Low pay with low responsibilities versus high pay with high responsibilities? (employees, jobs)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First of all, please understand that I do not regard either choice as good or bad. Entirely up to individual preference, me thinks.
In my profession, there are generally 2 paths to take:
(1) Easy work and extremely laid back. You are required to write may be 1 report every 2 weeks. Most of the time, you can do whatever you want and create your own assignments. Pay is $50k/year. Absolutely no opportunity for advancement. Very low to zero stress. Also very low level of responsibility.
(2) Not-so easy work. You have to be on your toes and work smart. Aside from being in charge of an entire work crew, you are required to write a report every single day. Upper management constantly encourages you to get more certifications and advance further. Heck, they even offer to pay for you to go back to school to get more education. Plenty of opportunities to move up. Pay is $95k-100k/year. Plenty of wiggle room. Plenty of stress. Also plenty of responsibilities.
Hour many hours is job 2 requiring? I mean if you need time to go back to school, why not use that time to work if you are at job 1? Much less if job 2 works more than standard 40.
I took 1.5, and pay is between as well. Happy medium of pay and personal time/duties
Job 1, on 50k a year where I live would be racking in the bucks. Personally, I will take lower pay for working reduced hours. Life is too short to spend more than 40 hours a week in some cubicle.
Not sure what having to write a report daily vs every couple of weeks has to do with anything. That's all of 10 minutes. Perhaps the key question has been assumed by the other posters, but is not obvious from the OP, what is the difference in hours worked? By the definition given in example 1 pretty much any other job will be stressful.
So, from the information give, I'd pick job 2. Responsibility doesn't hurt, chance for more education, and opportunity to springboard to a different job. Frankly from what you described in job 1, I'd be more stressed because if the job is that trivial, I'd be worried about when it would be cut/outsourced.
Having more free time can allow for a better quality of life, more energy, better mood and mind set. You can use the extra time for the better, or waste it away surfing the internet. Either way, it beats working
My apologies for having left out the most obvious part LOL.
Job 1 is the standard 40 hours/week. May be once in a blue moon you are required to stay a couple extra hours.
Job 2 is the standard 40 hours/week during planning and design phases (December - March). The rest of the year during mobilization and construction phases, it is normal to work between 45-55 hours/week. Sometimes, more.
When I was working job 1, I'd spend half my day surfing the net and socializing with other people. That was fun while it lasted, but I used it as a stepping stone to get to job 2. I know people that are perfectly happy with job 1, and I'm happy for them. Job 2 is not for everyone, and the stress level is definitely up there.
I know one guy that took job 2 from job 1 and after just 3 months of working he couldn't handle it and went back to job 1.
Personally, I don't find job 2 that stressful, but that's what people in my industry think in general.
Througout my teens, twenties and early thirties I always took job 1. I Loved being home by 5:30 and having time to relax. At work I spent many an hour bored and aimlessly surfing the net.
Now in my mid thirties I regret all of the easy choices. I can't afford to buy a home, my savings have been depleted and my career hasn't progressed for 6-7 years and my last couple pf jobs were actually a step back in pay. If I had decided to take my career more seriously I would have surpassed many of ny peers and would be doing much better.
But that's me. There are others who lack the ambition to go beyond the path of least resistance. They will drift until they wake up one day depeessed and miserable because they spent their life taking the easy path instead of building something of value and having an aim in their professional life.
The way I grew up I was taught to hate work. I was told working is a necessary evil and the less you do it the better off you are as long as you get paid. But the thing is people are built to work. We can put in more than 40 hours and many do it routinely. Its nice to have more time to spend with family but that same family will fight with you and cause you stress and unhappiness when you can't pay your bills, go on a nice vacation or afford to fix up your home or move out of a bad neighborhood. Work is good. It gives pur lives meaning and something to...well work towards. Lol
Its up to you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
