DH has two job offers.
Job #1
Way more money
More fieldwork which means away from home lots
Different city which is more expensive and hard to find a cheap home
Possibly long commute
Lots of great incentives
Job #2
Far less money
Set hours means more family time
Shorter commute
Wouldn't have to move
Chance to move up in the company
Every third Friday off
Which would you choose?
88 votes
papaya / 10343 posts
Would job offer 2 mean a decrease in your quality of living? If not, and you're okay where you're at, I'd vote that.
grapefruit / 4582 posts
I voted #2 but I'm torn....
I grew up in a household where we had lots of money but my dad was gone for 2 weeks out of the month and when he was home, he worked long hours in his home office. So now my preference will always be family over $$. However, I also realize that maybe sacrifices need to be made short term while the kids are younger for us to have a more comfortable family life with more time together in the long run.
Would option 1 be better long term with room to make travel less frequent over time? And congrats! DH just got a new job moving us across the country and away from free childcare (grandma!) so we had a lot to consider as well. Good luck!
wonderful grape / 20453 posts
So many things to consider. Does #1 lead to a great possibility? Does "far less money" mean you'll have a hard time making ends meet?
There have to be other things to these jobs that are appealing. I think the way they are presented is pretty skewed to materialism.
What does DH want to do? Many guys love field work and would hate office work
cantaloupe / 6751 posts
What is "far less $"?
Would your cost of living go up so much from the move to the more expensive city that it would eat up most of your pay raise?
Will either offer lead to different/greater opportunities in the future!
pomegranate / 3759 posts
We sort of sat down and calculated our expenses. After taxes, the pay difference probably wouldnt be as extreme as it sounds but definitely a noticeable difference. We wouldn't be hurting but we would have to budget big time. My first thought is that family is always way more important. But not having that extra $$ for vacations, upgrading vehicles, etc seems like a loss too.
We are however, extremely grateful to at least have options 
pomegranate / 3759 posts
@pinkcupcake: A third less. They both have potential for moving up and earning more $$. As far as moving, our options are to find land to build or move into an existing home which is far overpriced so I think the moving would probably eat up the difference.
blogger / wonderful cherry / 21616 posts
I know it's not the common thing to say, but I would vote #1... I know what it's like growing up without money and never being able to do anything, wearing hand me downs and shopping only at thrift stores, etc... and even now, being financially strapped is so stressful and directly impacts the happiness of our family. Although I love having DH home, if he had the option to substantially increase his pay in exchange for extra hours, we would likely take the opportunity.
Family is important, yes. But you guys can still prioritize family even if he will be home less.
grapefruit / 4903 posts
Definitely more family time. I chose my legal specialty with that in mind (for flexibility as far as law goes, anyway).
honeydew / 7687 posts
Family time. I grew up while money was tight, no real vacations ever, handmade costumes etc and I think it had a positive impact on me in the long run. Hands down that would be the decision for our family and has been in the past. DHs flexibility to take LO to swim lessons, go to dr appts, now will translate into making soccer games and school plays later. IMO that is priceless. Especially since #1 isn't just more in office hours, it's more road time and less availability overall.
Something else to consider with #1 is your support system- we move often so it's important that DH can come home in a pinch or if I were to have a car accident or something. We don't live anywhere long enough to know someone else well enough to count on them!
pear / 1812 posts
I know I'm supposed to say more family time, but honestly, I'd pick more money, as long as you're able to really enjoy and prioritize quality time with family when he is home.
GOLD / watermelon / 14076 posts
More family time. I think not having money for vacations or upgrading vehicles is totally worth the family time. The only way I'd choose more money is if you were not going to be able to make end's meet otherwise or if paying bills would be a struggle each month. But it sounds like y'all will be fine, you just won't have some of the luxuries you would with job 1.
grapefruit / 4441 posts
Whichever job would be more satisfying to your DH. A happy husband who loves his job and is challenged but not overly stressed is preferable to one who is overwhelmed, stressed, or otherwise unhappy (obviously)! To me, a lot of travel, long hours, and a long commute sounds miserable and would not be worth extra money - BUT, maybe the position itself is preferable? What about the managers at each job? Coworkers? Other factors? It sounds like cost of living and having to move would eat up some of the pay difference with #1.
kiwi / 548 posts
More family time! As long as the lesser paying job will enable you to not feel stressed about money. I grew up with very little and I worked very hard to make sure I had a great career and luckily my husband does too, but since having kids we have prioritized our time at home and we are now at a point where we work 9-5 (both home by 6 with commute). We eat dinner together every night and I can't imagine ever giving that up. We are lucky in that we make good salaries, but having multiple family members pass away young, it has become apparent that you can't take it with you. We also have friends and family who are very wealthy ( partners in hedge funds and private equity) and overtime it's become clear that with $$ you always want more (selling your former 3 million dream house for your new 10 million dream house). Financial stability is paramount, but you can't get time spent away from your family back once it's past. Good luck!
pomelo / 5678 posts
A consideration for me would be... do you want to move? Better schools? Quality of life? Are you attracted to the new location?
We live in a more expensive location but I would much rather live here for the culture and opportunities for lo for instance vs. live in a more affordable rural area...
pomelo / 5678 posts
@78h2o: good point! Less stress for husband, place where he feels valuable and more appreciated. ..
pomelo / 5678 posts
@scg00387: good points! DH for instance has Mondays and Tuesdays off right now instead of a traditional weekend and I really love that time... he can come to appointments and things aren't as busy around town.
persimmon / 1281 posts
I voted other. I'm all for quality family time but I think the response also largely depends on how your day is spent, as his spouse. One tired, hungry person coming home late can be nurtured by the spouse who is more available to set a nurturing environment. Two tired and hungry spouses coming home late and tired each evening can make for a pretty tense household.
pineapple / 12793 posts
We once took the more family time option. The salary difference was about $40k. The time difference was supposed to be 40 hours vs. 70-80 hours. After the first month DH was brought in to his bosses office and notified that he was expected to be at the office for a minimum 60 hours. He ended up working 80 for a year burnt out and quit. It was awful.
Make sure if you choose family time that that is what you get.
clementine / 990 posts
I voted for option number 2, not specifically because of more family time, but because there was more opportunity for advancement.
That said, I would take option number 1 if option number 2 meant we would be struggling forever, financially.
cantaloupe / 6017 posts
More family time, you have the rest of your lives to take vacations and drive fancy cars. Your kids only have one childhood. The job has room for advancement, and it sounds like you won't be struggling.
I grew up without much money, but both of my parents made family time a priority, so it's definitely my bias. I want my kids to have both parents involved and present as much as possible. Used cars and camping trips instead of nice cars and resorts never hurt anyone.
honeydew / 7235 posts
100% more family time. The money can be temping but quality of life is worth sooooo much more.
grapefruit / 4770 posts
@oliviaoblivia: eep! That would be my concern too. Sorry to hear that happened.
pomegranate / 3768 posts
Which job is he more passionate about? Where does he want to be five years from now and which job will get him there? DH also had two job offers and one offered waaaaaaay more money but he turned it down because the other one was more in line with his long term goals.
apricot / 469 posts
@Lindsay05: I voted more money option but with a caveat - it depends on how comfortable you are now.
I know that many people feel like nice vehicles etc are not worth sacrificing family time for but I feel like increased security in the form of retirement savings and contributing more to a 529 and so on is worth sacrificing for.
I feel like lots of people need to sacrifice family time when their kids are little to be more secure and in a better position when they are older and need more in terms of education, sports etc.
eggplant / 11408 posts
I agree with @78h2o: I think I would pick whatever job DH would be most happy in. I think the only way that you can be happy with either less money or less time at home is if you have a job that you love.
pineapple / 12053 posts
there seems like a lot of differences between the 2 and not just family versus money... so i didn't vote. for me it would depend on where i want to live and raise my family, which one DH wanted to do more, and if there was room for advancement in #2 that wouldn't keep us hurting for money later on down the road.
pomegranate / 3383 posts
Is job #1 an on-site job where he'd be away for a couple of weeks then home for an extended period of time?
I *think* we live in the same province (sorry if I'm wrong!) but I've heard really great things about the job incentives and quality of work conditions of jobs up north.
wonderful pear / 26210 posts
My answer depends on what you are doing, are you working or home? If you're home, I'd go with job #1. If you're working, #2.
I believe in working hard when you're young, not old.
bananas / 9899 posts
I don't know... I think I'd need more information to decide.
Personally, we work harder (more hours) now so that in the future we'll have a much more comfortable life and time off. Money made now is going to be worth way more in the future than a trickle of money constantly over the years.
wonderful clementine / 24134 posts
Considering option two has the room for advancement, I would consider that.
But I do think that I would rather be busy and work my career now while my kids are younger (and won't remember) and then be able to relax a bit and be around more when they are older (in sports, going to college, etc)
| Today | Monthly Record | |
|---|---|---|
| Topics | 1 | 0 |
| Posts | 0 | 1 |
Ask for Help
Make a Suggestion
Frequently Asked Questions
Bee Levels
Acronyms
Most Viewed Posts
Hellobee Gold
Hellobee Recipes
Hellobee Features
Hellobee Contests
Baby-led Weaning
Bento Boxes
Breastfeeding
Newborn Essentials
Parties
Postpartum Care Essentials
Sensory Play Activities
Sleep Training
Starting Solids Gear
Transitioning to Toddler Bed
All Series
Who We Are
About the Bloggers
About the Hostesses
Contributing Bloggers
Apply to Blog
Apply to Hostess
Submit a Guest Blog
Hellobee Buttons
How We Make Money
Community Policies
- Google Plus
- Stumbleupon
- Twitter
- Facebook
- Pinterest
- Favorite0
34 comments