Offer below expectationI currently work for a State agency as a Financial Analyst and have been doing so for 6 years. My direct supervisor left unexpectedly due to health problems last July and passed away this past January. His supervisor has inherited me and another Analyst but has been extremely slow in dealing with the situation (she has traditionally been a weak decision maker as well as a micromanager). I have been given a temporary increase for the additional duties I have taken on that just keeps getting extended with no permanent change being made. I have also recently earned my MBA so I would expect that to be taken into account with respect to compensation but no luck on that front either. Everytime I bring up the situation, I am told that a decision will be made soon. Our agency has been without its Budget Director for over 9 months so needless to say, I have been looking elsewhere. My dilemma: I have recently been offered a similar but higher profile Analyst position with a major player in the banking industry. Unfortunately, I was required to state my current salary on an application early on in the process. While the salary offered is approx. 12% higher than my current salary, the benefits fall far shorter than what I have now. The difference lies mainly in paid sick time: currently I get 15 days/year but the new job has only 3 days/year. Also, current employer retirement contribution is 7.5% (regardless of my contribution) and increases to 10% after 10 years of service - the new company only contributes 6% as a matching contribution. This all boils down to an offer, when more than salary is considered, which is basically the same as what I get now (with the temporary increase). This offer was already adjusted upward during a phone conversation for which I asked for time to consider this new offer. After running the numbers I came to the conclusion I mentioned above - it does not put me in a better financial position which is part of my motivation for looking elsewhere. How should I try to negotiate further? Their offer is currently $5K less that what I told them I had expected. I would actually be satisfied with an additional $3K over their latest offer. Any advice??? Essentially no (or very few) private sector jobs are going to have the same benefits and stability of a government job. On the other hand, they are going to have a lot more potential for advancement, bonus and promotions/raises related to your great hard work. The government pays for longevity, the private sector pays for performance. In respect to this particular position, you' ve gotten all the cash you' re going to get at this point. The decision on you now is whether a 12% increase and the jump to the private sector is what you want or not. They' re not beating you at the basement in your current job, you could continue to stay put and see if something better comes along down the road. Generally speaking, government jobs have more generous benefits than the private sector. But a 12% salary increase isn' t all that bad and well within the range, 10% to 15%, that justifies a move. I' d also think your opportunities for advancement based on the quality of your job performance would be greater in a private sector job. On the other hand, there' s usually more job security - even for mediocre performers - in government jobs. Also sounds like salary negotiations have already taken place. Why not ask if you can have a performance and salary review after 6 months on the new job? That should give you plenty of time to demonstrate what you can accomplish and justify an increase in salary. The trade-off here, in a nutshell, is job security versus the chance for advancement based on performance, as I see it. Which is more important to you? I would most definitely look at the hours expected and the reality of hours worked by those in similar positions within the industry. If indeed you end up putting in tremendous amounts of O/T (and, yes, in the private financial sector, it seems entirely plausible that you would have to), you may not end up any better at all from a financial standpoint and certainly not from a life/work balance perspective. 12% more may end up as a break-even, or less, when you look at your salary in terms of $$/hr worked. Personally, the 3 days/yr of sick time would raise a flag to me. Professionals should be, at least in my experience (which is substantial), 5 days/yr to start. Not that you would necessarily take them, but 3 days is really, really stingy. And, is there concretely more growth potential with this company? Or is it some vague, "yes, there may be advancement later on..." If you like your current job well enough to put up with it a while longer, you may want to keep looking around a bit....Unless you can negotiate this job' s salary upward a bit more, it wouldn' t seem to me to be worth switching. But, understand, my perspective is based on a priority of better work/life balance, and money/advancement is secondary. So you' re getting a biased opinion here! I think you have to speak with the person you' ve had the most contact with and ask for clarification on the prospect of working weekends and mandatory overtime - keep in mind that the person who told you that was in another division doing, I presume, another job. Just be honest and say you' ve heard that the overtime commitment might be more significant that you had the impression it would be - and see what sort of response you get. | |
|
Career Tips
|