Would You Apply?

Xstatic3333

I was recently emailed a job posting by a colleague who works for a state agency.  She is the person who will be either the direct supervisor or a close senior coworker of whoever gets this position, so I was flattered she thought of me.  It's worth consideration, but there are many pros and cons.  I was hoping you guys could give me your unbiased opinion; my brain is really crowded by "life" stuff right now and I'm having a hard time being objective.

Pay: The starting rate is about 2.5% higher than my current salary; it's possible that after union dues come out, I'd barely notice a difference.  I'd be in a union, however, with scheduled step raises.  At my current position, since I had a large raise last year, I'm unlikely to get another one unless my boss retires someday and I'm offered her position.  I'll probably just be getting small COLs until then.  State job would have benefits, including access to a deferred comp plan.  I currently only have a Roth IRA for retirement (though we put extra in H's deferred comp to compensate).

Work: It is an environmental science position that I'm pretty well qualified for and interested in.  It would mean leaving behind the outreach and education components of my current job, which I do truly enjoy, but also picking up types of work I also enjoy that I'm not doing right now.  As a state job, however, I'm also expecting a fair amount of paperwork and frustrating bureaucracy.

Security: The traditional wisdom is that state jobs are pretty secure.  Our state's economy is pretty bad, however.  I feel like funding for my current position is quite secure right now, but it is officially "soft money" and a new presidential administration, especially if it's Trump, could really have a negative impact on our funding sources.  I have some control over my own destiny with the ability to apply for grants and develop new programs.

Flexibility: Here's one of the most major issues.  In my current position, all time is flex time.  If I want to take my dog to the vet, schedule a contractor, etc.  I can work from home or make up hours on the weekend and nobody needs to give approval as long as the work gets done.  A state job means zero flexibility of that sort, but an easier time leaving work at work at the end of the day.

The elephant in the room: We're headed into month 5 of TTC, and I don't especially want to put it on hold (though of course I'll be a big girl if I need to).  My current job is not subject to FMLA, but our board has adopted a policy that protects my position for 12 weeks.  At the state, if I got pregnant before FMLA kicked in I'd probably be looking at only 6 weeks of leave and a loss of seniority within the union system, if not outright dismissal.  The supervisor is a reasonable person, but they have to follow certain policies and there's not much wiggle room.  It's hard to remove TTC from my considerations, especially since I know that flexibility would be SO nice with a baby.  I could probably even do a 4-day work week, which could save on childcare and sanity.  Not an option at the state.  

I know the conventional response would be "just apply," but given the climate of my field in my state, there is a 0% chance that my current employer won't find out I applied, so I want to weight this very carefully.  They've invested a lot in me and are about to invest a lot more by sending me to my training in Nebraska.  I'm leaning towards not applying, but I know I tend to be lazy about job switches so outside opinions would be VERY appreciated!  I probably won't check this again until this afternoon after work, given the subject matter, but thanks in advance for any advice.

hoffse

I think TTC is a pretty strong consideration here, but so is the deferred compensation plan.  I assume by DFP you mean you would have a pension?  If so, I think it's worth asking your friend to give you the scoop on that in terms of vesting schedule, % pay, etc.  You could probably get the info before having to go through the application process.  It might have a longer vesting schedule or a smaller percent of final pay than interests you, but if it happens to be a really good benefit you should have that info before making your decision.

FWIW my parents were both state employees in GA for their whole careers.  They always saved diligently in 403(b)s, IRAs, etc., but at this point, their vested pensions significantly exceed their spending.  Between the pension and state-sponsored health insurance, it has set them up remarkably well.  Actually, H and I pay about 4x for health insurance as 20-somethings in the private sector than my parents pay as 60-somethings through the state.  At this point they don't need any of the money in their other accounts to live a more lavish lifestyle in retirement than they are used to, and that provides significant flexibility for them as they age.

So if nothing else, I would find out about that deferred comp. plan before making a decision.  I would also ask about health insurance, unless your current insurance options are very good for family plans.  I do think the TTC issue is a compelling one, and I would not be inclined to wait either unless the perks of the new job are pretty significant.  The thing is, they really might be significant from what you are describing.

julieanne912

I think it's worth applying for, and see where it goes from there.  I also agree that you need to find out more about the deferred compensation and what the other perks are with the state job.  Switching jobs for a 2.5% increase in pay, especially if it's going to be eaten up by union dues, isn't really worth it, but if the other perks have a good financial value for you, then it might be worth it.

That being said, I think flexibility is huge.  I used to have tons of flexibility with my previous job... work from home if I felt like it, take off in the middle of the day to run errands, etc.  I also worked a lot of "after hours" and weekends though.  I'm now in a "clock in clock out" type of job and it can be a bit frustrating, and we don't even have kids yet.  

vlagrl35

I personally like flexibility and with only 6 weeks of maternity that is not nearly enough time IMO especially if you have a c section.  You most likely would still be recovering from the surgery. Maternity leave is really exhausting and you need the time to recoup and bond with baby.  You are also really sleep deprived during that time.  I would stay where your at.

als1982

I would also stay. I think the benefit of flex time and working from home is HUGE. Also, I wouldn't want the uncertainty with TTC and the issues that come with a possible maternity leave.

Xstatic3333

hoffse said:

I think TTC is a pretty strong consideration here, but so is the deferred compensation plan.  I assume by DFP you mean you would have a pension?  If so, I think it's worth asking your friend to give you the scoop on that in terms of vesting schedule, % pay, etc.  You could probably get the info before having to go through the application process.  It might have a longer vesting schedule or a smaller percent of final pay than interests you, but if it happens to be a really good benefit you should have that info before making your decision.

FWIW my parents were both state employees in GA for their whole careers.  They always saved diligently in 403(b)s, IRAs, etc., but at this point, their vested pensions significantly exceed their spending.  Between the pension and state-sponsored health insurance, it has set them up remarkably well.  Actually, H and I pay about 4x for health insurance as 20-somethings in the private sector than my parents pay as 60-somethings through the state.  At this point they don't need any of the money in their other accounts to live a more lavish lifestyle in retirement than they are used to, and that provides significant flexibility for them as they age.

So if nothing else, I would find out about that deferred comp. plan before making a decision.  I would also ask about health insurance, unless your current insurance options are very good for family plans.  I do think the TTC issue is a compelling one, and I would not be inclined to wait either unless the perks of the new job are pretty significant.  The thing is, they really might be significant from what you are describing.

I actually don't think, as a new employee starting out, I would be in any sort of pension system.  Our state pension system is one of those failed ones, and it was famously dismantled by our current governor a few years ago.  There's no quicker way to sour moods than mentioning her name in a room of state employees!  I'm pretty sure that what they offer now is a 457 plan that I could chose to put money in and invest.  457s are pretty cool plans-my H has one-but it wouldn't offer the kinds of benefits that your parents enjoyed.  We may, however, get that on H's side.  H works in MA, a state that has a much more secure pension system.  He'll be fully vested after 20 years, and partially after 10.  He already has three in and is really flourishing at his job, so he may just make it.  If not, we'll get the money out but it will have lost value to inflation, which is why he puts a lot in his 457 too.

I may very well have been misusing the phrase deferred compensation plan.  I thought that was what 457s were, and I've heard other state employees say things like "Thanks to Gina I'm just stuck with my deferred comp plan," but I don't truly feel like I understand the meaning of the term.

For health insurance, we actually have a really good family plan situation from H's job already.  We're already paying at the family rate, so we could go full-Duggar and the cost would never increase.  It's possible that my state could offer a similar plan, but given their relative economic strengths I doubt it.

Anyway, thanks to you all for your thoughts.  I continue to lean "no" but will try to get some more information about the retirement plan first.  I can't ask my contact at the potential job-I know she was especially hurt by the pension situation so it's a very touchy subject for her-but have other friends I could ask.  

AprilZ81

It would take more than a 2.5% raise (even taking the union dues out of the equation) to make me leave a job that I liked that had flex time and the ability to work from home when needed.

Unless you are unhappy in your current position or you are given an amazing retirement plan I would stay where you are.  When you add in the lack of maternity leave if you should deliver a baby before your one year mark at the new job and I would be really hesitant.

Is your current job secure?  Are you happy (or at least content)?

MommyLiberty5013

I was going to give a vote for "apply" until I read about your childcare and TTC considerations. Then, immediately my vote turned to "don't apply."

That flex schedule and possible 4 day work week will be HUGE childcare savings and more importantly, time as a family being able to be spent.

You're going to have a lot more scheduling constraints with kids - doctors and such, but also wanting to participate in things like "Mommy and Me Day" at their pre-school, or whatever it is.

For me, I would see this as a debate between an actual monetary paycheck (and all the benefits too) versus a paycheck of the heart. There will always be money and job growth potential, but there won't always be more time with your kids and family.

I have never, ever heard of a parent who chose more time at home regretting it. But, I have heard many people say they wished they had more time at home and with family, but instead opted to or were forced to have to work more.

Xstatic3333

@AprilZ81 I am happy at my job.  I don't know if it's my dream job; there are certainly days I come home pretty grumpy.  Small nonprofit work can be very, very stressful when there is simply not enough hours in the week to do the work that needs to be done.  However, I have a great boss and coworkers, I'm doing work consistent with my values, and I feel valued and supported by my board.  You really can't ask for more than that.  Pay-wise, the ceiling would be much higher with the state job, but you're right, the raise would be negligible.

@MommyLiberty5013 thanks for your thoughts as well.  You did sum it up very well and it's helpful to hear your perspective as a mom.  I'm trying not to live like I'm pregnant until I am, but since we want to do everything we can to have kids one way or another thinking longer term is warranted here.

smerka

Another thing to consider is one of you will become the default parent - the one that gets the call when your future kid gets sick, etc. Having that kind of flexibility as a parent is priceless, not to mention all of the Doctor appointments you will have when pregnant. Unless the retirement is a full on pension, I wouldn't even apply. You should be able to find the info on the retirement plan on the Internet because it is public info.

hoffse

@Xstatic, you aren't misusing the term - I just missed the part in your original post about not having an employer-run retirement account, so that's why my brain jumped to pensions.  There are many kinds of deferred comp. plans, and 457's and pensions both fall in that category.

I think that if pensions are off the table and your health insurance is good, I would stay with the job that has more flexibility.  

401(k)s, 457's, etc. are great for tax-advantaged retirement planning, but if you have the self control and diligence to save on your own, you can always use regular investment accounts that you mentally earmark for retirement and just plan to pay capital gains on the back end.  Actually, if your H stays long enough for his pension to at least partially vest, this plan might end up working in your favor.  

My dad's single biggest financial regret was socking a ton of money away in a regular 403(b), instead of using outside investment accounts.  FYI, a 403(b) is basically like a 401(k) or 457 but for public school employees.  He got a deduction on the front end of course, but you still pay taxes at ordinary rates on the back end (on the original contribution and the gain), and at a certain age you are REQUIRED to start making withdrawals from that account, whether you need that money or not.  Obviously regular investment accounts have none of those rules.  

With the money from their pensions, my parents don't need any of the money in their 403(b)s, but they will be forced to take that money out and pay taxes on it anyway if they live long enough.  My dad hasn't quite reached that age yet, but he's close.  He gets seriously annoyed every time he thinks about it, lol.

The tax aspects of those accounts can be good if you leverage them (and guess) correctly with respect to your marginal tax rate over time, but I really think the best thing about them is the diligence of forced saving once you enroll.  A lot of people just don't have the perseverance to save any other way. Also, the employer matches are obviously a perk if that's something the plan has, but that varies.  But all of this is to say that these accounts are not the only way to save for retirement, and they may not even be the BEST way, depending on your specific circumstances. 

Sorry that got long - just wanted to explain myself.  I think I would take the flexibility and job security, given your immediate plans.  I would never suggest putting retirement plans on the back burner, but in your circumstance I think it's worth getting a little creative with your options to keep your current job.

Xstatic3333

Thanks to you all for your thoughts.  You confirmed the way I was leaning anyway, which is great.  I had a really good couple of days for the education portion of my job this week, and realized I really don't want to leave that behind.  I'm on the board for my environmental education professional organization and making great connections there, so as hard as it is I think I've positioned myself to make a reasonable living in that field.  If, hopefully, we have a child within the next year or so, it will be much easier for me to maintain my career trajectory in my current position while also having a more relaxed schedule for my hypothetical child's early years.  

You bring up some interesting points, @hoffse.  If H stays with the state, and I save for retirement using exclusively my Roth and regular investment accounts, we should have a good mix of options to draw from come retirement time.  I kind of think of my silly little Acorns account as a retirement account, although I'm not yet using taxable accounts of any other kind.  It already has $400 in it though, which is pretty cool.  I'm glad H is contributing to his 457 in addition to the pension just in case the MA system is every dismantled.  They made some changes before things got really bad, extending the vesting schedule from 10 to 20 years, which hopefully will save the whole system, but with what happened in RI I just can't trust it.  His job automatically increases his contribution $50/year/paycheck, which is a nice hedge against accidental lifestyle inflation.

short+sassy

Normally I'd lean toward the government job, but you make a good point that those just aren't necessarily the job security and spectacular benefits that they used to be.

Comparing your pros and cons, it seems like you are better off where you currently are.

This is a bit of personal opinion, but I always weigh in heavily for jobs that have more schedule flexibility.