A job that pays more money or a job that has excellent benefits? (401k, average)

[Svatos]

Of course, this is all relative to your situation, but...

Would you prefer a job that pays relatively low in your field ($30k-$40k range), but has excellent benefits:

*401k matched up to 5%
*3 weeks PTO
*telecommuting priveleges
*>= $2k annual bonus
*subs. group health insurance
*annual Christmas party and a ($0 to $400) gift
*business travel a few times per year; fully reimbursed
*partial education reimbursement
*laid back atmosphere; little oversight

or would you prefer a job that pays more ($50k-$70k range) and has average benefits:

*401k; no matching
*3 weeks PTO
*subs. group health insurance
*partial education reimbursement

[andreaspercheron]

It depends on your living situation. If you have just yourself to worry about and financially you're doing okay, then I'd go for less pay and better benefits. Here is why. The more you make, the more taxes are being taken anyway. Having been in a position where my benefits sucked and something unexpected happened, I was screwed. I ended up paying so much more money out of pocket towards medical costs that it would have been better if I had been taxed less and had better benefits.

Then I lost that job (due to economy, a lay off) and took a much lower paying job but benefits were free and good ones. Here again, I had an accident that costed me a trip to the doctor and xrays and I was thankful for not paying anything out of pocket and benefits covering me.

ON the other hand, if you're married and have kids, you will need the extra pay and perhaps the spouse might have better insurance, if so go on her plan and let her cover those expenses while your larger check feeds and houses the family...

I've been in both situations.. When I took a much lower paying job, my actual paychecks were about the same as the higher paying with greater taxes being taken out.. it's really screwed up. My b/f has a very high paying job and is taxed to death... his taxes are almost triple what mine are.

[Charles]

Originally Posted by Svatos

Of course, this is all relative to your situation, but...

Would you prefer a job that pays relatively low in your field ($30k-$40k range), but has excellent benefits:

*401k matched up to 5%
*3 weeks PTO
*telecommuting priveleges
*>= $2k annual bonus
*subs. group health insurance
*annual Christmas party and a ($0 to $400) gift
*business travel a few times per year; fully reimbursed
*partial education reimbursement
*laid back atmosphere; little oversight

or would you prefer a job that pays more ($50k-$70k range) and has average benefits:

*401k; no matching
*3 weeks PTO
*subs. group health insurance
*partial education reimbursement

This is a slam dunk. Take the $50K-$70K job.
The 401(k) matching is $1500-$2000 - big deal.
Your next job will ask you how much you made on your last (this) job. That plays a big part on your next offer.
Assuming you average a 3% raise for the rest of your life you will make $1.8M (that's M as in million) more over 40 years, comparing a $35K job to a $60K job.

[dnvrsoul]

I agree with Charles-who cares if a company doesn't match on a 401K-I would take more $$ since this is going to assist you in:
Getting more $ on your next offer
paying for the higher costs of: gas, groceries, living expenses
Plus you can't tell Visa: Hey I can't pay the bill but I have excellent benefits
No offense but your "average benefits" are above average in this economy

[Mystique13]

Money, money money. Benefits don't pay the rent or put food on the table.

[Rhenzanite]

I have to choose jobs based on benefits...I absolutely have to have affordable insurance because of a chronic genetic disorder I have.

If I have bad or 'mediocre' insurance, I'd end up spending all my money on health related stuff anyway, so the higher pay wouldn't really matter as much. At least with a moderately well paying job I'd have the security of having insurance. I had a job for a while that paid in the 50k range, but had HORRIBLE medical insurance and I ended up paying 10k+ towards gigantic copays, mileage to see doctors, time taken off of work to argue with the insurance company to get at least a little bit covered etc.

It's no contest which one I'd pick.

[manderly6]

So the difference between the two are:

401k matched up to 5%

This equals $2,000 max

telecommuting priveleges

Not worth anything IMHO

>= $2k annual bonus

Worth $2,000

annual Christmas party and a ($0 to $400) gift

Worthless

business travel a few times per year; fully reimbursed

Worthless

laid back atmosphere; little oversight

A notch above worthless


So in total the benefits give me about $4,000 a year in value vs. $20K - $30K in inreased salary. Even if some of those other things were worth something to you (say $5,000 each) that would still not equal the increased salary.

[1200RT]

#1 sounds nice, but i would take #2. With the increase in pay, i would handle the rest on my own. Telecommuting and christmas party? Nah.

[OHGreat]

you can always buy better benefits with all that extra cash.

[Svatos]

I once had a manager tell me that we don't offer great pay, but we try to attract people with the other things we offer (the benefits). It took everything I had to prevent myself from laughing.