I used to not mind my job, but things can change quickly and this is just one example. Get your FU money ASAP, you never know when you will need it.
I used to not mind my job, but things can change quickly and this is just one example. Get your FU money ASAP, you never know when you will need it.
This is so true. Never be overly complacent. A new boss, new owner or CEO, even a new coworker can wreak havoc on a formerly enjoyable job.
I'm also in the thick of similar disgruntlements, wageslave. I'm not quite FI, but close enough that if I quit and the market is relatively average for a few years, I'd be fine. If push comes to shove, I will take the euphemistic sabatical and see where I end up. I am old enough that new employment (particularly of a comparable level) and without a current job while searching might not be in the cards for me. So I am proceeding judiciously, but I do not feel powerless by any means, which is helpful. Not only for planning, but for the mental health aspect.
I can reframe the current situation as - how long can I put up with this, rather than feeling trapped.
Hang on, I thought it was important to be FI so you could buy a Camry SE instead of an LE to flex on the haters?
:D
</threadspillover>
But yeah, I tend to agree that its good to be FI in the event that you find yourself in a toxic work environment. I would advise not heading for the hills immediately though, I think I'd use my FI status to try to influence/train the incompetent manager to make the place a bit more bearable.
I used to not mind my job, but things can change quickly and this is just one example. Get your FU money ASAP, you never know when you will need it.
This is so true. Never be overly complacent. A new boss, new owner or CEO, even a new coworker can wreak havoc on a formerly enjoyable job.
I'm also in the thick of similar disgruntlements, wageslave. I'm not quite FI, but close enough that if I quit and the market is relatively average for a few years, I'd be fine. If push comes to shove, I will take the euphemistic sabatical and see where I end up. I am old enough that new employment (particularly of a comparable level) and without a current job while searching might not be in the cards for me. So I am proceeding judiciously, but I do not feel powerless by any means, which is helpful. Not only for planning, but for the mental health aspect.
I can reframe the current situation as - how long can I put up with this, rather than feeling trapped.
My boss said a jerky thing to me in a meeting and I called him out on it (it wasn't on purpose, more of a bad optics thing, but I was totally in the right). Haha- he was not expecting that, especially because I'm generally mild mannered. He actually avoided me for about two months and then I was moved to a new boss during a reorg. We were FI too, so didn't care if I was fired. It's a very helpful thing to have in your back pocket!
I'm living in toxic land too. Some days are great, when I get paired with the right people, some days I absolutely feel physically ill. Good luck to both of you in flexing your FU-ness
We just had a coworker who is under credentialed and under experienced promoted to manager. At the time, I thought who cares, it's not my company - I'll just keep doing what I'm doing. Well, fast forward a few months and she has set up all these tasks with deadlines and micromanaging the shit out of everything. She just had a company wide meeting berating everyone, new employees who are still learning and experienced employees who are Rockstar employees in all measurable variables except these arbitrary micromanaging tasks. Needless to say, the new employees are overwhelmed by the workload and experienced employees are pissed that they are being treated like they work at McDonald's. Luckily I'm FI and will be monitoring the situation carefully to see if it eventually blows over. But if it gets worse or if veteran employees start leaving putting the company in a tough spot with the remaining employees, I will be jumping ship too which will only make the landslide for the company worse. Any younger MMMers reading this - your lack of FI or at least FU money is truly a hair on fire emergency. I used to not mind my job, but things can change quickly and this is just one example. Get your FU money ASAP, you never know when you will need it.It is a shame, but this is just the nature of the beast. There is always politics like this, and it sucks. Posts like this have lit a fire under my butt to motivate me to aggressively save.
Any younger MMMers reading this - your lack of FI or at least FU money is truly a hair on fire emergency. I used to not mind my job, but things can change quickly and this is just one example. Get your FU money ASAP, you never know when you will need it.
When I read the subject headline I thought this was going to be about not depending on your domestic partner for your financial support.
The trend of romanticizing being a "trad wife" - i.e., a homemaker without a paying job - is definitely surprising in these economic times. It's like the feminist revolution of the 1970s and 1980s never happened ..
My boss said a jerky thing to me in a meeting and I called him out on it (it wasn't on purpose, more of a bad optics thing, but I was totally in the right). Haha- he was not expecting that, especially because I'm generally mild mannered. He actually avoided me for about two months and then I was moved to a new boss during a reorg. We were FI too, so didn't care if I was fired. It's a very helpful thing to have in your back pocket!
When I read the subject headline I thought this was going to be about not depending on your domestic partner for your financial support.
The trend of romanticizing being a "trad wife" - i.e., a homemaker without a paying job - is definitely surprising in these economic times. It's like the feminist revolution of the 1970s and 1980s never happened ..
How wide spread is that?
My DD and all her friends are very career focused. And voting today!
When I read the subject headline I thought this was going to be about not depending on your domestic partner for your financial support.
The trend of romanticizing being a "trad wife" - i.e., a homemaker without a paying job - is definitely surprising in these economic times. It's like the feminist revolution of the 1970s and 1980s never happened ..
How wide spread is that?
My DD and all her friends are very career focused. And voting today!
Unfortunately, in religious circles, it seems to be gaining ground. When I discussed deciding on a college major with my then-17 year old niece (i.e., choosing something that would assist her in the job market once graduated), she airily replied that SHE didn't need to worry about making a living, as it would be her husband's job to do so.
This was in 2019, and I am still horrified that my brother has raised a child who thinks this way.
Our parents separated when Mom was 33, with three kids under the age of 8. She struggled for nearly a decade as a single mom, in an era before women were allowed to buy a house or open a credit card without a husband. My brother SAW this, and he has a privileged daughter with no thought about what it would be like to be abandoned for the new, younger model ate age 40.
Gah!
When I read the subject headline I thought this was going to be about not depending on your domestic partner for your financial support.What types of economic times do you prefer? What markers and metrics are you using? Unemployment? Inflation? 10 year Treasury yield? Market returns? GDP? My household operates on a fairly low information diet but it seems like the economy is at least "good" if not "very good" with any comparisons historically in the US or compared to other parts of the world. I'm assuming you were referencing the US, apologies if you were not.
The trend of romanticizing being a "trad wife" - i.e., a homemaker without a paying job - is definitely surprising in these economic times. It's like the feminist revolution of the 1970s and 1980s never happened ..
When I read the subject headline I thought this was going to be about not depending on your domestic partner for your financial support.
The trend of romanticizing being a "trad wife" - i.e., a homemaker without a paying job - is definitely surprising in these economic times. It's like the feminist revolution of the 1970s and 1980s never happened ..
How wide spread is that?
My DD and all her friends are very career focused. And voting today!
Unfortunately, in religious circles, it seems to be gaining ground. When I discussed deciding on a college major with my then-17 year old niece (i.e., choosing something that would assist her in the job market once graduated), she airily replied that SHE didn't need to worry about making a living, as it would be her husband's job to do so.
This was in 2019, and I am still horrified that my brother has raised a child who thinks this way.
Our parents separated when Mom was 33, with three kids under the age of 8. She struggled for nearly a decade as a single mom, in an era before women were allowed to buy a house or open a credit card without a husband. My brother SAW this, and he has a privileged daughter with no thought about what it would be like to be abandoned for the new, younger model ate age 40.
Gah!
@mistymoney - she's a senior in college this year. Comparative religious at a far-right Catholic private university.
Solemnly informed my cousin's DH - with a PhD in philosophy - that they didn't study any modern philosophy, as they are all blasphemous. But Plato and Aristotle are apparently OK.
@mistymoney - she's a senior in college this year. Comparative religious at a far-right Catholic private university.
Solemnly informed my cousin's DH - with a PhD in philosophy - that they didn't study any modern philosophy, as they are all blasphemous. But Plato and Aristotle are apparently OK.
I have to repeat myself. yikes.
Hope it works out for her.
@mistymoney - she's a senior in college this year. Comparative religious at a far-right Catholic private university.
Solemnly informed my cousin's DH - with a PhD in philosophy - that they didn't study any modern philosophy, as they are all blasphemous. But Plato and Aristotle are apparently OK.
I have to repeat myself. yikes.
Hope it works out for her.
I am torn - I kinda want it to not work out for her, at least in the 5-7 years after graduation. I'd love to see her humbled enough to get some real work experience that she can rely on later in life, ya know?
If it works out for her immediately, it will be a much harder crash if things go wrong in her 40's.
My wife worked for a retail company that had a very strong culture of promoting from within. One of the biggest predictors of getting promoted was "willingness to move". Toward the end of her 10 year career at that company she had a few different managers that were younger, less experienced and just didn't know what they were doing. She ran the largest department in the store and her numbers were very good. However, her numbers were never good enough for management, so she ended up quitting. They had 2-3 different replacements that posted worse numbers and corporate decided to close the store within 18 months.
I don't mind having a boss with high expectations that knows what they are doing. However, it continues to amaze me how many bad bosses exist that are a liability to a company, but they continue to get promoted. It shouldn't surprise me, but it still does.
When I read the subject headline I thought this was going to be about not depending on your domestic partner for your financial support.
The trend of romanticizing being a "trad wife" - i.e., a homemaker without a paying job - is definitely surprising in these economic times. It's like the feminist revolution of the 1970s and 1980s never happened ..
When I read the subject headline I thought this was going to be about not depending on your domestic partner for your financial support.
The trend of romanticizing being a "trad wife" - i.e., a homemaker without a paying job - is definitely surprising in these economic times. It's like the feminist revolution of the 1970s and 1980s never happened ..
There’s a lot of benefits to having a parent that can stay at home with children before they start kindergarten and also available more readily through their education.
On a forum surrounding early retirement, there’s also an argument in living within a families means so a spouse can stay at home to improve the families quality of life.
When I read the subject headline I thought this was going to be about not depending on your domestic partner for your financial support.
The trend of romanticizing being a "trad wife" - i.e., a homemaker without a paying job - is definitely surprising in these economic times. It's like the feminist revolution of the 1970s and 1980s never happened ..
There’s a lot of benefits to having a parent that can stay at home with children before they start kindergarten and also available more readily through their education.
On a forum surrounding early retirement, there’s also an argument in living within a families means so a spouse can stay at home to improve the families quality of life.
All real benefits to the children and the family unit. But the concern in @LaineyAZ 's comment was surrounding the financial vulnerability of the spouse whose current marketable skills are homemaking and caregiving, or as in @Sandi_k 's niece's situation, youth and beauty that will inevitably decline. Choose dependency at your own peril.
When I read the subject headline I thought this was going to be about not depending on your domestic partner for your financial support.
The trend of romanticizing being a "trad wife" - i.e., a homemaker without a paying job - is definitely surprising in these economic times. It's like the feminist revolution of the 1970s and 1980s never happened ..
@mistymoney - she's a senior in college this year. Comparative religious at a far-right Catholic private university.
Solemnly informed my cousin's DH - with a PhD in philosophy - that they didn't study any modern philosophy, as they are all blasphemous. But Plato and Aristotle are apparently OK.
I have to repeat myself. yikes.
Hope it works out for her.
I am torn - I kinda want it to not work out for her, at least in the 5-7 years after graduation. I'd love to see her humbled enough to get some real work experience that she can rely on later in life, ya know?
When I read the subject headline I thought this was going to be about not depending on your domestic partner for your financial support.
The trend of romanticizing being a "trad wife" - i.e., a homemaker without a paying job - is definitely surprising in these economic times. It's like the feminist revolution of the 1970s and 1980s never happened ..
How wide spread is that?
My DD and all her friends are very career focused. And voting today!
Unfortunately, in religious circles, it seems to be gaining ground. When I discussed deciding on a college major with my then-17 year old niece (i.e., choosing something that would assist her in the job market once graduated), she airily replied that SHE didn't need to worry about making a living, as it would be her husband's job to do so.
This was in 2019, and I am still horrified that my brother has raised a child who thinks this way.
Our parents separated when Mom was 33, with three kids under the age of 8. She struggled for nearly a decade as a single mom, in an era before women were allowed to buy a house or open a credit card without a husband. My brother SAW this, and he has a privileged daughter with no thought about what it would be like to be abandoned for the new, younger model ate age 40.
Gah!
yikes.
did neice finish a degree?
Do these women that voluntarily leave the W-2/1099 labor market tend to regret the time they were at home with their children or whatever is it they are now pursuing (gardening/homesteading, entrepreneurship, running for or supporting elected a type of elected office, charity work, writing, music-making, etc.)? Or are they generally happy with their choices?
@mistymoney - she's a senior in college this year. Comparative religious at a far-right Catholic private university.I've got a friend whose daughter made an offhand comment to her mom that she's going to college to find a husband and stay at home. Her mom, an accountant, was horrified. She and her kid's dad are divorced, and kid went to religious school.
Solemnly informed my cousin's DH - with a PhD in philosophy - that they didn't study any modern philosophy, as they are all blasphemous. But Plato and Aristotle are apparently OK.
When I read the subject headline I thought this was going to be about not depending on your domestic partner for your financial support.
The trend of romanticizing being a "trad wife" - i.e., a homemaker without a paying job - is definitely surprising in these economic times. It's like the feminist revolution of the 1970s and 1980s never happened ..
There’s a lot of benefits to having a parent that can stay at home with children before they start kindergarten and also available more readily through their education.
On a forum surrounding early retirement, there’s also an argument in living within a families means so a spouse can stay at home to improve the families quality of life.
That is the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principleMy wife worked for a retail company that had a very strong culture of promoting from within. One of the biggest predictors of getting promoted was "willingness to move". Toward the end of her 10 year career at that company she had a few different managers that were younger, less experienced and just didn't know what they were doing. She ran the largest department in the store and her numbers were very good. However, her numbers were never good enough for management, so she ended up quitting. They had 2-3 different replacements that posted worse numbers and corporate decided to close the store within 18 months.
I don't mind having a boss with high expectations that knows what they are doing. However, it continues to amaze me how many bad bosses exist that are a liability to a company, but they continue to get promoted. It shouldn't surprise me, but it still does.
As the saying goes, "One rises to the level of their incompetence."
That is the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_principle)My wife worked for a retail company that had a very strong culture of promoting from within. One of the biggest predictors of getting promoted was "willingness to move". Toward the end of her 10 year career at that company she had a few different managers that were younger, less experienced and just didn't know what they were doing. She ran the largest department in the store and her numbers were very good. However, her numbers were never good enough for management, so she ended up quitting. They had 2-3 different replacements that posted worse numbers and corporate decided to close the store within 18 months.
I don't mind having a boss with high expectations that knows what they are doing. However, it continues to amaze me how many bad bosses exist that are a liability to a company, but they continue to get promoted. It shouldn't surprise me, but it still does.
As the saying goes, "One rises to the level of their incompetence."
as extended by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilbert_principle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dilbert_principle)
"By the Dilbert principle, employees who were never competent are promoted to management to limit the damage they can do."
I think I've seen the Dilbert Principle in action once. It wasn't my direct organization, so I didn't follow up or track the results.
I've got a friend whose daughter made an offhand comment to her mom that she's going to college to find a husband and stay at home. Her mom, an accountant, was horrified. She and her kid's dad are divorced, and kid went to religious school.
I've got a friend whose daughter made an offhand comment to her mom that she's going to college to find a husband and stay at home. Her mom, an accountant, was horrified. She and her kid's dad are divorced, and kid went to religious school.
It's because it is out there in the schools from other kids who are encouraged to think that way. Around 11 to 12 yo point my daughter absorbed this and would out of the blue say things like "I'm going to marry a rock star" or "I'm going to marry a millionaire".
I'd just calmly reply "why don't you be a rock star?", "Why don't you be a millionaire?" And I'd listen to what she said. Then encourage her to develop her own abilities even if she did marry a rock star.Spoiler: show
Many families could be structured so that both parents can work part-time. It doesn't happen because people tend to over-consume or aren't willing to make other lifestyle sacrifices.The difficulties that we faced when discussing/ considering this (full disclosure, I worked "part time" - 30-35 hours a week - for about 2.5 to 3 years total)
I'm not saying two min-wage earners can do that, but two median-wage earners certainly can.
I've got a friend whose daughter made an offhand comment to her mom that she's going to college to find a husband and stay at home. Her mom, an accountant, was horrified. She and her kid's dad are divorced, and kid went to religious school.
It's because it is out there in the schools from other kids who are encouraged to think that way. Around 11 to 12 yo point my daughter absorbed this and would out of the blue say things like "I'm going to marry a rock star" or "I'm going to marry a millionaire".
I'd just calmly reply "why don't you be a rock star?", "Why don't you be a millionaire?" And I'd listen to what she said. Then encourage her to develop her own abilities even if she did marry a rock star.Spoiler: show
👏
Cher's "Mom, I am a rich man" (https://youtu.be/dZsL5R_CR-k) clip.
I like the idea of being with someone because you want to be with them, not because they're a meal ticket.
<snip>
I want my daughter to get a decently paying job she likes when she graduates but if we wanted to be a SAHM I would 100% support her. Her mom will be around to help as well so maybe she could do some part time things. HOWEVER, most men who want stay at home wives dont want the pressure of being the sole income. Being only one income was part of the reason I found FIRE.
The whole point of the conversation, to ME, is that BOTH men and women should "learn a marketable skill and develop a work history and have some savings, rather than be dependent on a spouse's income."I agree completely but it's still rare to hear people say "I 100% support my son's decision to be a SAHD and dependent on his spouse's income" as several people said about their daughters up thread. Fwiw, as a clueless crazy cat lady childless person, I think most parents want to see their kids become self sufficient and have the ability to be self supporting and be able to be a SAHP if they want to.
Self-reliance and independence is critical in this world.
^^^ Curious if you all (the generic you all) would encourage (support the decision) your sons to be SAHD rather than learn a marketable skill and develop a work history and have some savings rather then be dependant on a spouse's income for years or decades?
The whole point of the conversation, to ME, is that BOTH men and women should "learn a marketable skill and develop a work history and have some savings, rather than be dependent on a spouse's income."I agree completely but it's still rare to hear people say "I 100% support my son's decision to be a SAHD and dependent on his spouse's income" as several people said up thread. FWIW as a clueless crazy cat lady childless person I think most parents want to see their kids become self sufficient and have the ability to be self supporting and be able to be a SAHP if they want to.
Self-reliance and independence is critical in this world.
^^^ Curious if you all (the generic you all) would encourage (support the decision) your sons to be SAHD rather than learn a marketable skill and develop a work history and have some savings rather then be dependant on a spouse's income for years or decades?Nope.
^^^ Curious if you all (the generic you all) would encourage (support the decision) your sons to be SAHD rather than learn a marketable skill and develop a work history and have some savings rather then be dependant on a spouse's income for years or decades?I'm along the same lines as what GuitarStv said for a son and no way in hell would I encourage a hypothetical daughter to plan for the trad wife approach.
^^^ Curious if you all (the generic you all) would encourage (support the decision) your sons to be SAHD rather than learn a marketable skill and develop a work history and have some savings rather then be dependant on a spouse's income for years or decades?Sandi_k and GuitarStv already gave excellent responses. I would not encourage any daughter or son to avoid learning workplace skills and instead be a stay-at-home parent (or plan to be one). That sounds like they became pregnant (or made someone pregnant) at 18 or some other unprepared age by mistake and you're just dealing with the fallout. That certainly happens and you can pivot to make the best of it but it's not something to be encouraged during young adult and adolescent years IMO.
My boss said a jerky thing to me in a meeting and I called him out on it (it wasn't on purpose, more of a bad optics thing, but I was totally in the right). Haha- he was not expecting that, especially because I'm generally mild mannered. He actually avoided me for about two months and then I was moved to a new boss during a reorg. We were FI too, so didn't care if I was fired. It's a very helpful thing to have in your back pocket!
Now I want to know what he said!
And how you so wonderfully parried him with "Not today, F*cker!"
:-)
Sorry if my post came off as trollish - it did - but I was genuinely curious if some of the posters would have the same mind set about their sons being a SAHP and not having careers for a long time (and often being left far behind on the career path as many SAHPs are) making it harder to become FI. Unfortunately there's still a double standard out there abut "who should work and who should be a SAHP) so it's nice to see more people both accepting, encouraging and supporting their kids to do what they want.^^^ Curious if you all (the generic you all) would encourage (support the decision) your sons to be SAHD rather than learn a marketable skill and develop a work history and have some savings rather then be dependant on a spouse's income for years or decades?Sandi_k and GuitarStv already gave excellent responses. I would not encourage any daughter or son to avoid learning workplace skills and instead be a stay-at-home parent (or plan to be one). That sounds like they became pregnant (or made someone pregnant) at 18 or some other unprepared age by mistake and you're just dealing with the fallout. That certainly happens and you can pivot to make the best of it but it's not something to be encouraged during young adult and adolescent years IMO.
I just don't know why it has it to be an either/or instead of both being a stay-at-home parent and having workplace skills and experience, and that goes for sons and daughters. Call the reason(s) feminism, the demographic transition, post WW2 labor markets, an emphasis on tertiary education, whatever - but I feel like most developed societies are generally pushing children to have value beyond (but not in lieu of, necessarily) their fecundity and childrearing abilities, and that in acquiring this value it will directly and indirectly push the age of having children to later in life (when a person is likely to have more $ as well). Having competency also lends itself to not being stuck in a crappy work situation, you are more likely to have the confidence and the wherewithal to move to greener pastures instead of being/feeling stuck.
@LaineyAZ thanks for your response, I agree with you in the grand scheme and admit to being a bit naive/overconfident in my own household's situation. My wife has many marketable skills and I have no doubt if/when she wants to return to the workforce (tentative plan is ~3-4 years from now but we shall see, could be earlier, could be later, could be never), she will be successful in the long run (even if it takes her a little bit to get "back in" and not be underemployed). If she didn't have any marketable skills to start with or was not pursuing any avenues of acquiring some, I wouldn't have been that interested in anything beyond a short-term physical fling (with protection!) to begin with, but that's off-topic. To each their own with long-term mate selection! We will do our best to raise our future daughter in an environment where she is in control of the life she wants to create.
I also think it's important for young people to be exposed to various jobs even if they have a good idea of what they want to do and be after whichever level of education they need to complete. Go work in a factory one summer, go wait tables, go deliver food, go sucker horseradish, go pour asphalt, babysit, walk dogs, mow grass, lifeguard, replace roofs, install windows, whatever. If you like it, great. If not, you have money in your pocket, will have been exposed to various types of people that aren't always present in a young person's bubble, will have learned something (possibly about yourself or at least how to start balancing priorities), and you will be motivated for a career that is NOT related to what you were doing as a teenager over the summers or while you were going to school.
Sorry if my post came off as trollish - it did - but I was genuinely curious if some of the posters would have the same mind set about their sons being a SAHP and not having careers for a long time (and often being left far behind on the career path as many SAHPs are) making it harder to become FI. Unfortunately there's still a double standard out there abut "who should work and who should be a SAHP) so it's nice to see more people both accepting, encouraging and supporting their kids to do what they want.^^^ Curious if you all (the generic you all) would encourage (support the decision) your sons to be SAHD rather than learn a marketable skill and develop a work history and have some savings rather then be dependant on a spouse's income for years or decades?Sandi_k and GuitarStv already gave excellent responses. I would not encourage any daughter or son to avoid learning workplace skills and instead be a stay-at-home parent (or plan to be one). That sounds like they became pregnant (or made someone pregnant) at 18 or some other unprepared age by mistake and you're just dealing with the fallout. That certainly happens and you can pivot to make the best of it but it's not something to be encouraged during young adult and adolescent years IMO.
I just don't know why it has it to be an either/or instead of both being a stay-at-home parent and having workplace skills and experience, and that goes for sons and daughters. Call the reason(s) feminism, the demographic transition, post WW2 labor markets, an emphasis on tertiary education, whatever - but I feel like most developed societies are generally pushing children to have value beyond (but not in lieu of, necessarily) their fecundity and childrearing abilities, and that in acquiring this value it will directly and indirectly push the age of having children to later in life (when a person is likely to have more $ as well). Having competency also lends itself to not being stuck in a crappy work situation, you are more likely to have the confidence and the wherewithal to move to greener pastures instead of being/feeling stuck.
@LaineyAZ thanks for your response, I agree with you in the grand scheme and admit to being a bit naive/overconfident in my own household's situation. My wife has many marketable skills and I have no doubt if/when she wants to return to the workforce (tentative plan is ~3-4 years from now but we shall see, could be earlier, could be later, could be never), she will be successful in the long run (even if it takes her a little bit to get "back in" and not be underemployed). If she didn't have any marketable skills to start with or was not pursuing any avenues of acquiring some, I wouldn't have been that interested in anything beyond a short-term physical fling (with protection!) to begin with, but that's off-topic. To each their own with long-term mate selection! We will do our best to raise our future daughter in an environment where she is in control of the life she wants to create.
I also think it's important for young people to be exposed to various jobs even if they have a good idea of what they want to do and be after whichever level of education they need to complete. Go work in a factory one summer, go wait tables, go deliver food, go sucker horseradish, go pour asphalt, babysit, walk dogs, mow grass, lifeguard, replace roofs, install windows, whatever. If you like it, great. If not, you have money in your pocket, will have been exposed to various types of people that aren't always present in a young person's bubble, will have learned something (possibly about yourself or at least how to start balancing priorities), and you will be motivated for a career that is NOT related to what you were doing as a teenager over the summers or while you were going to school.
^^^or stay at home granddaddy lol.
I do think women are given a bit of lee way by potential employers and other people in general when taking long periods off work then most men. I could say I quit my job at 36 to be a care giver or raise kids or be a trailing spouse to support a DHs career for the past 10 or 20 years and most people wouldn't bat an eye. But I'm not so sure that would be the case with males, and a long work break might be a bit of a red flag for many employers.
One of the things talked about here sometimes is whether or not a SAH spouse is FI or not if, in the event of a divorce or unemployment of the earning spouse, they have to go back to work? Or if they can continue to FI (even a leaner FI) or not. So as a couple they might be FI but as 2 singles they may not be. Lots of people who are dependent on either a working spouse's income or joint assets to be FI would call themselves FI and maybe RE or even that they have FU money based on a spouse's earnings but wouldn't be if they divorced. That was mentioned up thread as a reason to stash more then you need as a couple in case of a split or long unemployment.
I worked with a guy early on when I was interning that had taken off several years as an engineer to take care of his child when they were born. He got an engineering job back afterwards, but it was a third shift job that seemed to be the only one he could find. I wondered if a woman would have been in the same situation.
I worked with a guy early on when I was interning that had taken off several years as an engineer to take care of his child when they were born. He got an engineering job back afterwards, but it was a third shift job that seemed to be the only one he could find. I wondered if a woman would have been in the same situation.
Maybe the guy wasn’t a very good engineer, or maybe just a bad communicator.
I took a six year break after undergrad engineering degree (Army) and feared difficulty finding a technical engineering position. Hit the reset button by going to grad school and getting a MS.
^^^ Curious if you all (the generic you all) would encourage (support the decision) your sons to be SAHD rather than learn a marketable skill and develop a work history and have some savings rather then be dependant on a spouse's income for years or decades?Nope.
Were you in the Army those 6 years? If so that's likely a plus for many employers. Even if you weren't working in the profession you trained for as a civilian, you were still working and not lying on a sunny beach drinking Monday morning mimosas after some beach volleyball ;-).
I worked with a guy early on when I was interning that had taken off several years as an engineer to take care of his child when they were born. He got an engineering job back afterwards, but it was a third shift job that seemed to be the only one he could find. I wondered if a woman would have been in the same situation.
Maybe the guy wasn’t a very good engineer, or maybe just a bad communicator.
I took a six year break after undergrad engineering degree (Army) and feared difficulty finding a technical engineering position. Hit the reset button by going to grad school and getting a MS.
^^^ Curious if you all (the generic you all) would encourage (support the decision) your sons to be SAHD rather than learn a marketable skill and develop a work history and have some savings rather then be dependant on a spouse's income for years or decades?Nope.
It can be a very touchy subject around here, historically. Some will say that evidence demonstrates, all things being equal, raising pre-K kids is best done by a loving stay at home parent and a second attentive parent that is around outside work hours. There are others who will vehemently argue that 10-12 hours of day care in a crowded facility from a few months onward is harmless and allows both parents to pursue their rightful careers, uninterrupted. A few may argue the middle ground of a live-in nanny supporting 1-2 WFH parents.
I can say from first-hand experience that it is important to make sure you can support yourself. My sweet husband of 25 years passed away from an out-of-the-blue aggressive cancer within 9 months. He was only 54--a life-altering nightmare for us both on so many levels. Thankfully, though, I have a good career and can maintain our home, expenses, retirement contributions, etc. without his salary (while he was sick and after he died.) He did not have life insurance (which is another story--I tell anyone who will listen to ensure they have term-life at the very least.) I couldn't imagine mourning his loss AND worrying about how to keep a roof over my head, pay bills, etc. For that I'm grateful my parents raised me to not be dependent on another because you just never know.So very sorry @Sunnytimes but that's a good point. Losing a partner, their income and maybe their assets, while dealing with their death (and maybe huge medical bills) would be extremely hard if not FI or at least able to support yourself. Have life insurance is at least a good hedge against possible poverty.
I know there's life insurance and disability insurance but maybe there should be divorce insurance too!
I know there's life insurance and disability insurance but maybe there should be divorce insurance too!
My most favorite thing about this forum is when someone says something that has never crossed my mind and makes me go hmmm. I just wanted to say thanks for the new thought @spartana!
I'm not sure how they'd do it - maybe a policy that pays each party x amount of money upon divorce - but I guess it could be a "thing" that's separate from a pre-nup. Although I can see the potential for fraud where couples divorce to get that money then continue to shack up together. I guess that's better than one spouse murdering the other for their life insurance LOL.I know there's life insurance and disability insurance but maybe there should be divorce insurance too!
My most favorite thing about this forum is when someone says something that has never crossed my mind and makes me go hmmm. I just wanted to say thanks for the new thought @spartana!
She sure would have, except she would be paid less.^^^or stay at home granddaddy lol.
I do think women are given a bit of lee way by potential employers and other people in general when taking long periods off work then most men. I could say I quit my job at 36 to be a care giver or raise kids or be a trailing spouse to support a DHs career for the past 10 or 20 years and most people wouldn't bat an eye. But I'm not so sure that would be the case with males, and a long work break might be a bit of a red flag for many employers.
One of the things talked about here sometimes is whether or not a SAH spouse is FI or not if, in the event of a divorce or unemployment of the earning spouse, they have to go back to work? Or if they can continue to FI (even a leaner FI) or not. So as a couple they might be FI but as 2 singles they may not be. Lots of people who are dependent on either a working spouse's income or joint assets to be FI would call themselves FI and maybe RE or even that they have FU money based on a spouse's earnings but wouldn't be if they divorced. That was mentioned up thread as a reason to stash more then you need as a couple in case of a split or long unemployment.
I worked with a guy early on when I was interning that had taken off several years as an engineer to take care of his child when they were born. He got an engineering job back afterwards, but it was a third shift job that seemed to be the only one he could find. I wondered if a woman would have been in the same situation.
Thanks @jeninco you saved me from having to say the same thing.^^^ Curious if you all (the generic you all) would encourage (support the decision) your sons to be SAHD rather than learn a marketable skill and develop a work history and have some savings rather then be dependant on a spouse's income for years or decades?Nope.
It can be a very touchy subject around here, historically. Some will say that evidence demonstrates, all things being equal, raising pre-K kids is best done by a loving stay at home parent and a second attentive parent that is around outside work hours. There are others who will vehemently argue that 10-12 hours of day care in a crowded facility from a few months onward is harmless and allows both parents to pursue their rightful careers, uninterrupted. A few may argue the middle ground of a live-in nanny supporting 1-2 WFH parents.
Oh stop. There are obviously options between "work all the hours, stick the kids in crappy daycare for 100+ hours per week" and "one of you -- probably the female one -- should significantly decrease her lifetime earnings (and salary, and retirement benefits) by staying home indefinitely, because "women naturally want to stay home with baybeees"". And your "middle ground" is barely available to the most highly-paid families, so knock it off!
She sure would have, except she would be paid less.^^^or stay at home granddaddy lol.
I do think women are given a bit of lee way by potential employers and other people in general when taking long periods off work then most men. I could say I quit my job at 36 to be a care giver or raise kids or be a trailing spouse to support a DHs career for the past 10 or 20 years and most people wouldn't bat an eye. But I'm not so sure that would be the case with males, and a long work break might be a bit of a red flag for many employers.
One of the things talked about here sometimes is whether or not a SAH spouse is FI or not if, in the event of a divorce or unemployment of the earning spouse, they have to go back to work? Or if they can continue to FI (even a leaner FI) or not. So as a couple they might be FI but as 2 singles they may not be. Lots of people who are dependent on either a working spouse's income or joint assets to be FI would call themselves FI and maybe RE or even that they have FU money based on a spouse's earnings but wouldn't be if they divorced. That was mentioned up thread as a reason to stash more then you need as a couple in case of a split or long unemployment.
I worked with a guy early on when I was interning that had taken off several years as an engineer to take care of his child when they were born. He got an engineering job back afterwards, but it was a third shift job that seemed to be the only one he could find. I wondered if a woman would have been in the same situation.
^^^ Curious if you all (the generic you all) would encourage (support the decision) your sons to be SAHD rather than learn a marketable skill and develop a work history and have some savings rather then be dependant on a spouse's income for years or decades?
I wouldn't. Not because he's my son, but because I'm a fan of safety and backup plans. Everyone should have a marketable skill of some kind that they can go to in case things fall apart. For a stay at home parent, a divorce is likely going to require that they find a job. I'd want any kid of mine to be able to weather that and not feel trapped in a miserable marriage because they don't have other options. Once he has that backup plan, then being a stay at home parent is totally fine.
Thanks @jeninco you saved me from having to say the same thing.^^^ Curious if you all (the generic you all) would encourage (support the decision) your sons to be SAHD rather than learn a marketable skill and develop a work history and have some savings rather then be dependant on a spouse's income for years or decades?Nope.
It can be a very touchy subject around here, historically. Some will say that evidence demonstrates, all things being equal, raising pre-K kids is best done by a loving stay at home parent and a second attentive parent that is around outside work hours. There are others who will vehemently argue that 10-12 hours of day care in a crowded facility from a few months onward is harmless and allows both parents to pursue their rightful careers, uninterrupted. A few may argue the middle ground of a live-in nanny supporting 1-2 WFH parents.
Oh stop. There are obviously options between "work all the hours, stick the kids in crappy daycare for 100+ hours per week" and "one of you -- probably the female one -- should significantly decrease her lifetime earnings (and salary, and retirement benefits) by staying home indefinitely, because "women naturally want to stay home with baybeees"". And your "middle ground" is barely available to the most highly-paid families, so knock it off!
The concept that job security is parlous is something foreign to me. I think if you are good at your job you will always have work, whether as an employee, as a contractor, with your own practice, etc. There is demand for everything as long as you are good at your job.Dunno, I've been reading numerous horror stories about the state of tech job hiring atm. Seemingly qualified people spending months and months looking, and getting zero offers. Perhaps they're all just bad at their jobs, or (more likely) bad at interviewing? But it's enough to give me pause as a tech worker myself.
The concept that job security is parlous is something foreign to me. I think if you are good at your job you will always have work, whether as an employee, as a contractor, with your own practice, etc. There is demand for everything as long as you are good at your job.Dunno, I've been reading numerous horror stories about the state of tech job hiring atm. Seemingly qualified people spending months and months looking, and getting zero offers. Perhaps they're all just bad at their jobs, or (more likely) bad at interviewing? But it's enough to give me pause as a tech worker myself.
The concept that job security is parlous is something foreign to me. I think if you are good at your job you will always have work, whether as an employee, as a contractor, with your own practice, etc. There is demand for everything as long as you are good at your job.
I've known many of these people in the past, during previous layoff/ downturns. And they are great people, highly talented, hard workers. If there aren't enough jobs, some people will be unemployed for awhile.The concept that job security is parlous is something foreign to me. I think if you are good at your job you will always have work, whether as an employee, as a contractor, with your own practice, etc. There is demand for everything as long as you are good at your job.Dunno, I've been reading numerous horror stories about the state of tech job hiring atm. Seemingly qualified people spending months and months looking, and getting zero offers. Perhaps they're all just bad at their jobs, or (more likely) bad at interviewing? But it's enough to give me pause as a tech worker myself.
Same. I know some of these people personally, too.
The concept that job security is parlous is something foreign to me. I think if you are good at your job you will always have work, whether as an employee, as a contractor, with your own practice, etc. There is demand for everything as long as you are good at your job.
The concept that job security is parlous is something foreign to me. I think if you are good at your job you will always have work, whether as an employee, as a contractor, with your own practice, etc. There is demand for everything as long as you are good at your job.Dunno, I've been reading numerous horror stories about the state of tech job hiring atm. Seemingly qualified people spending months and months looking, and getting zero offers. Perhaps they're all just bad at their jobs, or (more likely) bad at interviewing? But it's enough to give me pause as a tech worker myself.
The concept that job security is parlous is something foreign to me. I think if you are good at your job you will always have work, whether as an employee, as a contractor, with your own practice, etc. There is demand for everything as long as you are good at your job.
I don't agree- there's a ton of ageism, sexism, racism and other forms of conscious and unconscious bias that get in the way of logical hiring decisions - plenty of people who are/would be good at the job don't get a look in whilst others who are totally mediocre or worse but fit the mould stay employed. It all gets worse when unemployment spikes of course.
The concept that job security is parlous is something foreign to me. I think if you are good at your job you will always have work, whether as an employee, as a contractor, with your own practice, etc. There is demand for everything as long as you are good at your job.
I don't agree- there's a ton of ageism, sexism, racism and other forms of conscious and unconscious bias that get in the way of logical hiring decisions - plenty of people who are/would be good at the job don't get a look in whilst others who are totally mediocre or worse but fit the mould stay employed. It all gets worse when unemployment spikes of course.
The concept that job security is parlous is something foreign to me. I think if you are good at your job you will always have work, whether as an employee, as a contractor, with your own practice, etc. There is demand for everything as long as you are good at your job.Dunno, I've been reading numerous horror stories about the state of tech job hiring atm. Seemingly qualified people spending months and months looking, and getting zero offers. Perhaps they're all just bad at their jobs, or (more likely) bad at interviewing? But it's enough to give me pause as a tech worker myself.
I'm a super versatile experienced (25 years) software engineer with 2 years of self-taught data science experience, plenty of cloud / devops experience.
I've only been VERY casually looking for the past 5 months, but I have had exactly ZERO response to my (multiple versions) resumes in that time. Note that because I'm furloughed and collecting unemployment, I have to submit my resume to 2 positions each week.
The last time (and every time) I've looked for a job, I had an offer within 3 weeks of starting to look. (Most of my career, I've been recruited out of the blue with no effort on my part.) My current job was one where I knew a guy who knew a guy, and I interviewed, but at the time they went with someone more junior and affordable. Then a year later, they called me and gave me what I asked for (which was higher than what I'd asked for a year earlier.) They didn't have me re-interview. I've been there 5 years, but am now furloughed due to a bunch of misfortunes affecting our company; no fault of our own. (High interest rates, low venture capital pool, one client went bankrupt which hurt us in multiple ways, another client had an unexpected CEO death! Other projects are pending but not yet signed. And so on.)
Maybe I'm "suddenly" bad at my job ;) or maybe, just maybe, the over-hiring during COVID, the lay-offs of 2023, and the "return to office" mandate (which is another form of layoffs) just maybe indicates a big shift in the tech job market?
There's also something to be said for the gold rush for "AI" (e.g. machine learning being applied in new and novel ways, and utilizing the big, popular models and their APIs). Most of us, however senior as we are, have very little experience in this new area of technology, but the companies that are hiring "only" want someone with experience, because they don't want to risk being left out of the cool new thing. This happens from time to time, and it will likely shift again over the next 6 months as various companies figure out what's necessary to pursue, technologically speaking, and what can be safely put off for now.
If you're in tech and need work, skill up!
The concept that job security is parlous is something foreign to me. I think if you are good at your job you will always have work, whether as an employee, as a contractor, with your own practice, etc. There is demand for everything as long as you are good at your job.
I don't agree- there's a ton of ageism, sexism, racism and other forms of conscious and unconscious bias that get in the way of logical hiring decisions - plenty of people who are/would be good at the job don't get a look in whilst others who are totally mediocre or worse but fit the mould stay employed. It all gets worse when unemployment spikes of course.
I worked in aerospace for a while. Big contract, tons of people hired. Contract ends, tons of people get fired. It's very cyclical and there's no serious attempt to hold on to good people when you're firing 90% of the engineers.
There's also something to be said for the gold rush for "AI" (e.g. machine learning being applied in new and novel ways, and utilizing the big, popular models and their APIs). Most of us, however senior as we are, have very little experience in this new area of technology, but the companies that are hiring "only" want someone with experience, because they don't want to risk being left out of the cool new thing. This happens from time to time, and it will likely shift again over the next 6 months as various companies figure out what's necessary to pursue, technologically speaking, and what can be safely put off for now.
If you're in tech and need work, skill up!
What I can't figure out is exactly why this drought is so prolonged? I mean, yeah, obviously after FAANG did mass layoffs couple of years ago, there's gonna be a glut for a little while. But part of the explanation for those layoffs was supposed to be correcting for the previous over-hiring during the pandemic, so that should have just put us back at 2019 conditions (albeit with a lot more FAANG name-drops on resumés). But it really feels like a much deeper and more persistent change in the tech job market.The concept that job security is parlous is something foreign to me. I think if you are good at your job you will always have work, whether as an employee, as a contractor, with your own practice, etc. There is demand for everything as long as you are good at your job.Dunno, I've been reading numerous horror stories about the state of tech job hiring atm. Seemingly qualified people spending months and months looking, and getting zero offers. Perhaps they're all just bad at their jobs, or (more likely) bad at interviewing? But it's enough to give me pause as a tech worker myself.
I'm a super versatile experienced (25 years) software engineer with 2 years of self-taught data science experience, plenty of cloud / devops experience.
I've only been VERY casually looking for the past 5 months, but I have had exactly ZERO response to my (multiple versions) resumes in that time. Note that because I'm furloughed and collecting unemployment, I have to submit my resume to 2 positions each week.
The last time (and every time) I've looked for a job, I had an offer within 3 weeks of starting to look. (Most of my career, I've been recruited out of the blue with no effort on my part.) My current job was one where I knew a guy who knew a guy, and I interviewed, but at the time they went with someone more junior and affordable. Then a year later, they called me and gave me what I asked for (which was higher than what I'd asked for a year earlier.) They didn't have me re-interview. I've been there 5 years, but am now furloughed due to a bunch of misfortunes affecting our company; no fault of our own. (High interest rates, low venture capital pool, one client went bankrupt which hurt us in multiple ways, another client had an unexpected CEO death! Other projects are pending but not yet signed. And so on.)
Maybe I'm "suddenly" bad at my job ;) or maybe, just maybe, the over-hiring during COVID, the lay-offs of 2023, and the "return to office" mandate (which is another form of layoffs) just maybe indicates a big shift in the tech job market?
There's also something to be said for the gold rush for "AI" (e.g. machine learning being applied in new and novel ways, and utilizing the big, popular models and their APIs). Most of us, however senior as we are, have very little experience in this new area of technology, but the companies that are hiring "only" want someone with experience, because they don't want to risk being left out of the cool new thing. This happens from time to time, and it will likely shift again over the next 6 months as various companies figure out what's necessary to pursue, technologically speaking, and what can be safely put off for now.
If you're in tech and need work, skill up!
What I can't figure out is exactly why this drought is so prolonged? I mean, yeah, obviously after FAANG did mass layoffs couple of years ago, there's gonna be a glut for a little while. But part of the explanation for those layoffs was supposed to be correcting for the previous over-hiring during the pandemic, so that should have just put us back at 2019 conditions (albeit with a lot more FAANG name-drops on resumés). But it really feels like a much deeper and more persistent change in the tech job market.The concept that job security is parlous is something foreign to me. I think if you are good at your job you will always have work, whether as an employee, as a contractor, with your own practice, etc. There is demand for everything as long as you are good at your job.Dunno, I've been reading numerous horror stories about the state of tech job hiring atm. Seemingly qualified people spending months and months looking, and getting zero offers. Perhaps they're all just bad at their jobs, or (more likely) bad at interviewing? But it's enough to give me pause as a tech worker myself.
I'm a super versatile experienced (25 years) software engineer with 2 years of self-taught data science experience, plenty of cloud / devops experience.
I've only been VERY casually looking for the past 5 months, but I have had exactly ZERO response to my (multiple versions) resumes in that time. Note that because I'm furloughed and collecting unemployment, I have to submit my resume to 2 positions each week.
The last time (and every time) I've looked for a job, I had an offer within 3 weeks of starting to look. (Most of my career, I've been recruited out of the blue with no effort on my part.) My current job was one where I knew a guy who knew a guy, and I interviewed, but at the time they went with someone more junior and affordable. Then a year later, they called me and gave me what I asked for (which was higher than what I'd asked for a year earlier.) They didn't have me re-interview. I've been there 5 years, but am now furloughed due to a bunch of misfortunes affecting our company; no fault of our own. (High interest rates, low venture capital pool, one client went bankrupt which hurt us in multiple ways, another client had an unexpected CEO death! Other projects are pending but not yet signed. And so on.)
Maybe I'm "suddenly" bad at my job ;) or maybe, just maybe, the over-hiring during COVID, the lay-offs of 2023, and the "return to office" mandate (which is another form of layoffs) just maybe indicates a big shift in the tech job market?
There's also something to be said for the gold rush for "AI" (e.g. machine learning being applied in new and novel ways, and utilizing the big, popular models and their APIs). Most of us, however senior as we are, have very little experience in this new area of technology, but the companies that are hiring "only" want someone with experience, because they don't want to risk being left out of the cool new thing. This happens from time to time, and it will likely shift again over the next 6 months as various companies figure out what's necessary to pursue, technologically speaking, and what can be safely put off for now.
If you're in tech and need work, skill up!
And on the other side of the coin, this all started before "AI" became ubiquitous, so I can't see "ChatGPT took er jerbs!!1!" being the answer, either. Which only makes me wonder how much worse it's gonna get when that does become a major factor?
And on the other side of the coin, this all started before "AI" became ubiquitous, so I can't see "ChatGPT took er jerbs!!1!" being the answer, either. Which only makes me wonder how much worse it's gonna get when that does become a major factor?
In my comments about job security, I wasn't suggesting that you would never be laid off, but that there should always be an alternative to hop to.
In my comments about job security, I wasn't suggesting that you would never be laid off, but that there should always be an alternative to hop to. I'm no longer an employee, but when I was, I was constantly in the ear of recruiters so that I had a plan B and C in case my current firm wasn't going well or wasn't acceding to pay demands. Employers are replaceable, so treat them accordingly.And that's what I was addressing: from what I'm hearing, the alternatives in my industry have dried up, and those recruiters no longer come calling (nor have anything real to offer if you call on them).
I'm a bit skeptical of "AI" abilities as well. But I do think that it'll get to the point that a lot of low-level jobs in certain industries can be automated away, with a smaller number of "AI wranglers" overseeing and double-checking the output. Even if the quality drops a little bit, a lot of businesses in a number of industries will likely be willing to make that tradeoff to save time & money.QuoteAnd on the other side of the coin, this all started before "AI" became ubiquitous, so I can't see "ChatGPT took er jerbs!!1!" being the answer, either. Which only makes me wonder how much worse it's gonna get when that does become a major factor?
Can't see AI ever supplanting most skilled human jobs. AI for instance can transcribe to some extent but we still have human court transcribers. And that's not a particularly difficult job to begin with. More complex jobs are completely AI proof and will use AI only to augment their productivity.
The tech layoffs are tapering off so conditions could improve going forward, especially for AI, cloud and cybersecurity experts.
(https://cdn.ibj.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/TechJobs_Chart-1024x571.png)
Amateur question: is the economy just slowing down and the big employers are premptively shrinking their employee pools?All the standard economic indicators suggest otherwise, which is part of why this is all so baffling.
Car manufacturers are also laying off white collar workers.
Amateur question: is the economy just slowing down and the big employers are premptively shrinking their employee pools?All the standard economic indicators suggest otherwise, which is part of why this is all so baffling.
Car manufacturers are also laying off white collar workers.
There's also something to be said for the gold rush for "AI" (e.g. machine learning being applied in new and novel ways, and utilizing the big, popular models and their APIs). Most of us, however senior as we are, have very little experience in this new area of technology, but the companies that are hiring "only" want someone with experience, because they don't want to risk being left out of the cool new thing. This happens from time to time, and it will likely shift again over the next 6 months as various companies figure out what's necessary to pursue, technologically speaking, and what can be safely put off for now.
If you're in tech and need work, skill up!
Even in AI/ML the demand is drying up. As I've mentioned elsewhere on this forum I'm an OG AI researcher (30+ years working on neural networks :-)). I have now been retired for four years. Until the end of 2023, I used to get cold calls from recruiters but this year, the calls have completely stopped. I just feel grateful that I got out of the field when I did.
There's also something to be said for the gold rush for "AI" (e.g. machine learning being applied in new and novel ways, and utilizing the big, popular models and their APIs). Most of us, however senior as we are, have very little experience in this new area of technology, but the companies that are hiring "only" want someone with experience, because they don't want to risk being left out of the cool new thing. This happens from time to time, and it will likely shift again over the next 6 months as various companies figure out what's necessary to pursue, technologically speaking, and what can be safely put off for now.
If you're in tech and need work, skill up!
Even in AI/ML the demand is drying up. As I've mentioned elsewhere on this forum I'm an OG AI researcher (30+ years working on neural networks :-)). I have now been retired for four years. Until the end of 2023, I used to get cold calls from recruiters but this year, the calls have completely stopped. I just feel grateful that I got out of the field when I did.
My employer is constantly looking for cloud architects, developers, engineers, sysadmins, etc. Openings require either a public trust or security clearance (depends on the customer). Yet can't find people to fill all our slots. Some of the openings we have are because the prime contractor couldn't fill those slots. The pay is very competitive within this industry sector, with good benefits. Recruiters say it's hard to fill openings with ex-FAANGs because they want X pay, Y bonus, Z time off, N days of PTO, etc. and don't want to come down from their lofty perch to what we can pay, which is based on the FedGov customers' pay rates. (Employer is a lean professional services consulting company where C-level down are mostly engineers; 85% of the company, less than 100 employees, are all technical. Even admin staff are incentivized to get a basic cloud cert to understand our line of business.)
Also recruiters saying that some of the ex-FAANG folks don't want to get even a basic public trust clearance. But they want the job, and argue that the gov agency should hire them without having to poke through their background history. Most of these openings have transitioned from working in the DC area to full-time WFH, with the occasional travel to customer site (maybe one week in 3 months).
Hence we've pretty much given up on ex-FAANGs. We've been hiring people who got tired of working for big consulting companies and wanted a work-life balance, and want to work with a single customer for a couple of years instead of 3-6 month engagements. Pretty sure some of these new hires might be FI or close to it.
On the AI aspect, late 2022 to mid-2024, our customers kept on asking us to implement AI. We asked for details, specs, more info - got no answers. On some projects, we previously had implemented ML or some other company did for that gov customer. That AI talk is pretty much dead, at least for now.
Reminds me of the tech meme, where the job listing states they want someone with N years of experience in a technology that is much less than N years old.
How do you get a security clearance, though? Do you have to be recruited by an employer who will sponsor you through the process?
How do you get a security clearance, though? Do you have to be recruited by an employer who will sponsor you through the process?Yes. Employer has to sponsor.
^^^This pretty much covers everything but a few relatively unknown interim specialty clearances.How do you get a security clearance, though? Do you have to be recruited by an employer who will sponsor you through the process?Yes. Employer has to sponsor.
Who pays (https://news.clearancejobs.com/2020/05/11/who-pays-for-security-clearances/)
Myths (https://news.clearancejobs.com/2020/12/07/security-clearance-myths-your-employer-pays-for-your-security-clearance/)
Clearance costs (https://news.clearancejobs.com/2021/09/07/how-much-does-it-cost-to-obtain-a-clearance-fy-2022-23-costs-go-down/)
Twenty years ago I had to fill out a fuck-ton of paperwork for my Tier 3 clearance. Every year since, I have to review it and submit changes on an addendum form. Thankfully, it's all done online now. Or pdf forms. But I've moved a couple of levels up over the years and employers, based on the customer sites I've worked at.
We used to say "Yes, Sir, I am cleared for everything up to but not including Unrestricted."Badges!! You need those stinking badges! Most places with high level security are seriously locked down and unless you have the right clearance level ain't no way you're getting in.
We used to say "Yes, Sir, I am cleared for everything up to but not including Unrestricted."Badges!! You need those stinking badges! Most places with high level security are seriously locked down and unless you have the right clearance level ain't no way you're getting in.
I do find it interesting that some people like @GuitarStv could get clearances so easily. Especially as foreign nationals. My personal.experience, as well as my sister's, was of a deep background probe, in person interviews of all your living family members and their spouses and in-laws and sibs, also in person interviews with all your fellow employees or student friends, neighbors and anyone's name they mentioned as a possible known associate of yours, your personal friends and love life, a complete financial assessment, etc. Have financial problems or deep in debt? Security risk so denied clearance. Hunking BF's grandfather is from the Soviet Union/Russia? Security risk so denied clearance. Or you're gay or a loud mouth drunk or like beautiful women from China or North Korea, or...whatever. Lots of reasons it takes a long time initially and lots of reasons to be denied.
Yeah they're very pesky! My sister to never offer info and if asked weird or personal questions that you probably don't really know the answer to just say I don't know. I.e. to the landlord: " Does she pay her rent on time"? Yes. "Does she ever have complains from other tenants, or have the police or the like, called for noise or party issues"? No. "Does she engage 8n sex with strange men or women"? I don't know or not that I'm aware of. Etc..We used to say "Yes, Sir, I am cleared for everything up to but not including Unrestricted."Badges!! You need those stinking badges! Most places with high level security are seriously locked down and unless you have the right clearance level ain't no way you're getting in.
I do find it interesting that some people like @GuitarStv could get clearances so easily. Especially as foreign nationals. My personal.experience, as well as my sister's, was of a deep background probe, in person interviews of all your living family members and their spouses and in-laws and sibs, also in person interviews with all your fellow employees or student friends, neighbors and anyone's name they mentioned as a possible known associate of yours, your personal friends and love life, a complete financial assessment, etc. Have financial problems or deep in debt? Security risk so denied clearance. Hunking BF's grandfather is from the Soviet Union/Russia? Security risk so denied clearance. Or you're gay or a loud mouth drunk or like beautiful women from China or North Korea, or...whatever. Lots of reasons it takes a long time initially and lots of reasons to be denied.
I once had a hilarious interview with an investigator who was probing the background of a schoolmate who needed clearance for a summer job at Sandia Labs. The investigator kept insisting "Isn't there anything UNUSUAL you want to tell me about her? Anything DIFFERENT? Can't you think of SOMETHING about her you need to tell me???" She was apparently trying to get me to indicate that the subject was a practicing lesbian in order to ensure this was openly known and not a potential source of blackmail. But the way she phrased the question, many times, and the horrible faces she made gave me pause about bringing it up although I suppose I should have relented. Anyhow, my friend got the clearance and motored off to New Mexico with her girlfriend in tow.
My DD was a language major, focused on Asian languages, and was recruited by the CIA.There's also something to be said for the gold rush for "AI" (e.g. machine learning being applied in new and novel ways, and utilizing the big, popular models and their APIs). Most of us, however senior as we are, have very little experience in this new area of technology, but the companies that are hiring "only" want someone with experience, because they don't want to risk being left out of the cool new thing. This happens from time to time, and it will likely shift again over the next 6 months as various companies figure out what's necessary to pursue, technologically speaking, and what can be safely put off for now.
If you're in tech and need work, skill up!
Even in AI/ML the demand is drying up. As I've mentioned elsewhere on this forum I'm an OG AI researcher (30+ years working on neural networks :-)). I have now been retired for four years. Until the end of 2023, I used to get cold calls from recruiters but this year, the calls have completely stopped. I just feel grateful that I got out of the field when I did.
My employer is constantly looking for cloud architects, developers, engineers, sysadmins, etc. Openings require either a public trust or security clearance (depends on the customer). Yet can't find people to fill all our slots. Some of the openings we have are because the prime contractor couldn't fill those slots. The pay is very competitive within this industry sector, with good benefits. Recruiters say it's hard to fill openings with ex-FAANGs because they want X pay, Y bonus, Z time off, N days of PTO, etc. and don't want to come down from their lofty perch to what we can pay, which is based on the FedGov customers' pay rates. (Employer is a lean professional services consulting company where C-level down are mostly engineers; 85% of the company, less than 100 employees, are all technical. Even admin staff are incentivized to get a basic cloud cert to understand our line of business.)
Also recruiters saying that some of the ex-FAANG folks don't want to get even a basic public trust clearance. But they want the job, and argue that the gov agency should hire them without having to poke through their background history. Most of these openings have transitioned from working in the DC area to full-time WFH, with the occasional travel to customer site (maybe one week in 3 months).
Hence we've pretty much given up on ex-FAANGs. We've been hiring people who got tired of working for big consulting companies and wanted a work-life balance, and want to work with a single customer for a couple of years instead of 3-6 month engagements. Pretty sure some of these new hires might be FI or close to it.
On the AI aspect, late 2022 to mid-2024, our customers kept on asking us to implement AI. We asked for details, specs, more info - got no answers. On some projects, we previously had implemented ML or some other company did for that gov customer. That AI talk is pretty much dead, at least for now.
Reminds me of the tech meme, where the job listing states they want someone with N years of experience in a technology that is much less than N years old.
I also agree that jobs that require security clearances are among the best options nowadays. My younger daughter who is a math major was recruited quite aggressively by several defense companies since it's hard to find math majors who are born in the US - (although she has decided to go to grad school however).
My DD was a language major, focused on Asian languages, and was recruited by the CIA.The reincarnation of Moe Berg. :-)
I like to tell her that I know she's actually working for them and can't tell me, and that her gig teaching English in Japan is just a front, which always gets a major eye roll from her.
My DD was a language major, focused on Asian languages, and was recruited by the CIA.
I like to tell her that I know she's actually working for them and can't tell me, and that her gig teaching English in Japan is just a front, which always gets a major eye roll from her.
The concept that job security is parlous is something foreign to me. I think if you are good at your job you will always have work, whether as an employee, as a contractor, with your own practice, etc. There is demand for everything as long as you are good at your job.
Getting another job is the easy part. Wanting to work at another job is the more difficult part. Especially as you get more seniority, set in your ways, develop your niche and client relationships, mold your job and others expectations over many years, etc.
My DD was a language major, focused on Asian languages, and was recruited by the CIA.There's also something to be said for the gold rush for "AI" (e.g. machine learning being applied in new and novel ways, and utilizing the big, popular models and their APIs). Most of us, however senior as we are, have very little experience in this new area of technology, but the companies that are hiring "only" want someone with experience, because they don't want to risk being left out of the cool new thing. This happens from time to time, and it will likely shift again over the next 6 months as various companies figure out what's necessary to pursue, technologically speaking, and what can be safely put off for now.
If you're in tech and need work, skill up!
Even in AI/ML the demand is drying up. As I've mentioned elsewhere on this forum I'm an OG AI researcher (30+ years working on neural networks :-)). I have now been retired for four years. Until the end of 2023, I used to get cold calls from recruiters but this year, the calls have completely stopped. I just feel grateful that I got out of the field when I did.
My employer is constantly looking for cloud architects, developers, engineers, sysadmins, etc. Openings require either a public trust or security clearance (depends on the customer). Yet can't find people to fill all our slots. Some of the openings we have are because the prime contractor couldn't fill those slots. The pay is very competitive within this industry sector, with good benefits. Recruiters say it's hard to fill openings with ex-FAANGs because they want X pay, Y bonus, Z time off, N days of PTO, etc. and don't want to come down from their lofty perch to what we can pay, which is based on the FedGov customers' pay rates. (Employer is a lean professional services consulting company where C-level down are mostly engineers; 85% of the company, less than 100 employees, are all technical. Even admin staff are incentivized to get a basic cloud cert to understand our line of business.)
Also recruiters saying that some of the ex-FAANG folks don't want to get even a basic public trust clearance. But they want the job, and argue that the gov agency should hire them without having to poke through their background history. Most of these openings have transitioned from working in the DC area to full-time WFH, with the occasional travel to customer site (maybe one week in 3 months).
Hence we've pretty much given up on ex-FAANGs. We've been hiring people who got tired of working for big consulting companies and wanted a work-life balance, and want to work with a single customer for a couple of years instead of 3-6 month engagements. Pretty sure some of these new hires might be FI or close to it.
On the AI aspect, late 2022 to mid-2024, our customers kept on asking us to implement AI. We asked for details, specs, more info - got no answers. On some projects, we previously had implemented ML or some other company did for that gov customer. That AI talk is pretty much dead, at least for now.
Reminds me of the tech meme, where the job listing states they want someone with N years of experience in a technology that is much less than N years old.
I also agree that jobs that require security clearances are among the best options nowadays. My younger daughter who is a math major was recruited quite aggressively by several defense companies since it's hard to find math majors who are born in the US - (although she has decided to go to grad school however).
I like to tell her that I know she's actually working for them and can't tell me, and that her gig teaching English in Japan is just a front, which always gets a major eye roll from her.
Hmm...am I too old to learn this stuff?There's also something to be said for the gold rush for "AI" (e.g. machine learning being applied in new and novel ways, and utilizing the big, popular models and their APIs). Most of us, however senior as we are, have very little experience in this new area of technology, but the companies that are hiring "only" want someone with experience, because they don't want to risk being left out of the cool new thing. This happens from time to time, and it will likely shift again over the next 6 months as various companies figure out what's necessary to pursue, technologically speaking, and what can be safely put off for now.
If you're in tech and need work, skill up!
Even in AI/ML the demand is drying up. As I've mentioned elsewhere on this forum I'm an OG AI researcher (30+ years working on neural networks :-)). I have now been retired for four years. Until the end of 2023, I used to get cold calls from recruiters but this year, the calls have completely stopped. I just feel grateful that I got out of the field when I did.
My employer is constantly looking for cloud architects, developers, engineers, sysadmins, etc. Openings require either a public trust or security clearance (depends on the customer). Yet can't find people to fill all our slots. Some of the openings we have are because the prime contractor couldn't fill those slots. The pay is very competitive within this industry sector, with good benefits. Recruiters say it's hard to fill openings with ex-FAANGs because they want X pay, Y bonus, Z time off, N days of PTO, etc. and don't want to come down from their lofty perch to what we can pay, which is based on the FedGov customers' pay rates. (Employer is a lean professional services consulting company where C-level down are mostly engineers; 85% of the company, less than 100 employees, are all technical. Even admin staff are incentivized to get a basic cloud cert to understand our line of business.)
Also recruiters saying that some of the ex-FAANG folks don't want to get even a basic public trust clearance. But they want the job, and argue that the gov agency should hire them without having to poke through their background history. Most of these openings have transitioned from working in the DC area to full-time WFH, with the occasional travel to customer site (maybe one week in 3 months).
Hence we've pretty much given up on ex-FAANGs. We've been hiring people who got tired of working for big consulting companies and wanted a work-life balance, and want to work with a single customer for a couple of years instead of 3-6 month engagements. Pretty sure some of these new hires might be FI or close to it.
On the AI aspect, late 2022 to mid-2024, our customers kept on asking us to implement AI. We asked for details, specs, more info - got no answers. On some projects, we previously had implemented ML or some other company did for that gov customer. That AI talk is pretty much dead, at least for now.
Reminds me of the tech meme, where the job listing states they want someone with N years of experience in a technology that is much less than N years old.
No. One is never too old to learn technology, just like you're never too late to learn investing.Hmm...am I too old to learn this stuff?There's also something to be said for the gold rush for "AI" (e.g. machine learning being applied in new and novel ways, and utilizing the big, popular models and their APIs). Most of us, however senior as we are, have very little experience in this new area of technology, but the companies that are hiring "only" want someone with experience, because they don't want to risk being left out of the cool new thing. This happens from time to time, and it will likely shift again over the next 6 months as various companies figure out what's necessary to pursue, technologically speaking, and what can be safely put off for now.
If you're in tech and need work, skill up!
Even in AI/ML the demand is drying up. As I've mentioned elsewhere on this forum I'm an OG AI researcher (30+ years working on neural networks :-)). I have now been retired for four years. Until the end of 2023, I used to get cold calls from recruiters but this year, the calls have completely stopped. I just feel grateful that I got out of the field when I did.
My employer is constantly looking for cloud architects, developers, engineers, sysadmins, etc. Openings require either a public trust or security clearance (depends on the customer). Yet can't find people to fill all our slots. Some of the openings we have are because the prime contractor couldn't fill those slots. The pay is very competitive within this industry sector, with good benefits. Recruiters say it's hard to fill openings with ex-FAANGs because they want X pay, Y bonus, Z time off, N days of PTO, etc. and don't want to come down from their lofty perch to what we can pay, which is based on the FedGov customers' pay rates. (Employer is a lean professional services consulting company where C-level down are mostly engineers; 85% of the company, less than 100 employees, are all technical. Even admin staff are incentivized to get a basic cloud cert to understand our line of business.)
Also recruiters saying that some of the ex-FAANG folks don't want to get even a basic public trust clearance. But they want the job, and argue that the gov agency should hire them without having to poke through their background history. Most of these openings have transitioned from working in the DC area to full-time WFH, with the occasional travel to customer site (maybe one week in 3 months).
Hence we've pretty much given up on ex-FAANGs. We've been hiring people who got tired of working for big consulting companies and wanted a work-life balance, and want to work with a single customer for a couple of years instead of 3-6 month engagements. Pretty sure some of these new hires might be FI or close to it.
On the AI aspect, late 2022 to mid-2024, our customers kept on asking us to implement AI. We asked for details, specs, more info - got no answers. On some projects, we previously had implemented ML or some other company did for that gov customer. That AI talk is pretty much dead, at least for now.
Reminds me of the tech meme, where the job listing states they want someone with N years of experience in a technology that is much less than N years old.