Me: mid-20s, married/kids, graduating in May - two offers, not sure which one to pick.

Facts about the companies:
- both will require relocation (I'm not going to say where, although it's easy enough to figure out)
- both offer the same salary, but there's variation in benefits
- both are in urban areas with standard/cost of living respectably similar to Raleigh
- both companies are large, multi-national firms with over 50 years in business
- A is public, B is private

Personal Factors:
- Not having to transfer means not having to uproot the kids, which I personally feel is important. Some people feel otherwise, and I respect that, so please respect me and understand that locational stability for my kids is important. For me moving is VERY stressful, and me being tense is going to stress out everyone near me - something I'd rather avoid.
- Being near family is also important as my kids have some cousins their age that I'd like them to know rather than be strangers, and we have various family members who are in failing health.

Company A:
- kick-ass health benefits and retirement
- company-subsidized (though not "free") daycare on-site
- significant potential for advancement WITHOUT having to transfer
- significant potential for my husband to advance with his company in the same area, also WITHOUT having to transfer
- laid-back atmosphere (people don't panic when shit hits the fan)
- business-casual, emphasis on the casual
- no history of layoffs
- potential for semi-flexible hours and working remotely (as in local to the site)
- over a day's travel to/from any family, and that assumes we fly
- not likely to be doing much if any hiring after then next 5 years, but potentially I could relocate, although the closest site to family is still 2 hours and offers zero opportunity for my husband

Company B:
- decent benefits, but no real retirement to speak of except profit sharing
...... which I can't touch until I leave the company, and even then only if I have 7 years in
...... est. 8% of salary/year, but NOT guaranteed, so it could be zero. It could also be more.
- no childcare assistance
- moderate potential for me to advance without transferring
- little potential for my spouse to advance without transferring
- high-stress atmosphere
- business formal (I'll have to buy LOTS more suits)
- less than 20 minutes from about 70% of my family, within 2 hours of the rest
- in-office, 8-6, not negotiable
- minimal chance of transferring

Basically ... A is far away from family, which distresses me since my parents are both in failing health. Work will be flexible enough to offer me time with husband and kids, but I know me, I'll worry about Mom and Dad. B is very close to family, which is important since I want to be able to visit regularly (my parents especially) and be here if something were to happen, but with the high-stress environment I'm afraid I'll burn out.

So

Which one would you pick?

4/2/2007 8:36:26 PM

Option C: Keep Looking.

4/2/2007 8:43:57 PM

yikes, that's a tough one. i'd probably go with A

[Edited on April 2, 2007 at 8:44 PM. Reason : or C]

4/2/2007 8:44:28 PM

A

no question.

4/2/2007 8:51:52 PM

I'd probably have to go with A.

4/2/2007 8:57:13 PM

Don't underestimate the value of friends and family. My fiance and I moved 5 hours away from everyone we knew and its a really short stressful weekend trip to go home to visit. We both have great jobs, but aren't really happy because we moved to an area where it is difficult to meet people because there aren't many young people and the ones that are here grew up here. There is a lot more to it than what the job can offer you. I absolutely love my job and opportunities for advancement, but somewhat regret not having taken a job in Raleigh even though we didn't want to live in Raleigh, we would have been happier only being 2 hours from everyone. My vote is for company B or keep looking.

4/2/2007 9:20:31 PM

That is a tough one. I would say A but I wouldn't be able to do that myself. I love being just close enough to my parents and family to visit but far enough away to not see them everyday. I would prolly have to pick B but keep looking for something better. Job A sounds awesome though. I wish I could find a job that would offer my daycare assistance on-site...that would make me much more willing and able to go back to work.

4/2/2007 10:19:25 PM

A

no question.

4/2/2007 10:28:17 PM

If you are worried about your parents health, like its sounds you are, you definetly have to take B, at least for now.

You can always keep looking for another local job, which may have better benifets, while working at B.

Would you regret missing a promotion in an area you don't like? or missing out on the last years of your parents time here?

[Edited on April 2, 2007 at 10:32 PM. Reason : ]

4/2/2007 10:30:30 PM

Is it necessary that you and your husband work at the same company? Kinda confused on that.

And I personally say be a bit more flexible with the moving situation. Pick option A and continue looking for option C. When option C presents itself, take a month (or more) off during the summer so the move can go relatively stress-free.

If you can go with A for a short period of time, you should be able to move with little uprooting. If kids are between ages 0-3, they'll make new friends in 2nd-5th grade. If between 3-8, middle school is a transition anyways, and wouldn't be a bad time to move. If 8+ (possible, but not likely), something more to think about.

4/2/2007 10:31:59 PM

I'm a family guy, I'd take B and here's why.

-You're kids need time to spend with your parents. You can always move back but it may be too late then.
-You and your husband both have jobs so they benefits aren't a huge deciding factor
-Chances are you will leave this company B within 3-7 years for much more money at another company.

I'd choose the better location.

4/2/2007 10:34:00 PM

Quote :

"Is it necessary that you and your husband work at the same company"

We don't/wouldn't be - in fact we're kind-of avoiding that It just happens that this job is near a major nerve center for his company and there's a concentration of jobs.


The fact that twolfpack3 and cornbread just made me cry a little tells me I should probably go with B ... everyone who has said it here or elsewhere is right - with us both working, benefits aren't really a "need" although retirement would be nice, and maybe it won't be as tough as I think it will be. *sniffle*

4/2/2007 10:39:33 PM

i didn't read everything you posted, but there's a reason you listed one as A and the other as B

4/2/2007 10:50:59 PM

based on ^^...choose B

a job is a job. as long as you can support your family with your combined income, take the one that will make you the happiest when you get off of work. work is work no matter how great of a company it is. if you get off from a great company every single day and feel miserable for not being near your family, it won't be worth it.

you have to set your priorities. if you're hitting your financial objectives, and your family is more important to you than your career, i think you have to take B. i'm very close to my family and none of them are ill and i don't have kids, but that would further support being close to home. i could be making $20,000 more in houston, which would support my travel back home when needed, but i wouldn't be as happy. you're 25 years old and you have plenty of time to further your career. if there is an option that has the potential of you beating yourself up for taking it, it isn't an option.

there are doubts and uncertainties with any decision, but family is family. 5 years from now it may be much easier to take a great job and be further away because you may feel more comfortable with it, but i think the regret of leaving your family (factoring in children) is greater than the regret of having a better job for a short amount of time.

4/2/2007 11:33:59 PM

^
The only reason I'm against B (myself) is the 8-6 inflexibility with the stress. Been there, done that, and had a 24x7 phone attached to me after hours at one point. Some people may not mind, but to me, that entire combination disturbed my family life more than anything else. And I saw how it affected other people as well. Great if you have the energy to do so, but good luck keeping it up over the long run. "Sorry honey, I couldn't make your soccer game / school play / whatever because I was working" only works so many times.

A: Pro is the flexibility with the job and ability to work at home, Con is having to move again most likely.
B: Pro is having a house in the area you want to be in and not having to move, Con is the stress.
Either choice works if you know its going to be short-term until you find option C. It's what is more important to you in the short-term.

4/3/2007 5:16:02 AM

the key element is the failing health parents. while you'd normally be a fool to pass up (what seems like) a great opportunity just to be close to family, you dont want to regret missing see your parents more often once they are gone.

i have a great relationship with my family, but your job is your life for a good majority of the year. you need to be as happy with it as possible and have opportunity for advancement/retirement.

[Edited on April 3, 2007 at 8:54 AM. Reason : .]

4/3/2007 8:53:00 AM

I took a "choice A" in my own life & moved 5 hours away from Raleigh, and 8 hours away from all of my family.

9 months later, here I am back in Raleigh and LOVING it. Sure, it costs more to live here and I lost money on the move, but what's life if you're not where you want to be?

Still, I'd only take "B" if you have no shot at any other job. Some people don't mind moving far, far away -- I'm not one of them.

4/3/2007 10:39:58 AM

i'd probably go with A since you are still young - i think that you shouldn't move after the kids are in middle school though and earlier if possible

4/3/2007 11:04:52 AM

i agree, but probably only because i moved so much when younger. i think moving allows kids to develop some skills that help them adapt to situations later in life (such as moving themselves, going to college smoothly, etc).

i moved between 1st/2nd, and twice while in 5th. so im with omar on this one. moving during middle and, and moreso, highschool can be a bit much.

4/3/2007 11:11:19 AM

i moved inbetween 2nd/3rd and inbetween 10th/11th - that definitely has an effect on my response

4/3/2007 11:38:30 AM

i'm confused - is option A in India? over a day's travel must be international...but if your parents really need you, is the stuffy company B going to be as flexible as company a? while you may be thinking of geographic location, the time you have with family is more of a function of the company you work for, not where you're working. for example, i spent 2 1/2 years about 4 hours driving from my parents and saw them at christmas, a couple of thanksgivings, and one or two more times outside of that...now i'm a 2 hour flight/9 hour drive and have seen them as much in the past 9 months as i would in 2 years at my old location

4/3/2007 11:38:52 AM

^ Please take into account your massive pay increase w/ the distance factor -- unless I'm badly mistaken, they happened about the same time?

4/3/2007 4:28:08 PM

Yeah, both interviews and both call-backs were about the same timing.

"A" is about 9hrs driving from my family. By "day" I mean 8+ hours one-way, which ends up being closer to 14+ once you spend 2 (or more) hours getting self and kids out the door plus any prior packing, hauling this crap either onto a plane or into a car, rest stops if driving, etc ... it boils down to a pretty miserable day and by the time we'd arrive we'd be ready for bed.

It wouldn't be such an issue if it weren't for kids - traveling with them simply sucks. I commuted from Wilmington, DE, twice a month for weekends while I was doing my internship - it wasn't a big deal because I was traveling alone.

"B" and flexibility don't seem to be compatible. :/ I could be reading them wrong, I guess. During the week I'd still be able to visit local family in the evenings assuming I have any energy left. More distant family would be weekend trips. I'm used to driving 2 or 3 weekends a month 3.5-4.5 one-way hours to visit family, so getting off work at 6 and being on the road at 8 Friday night is not a problem. In fact, it's a lot more welcome than what we do now - my husband gets off work at 1am (so technically Saturday) and we drive. I'm used to visiting once a month or more - which would not be possible with company "A" since most of my weekend would be absorbed in travel.

4/3/2007 6:11:46 PM

also dont want to be 60 and have little to no retirement. I am pretty much set to retire at 60 based on what I have invested to date(of course, if i take it out, that would change) The next 10-15 years will determine when and if you can ever retire. 60 is my goal(has been since college). My fin advisor says I should have no problem.

4/7/2007 3:28:23 PM

A

4/7/2007 4:50:29 PM

A...as in dat 190% alcohol drank

4/7/2007 4:57:06 PM

Well, for your family in failing health - it could be two years or it could be ten - and I'd take the job at Company A, because "potential for advancement" means a lot. So does the daycare, esp. if the kids have a day off that you don't. Your kids are very young, too, so the "kickass health" plan will be a huge asset

The stressful job / inflexible schedule combo at Company B could cause your work performance to suffer, and that'll screw you in the long run. It's awful tough to put in your time somewhere you feel there's no upward mobility or opportunity.

4/7/2007 5:25:41 PM

5 years down the rd, when you are still going nowhere fast, you will think of what could of been.......

4/7/2007 6:11:30 PM

u also need to think far far in the future, grandkids....dont you want to retire and just be a grandparents, if you take the shitty job you will have to work until you die.....because you will have no retirement.....lots of ways to think about it.

it sucks the parents are in bad health, but you really should be looking 10+ years down the road.....

[Edited on April 7, 2007 at 7:33 PM. Reason : w]

4/7/2007 7:32:01 PM

this is too important a decision to be left up to TWW



go with your instinct. go with your gut


it's rarely ever wrong. i dont know how many times I (and others) have said, "I knew I should have done _____. I should have listened to my instinct"






[Edited on April 8, 2007 at 6:41 AM. Reason : ]

4/8/2007 6:35:25 AM

I procrastinated long enough that C came to fruition I've got a full relo package, above avg starting salary, 3 weeks vacation, and though it's not the most flexible schedule at least it's not ridiculously strict. YAY Now someone buy my house plz

4/16/2007 7:05:46 PM

I win

4/16/2007 7:09:21 PM

congrats!

4/16/2007 8:16:05 PM

option F

[Edited on April 16, 2007 at 8:25 PM. Reason : as in fail. as you did. to pick the proper choice.]

4/16/2007 8:25:00 PM

lolz

4/17/2007 8:45:29 AM