Temporary Career Change a Good IdeaThis question is about my husband's situation. I'll try to be brief, but it's involved.... I apologize in advance for the length. He just started a job search after only 1 1/2 years at his current position. He loves his work, but the company is in very big financial trouble, and there may be no job left if he waits to make a move. Here's the problem: He has two job possibilities, one a firm offer from "Company X," the other a strong "maybe" with "Company Y." Both of these are long-term contract positions. The one with Co. Y has a slight possibility of direct employment, but is not currently structured as contract to perm. Both are offering a fabulous wage, and have decent benefits packages, otherwise he wouldn't consider contracting. He worked for Co. X a few years ago, so he knows the people and is comfortable there. Problem is that the job is not in his current career field. I can't be too specific because his field is small and I don't want anyone to recognize his situation. Let's say he is in Field 1, and would like to stay in it. The job with Co. X is in Field 2, which is related, but not as challenging or as in demand. It's the same job he did with Co. X previously. Co. X has a large department in Field 1, but it's very, very difficult to get hired into. But that dept. has direct openings, and a job in it could be one "for life." If he takes the current opening in Field 2, it would be only to get his foot in the door for a job in the other department. If, however, that doesn't pan out, where will that leave him? Co. X never hires on direct in the department he'd be in initially. So, I'm concerned about what happens if/when he eventually is back out looking for a job in Field 1. If he's out of that field for, say, one or two years, but keeps his skills sharp, will he be at a great disadvantage? People with his skill set and level of experience & competence are, at the moment, in high demand and hard to find in this area. But that may not be true down the road. Now, the job with Co. Y is in Field 1, but it's a smaller firm, and there's not a strong chance for a permanent position, either. A possibility, but sounds like not a probability. The initial term of the contract is shorter, but he was pretty much guaranteed that it would be extended to the same length as that in Co. X. Co. Y hasn't been around for very long, whereas Co. X is a worldwide industry giant--not likely to get into financial trouble or suffer a slowdown. The big upside to Y, as I can see it, is that he would be in his chosen field and would continue to gain experience and knowledge. I assume this would put him at more of an advantage going forward when he is back out looking again. Both companies do most of their business with the federal government, in the defense industry, so they both look solid, even the smaller, newer Co. Y, at least for the forseeable future. Bottom line, I guess, is: If he goes with Co. X in Field 2 and can get back into Field 1, he is set for a very long time, probably until retirement (he's not a young chicken, so that's not an unreasonable expectation). If he doesn't get back into Field 2 there, he'll be out looking for another job in a year or so, and will have a break in his work experience in Field 1. We cannot assess the odds on getting into the right department with Co. X, except to say that it is surely easier to do it from within than from without. That is a certainty. If he goes with Co. Y in Field 1, not much of a chance at all he'll be staying and will be out looking for another job in a year or so, but with continual experience in his preferred field. His preference is to go back to Co. X in Field 2 and get hired on direct in Field 1. But that also is a risk. Any ideas, opinions, etc, greatly appreciated. He'd like to make up his mind by week's end, so your comments are urgently needed. Thanks! Um, please folks, I could really use your input with this.... Needing to make a decision by week's end, and we're struggling with this. Thanks in advance. Ok, I think I follow the issue, here's my thoughts. 1. A "permanent" job is nearly always better than a temp position, especially one that doesn't even dangle the possiblity of perm behind it. 2. A job with an actual offer is better than a job with a maybe offer. 3. He needs to give some thought to his field to determine if say 2 years out of the direct technical aspects is a problem or not. I can't guess that for him, especially not knowing exactly what the field is. 4. He needs to pick something, A, B or stay put and pass on both. All you can do when these things present themselves is to make the best decision you can and see what happens. You can't go down all the tracks at once and although you shouldn't take unnecessary risks, you also can't anticipate EVERY variable. As Dr. Phil says, there's making the right decision and there's making the decision (that you did make) right. Whatever he picks, he needs to give his all to MAKE IT be the right choice.
Tess Thanks, Tess! I appreciate your wise input. The biggest drawback to contracting would be going with Co. X, being out of his career field for one to two years, then trying to get back in it. I have no idea how employers would view this, and how much of a disadvantage it would be in trying to get back into the field. That's the perspective we're missing. Staying put is not really an option. Though he got probably the biggest raise in his dept. this year, with the increase in cost of living, higher cost of gas to commute, and the increase in health-insurance premiums and co-pays, he's actually losing money. Due to the financial situation of the company, there is no chance of promotion in order to up his salary. He is concerned that if he waits it out, and there are layoffs--a distinct possibility--he'll be in the bad situation of looking for a job while unemployed. Add to that the long commute and long hours, and his present job is simply no longer workable for our family situation. He's tired of commuting, the kids need him here at home more, etc. While a permanent job is certainly more desirable, his current one is no more secure or financially better than a contract one at this point. At least with the amount of money he'd be making on contract, we could bank large sums in the event he ended up between jobs after the contract period. His current job doesn't make that possible. The only way for him to get another perm job making a good wage is to continue to commute nearly an hour or more, but that's pretty much out unless he could get flexible hours (full-time hours, but structured so that he could be home earlier). I'm not so worried anymore about what happens when/if he's between jobs, since we'd have money in the bank and he could temporarily help out in our other business venture. So, for now it looks like contracting would be making the best out of a bad situation. At this point, he's still waiting to hear back from the outside recruiter for Co. Y to see whether or not they're still interested in him. I guess best scenario would be that they're not, then the answer is clear!
Keep in mind with contracting that he will not be an actual employee. He won't get their medical plan, he won't get their retirement, etc. If he's through a temp agency they may have some (usually pretty poor) medical plan, but if you think you're paying too much now, investigate what private coverage (if you can even get it) would cost.
Tess Tess, as opposed to years past, most of the large contracting firms now have healthcare plans. While they do not contribute to the cost, they get volume discounts from the insurers and are able to offer plans far more reasonably than one can get as a self-insured individual. (Although, we have been privately insured in the past and have managed to get decent coverage at rates far less than the standard BC/BS products.) One of the contract firms he's considering going with has a dental plan almost as good as what we have now, and the premiums & coverage for the medical plan are LOWER than what DH had in his previous postion. Both contract firms actually have pretty decent coverage options, and the cost is no more than what some people we know are paying even with direct employers who contribute to their plans. I never said we were paying "too much" now; he actually has a very reasonable premium and excellent coverage at his current job. But the combination of increased premiums (they're still reasonable) and much higher co-pays has helped to decrease his take-home pay, even factoring in his salary increase. Even with higher out-of-pocket costs for insurance premiums (co-pays with the contract plan would be the same or less) and higher deductible, he would be making more than enough money to cover any differences. I have a really good handle on our medical spending, and our oop expenses would be, while higher than what we now pay, about the same as we were paying when he was covered under his last employer's plan. So, that particular concern is not as prominent as it was many years ago when contract firms offered no coverage, or it was so expensive nobody could afford it anyway. Really, the biggest concern is how much it may hurt him "down the road" if he is out of his field a couple years. That's my biggest worry right now. | |
|
Career Tips
|