me to stay through the audit period (May 2020). However, Boss wanted me to keep doing all the tasks. I declined. Finally, she offered me $5k. Compared to 4 extra months of time off, that was an absurdly low offer. "No, thank you!"

[lhamo]

On my last day at my last FT job I was contacted out of the blue by someone who I had tried to hire into a position I designed at a previous organization.  I really liked and respected this person, and was thrilled when he asked me to consider joining him as PT support for a contract he had been working on that was related to my area of specialization but in a different part of the world.   After negotiating my rate it would have paid about 50k over two years for about 10 hours of work/week.

Right after I had signed the contract we learned that a new manager had been hired, someone he had had VERY negative interactions with in the past.   At our first conference call she started pushing me to do way more than the scope of work had originally called for. Of course she didn't have the budget for the many more hours that would require.  So she suggested cutting my rate.   After learning the person who brought me in was going to be distancing himself from any further involvement with the project, I decided to pull out myself. They did pay me for the 10 hours or so I had worked at that point.

As things turned out I didn't need to worry about earning money after leaving FT employment at that time -- our FIRE status became official about a year later once we sold some real estate that had appreciated nicely.  I do kind of wonder what it would have been like to work with the friend who threw the opportunity my way.  But I would NOT have wanted to work under that disaster of a manager!

[Missy B]

Also ,men who marry women who fall in line with traditional gender roles, who are willing to be stay at home wives to take care of the kids while hubby is away most of the time being the traditional provider.  My sister is the stay at home wife in that scenario, her husband is a national sales manager and is away most of the time.

Can we please refrain from disparaging stay at home moms. Of course, no woman (or man) should ever be compelled or otherwise pressured to stay home and take care of the kids. But some moms want to. In other words, it's not something they are "willing to" do, as if it's negative. A big part of FIRE for me was having the opportunity to be at home to care for the kids.

The original comment doesn’t seem disparaging to me, just matter of fact. Maybe you’re projecting you’re own insecurities onto this comment. I agree there is nothing wrong with being a SAHP.

100% agree. There's nothing disparaging here.

[DeniseNJ]

Also ,men who marry women who fall in line with traditional gender roles, who are willing to be stay at home wives to take care of the kids while hubby is away most of the time being the traditional provider.  My sister is the stay at home wife in that scenario, her husband is a national sales manager and is away most of the time.

Can we please refrain from disparaging stay at home moms. Of course, no woman (or man) should ever be compelled or otherwise pressured to stay home and take care of the kids. But some moms want to. In other words, it's not something they are "willing to" do, as if it's negative. A big part of FIRE for me was having the opportunity to be at home to care for the kids.

The original comment doesn’t seem disparaging to me, just matter of fact. Maybe you’re projecting you’re own insecurities onto this comment. I agree there is nothing wrong with being a SAHP.

100% agree. There's nothing disparaging here.

there's a difference between have to and get to.
women who are willing to stay at home---a crummy job but somebody's gotta do it.
women who decide to stay at home---neutral
women who get to stay at home---"must be nice"