Help - Former USAID contractor -- zero interviews in a year

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I say this with respect because I know there’s a lot of affected people here (in addition to the OP), but could someone please explain how/why the people at this org were paid so much before when it seems like their actual skills just didn’t warrant that high level of pay? Is this typical in government orgs? I knew government positions paid a lot more than I originally expected, but I was told that they need to pay those salaries (in addition to the security that has historically also come with government positions) in order to staff the positions.

+1

Also hear a lot about how a high salary is needed because folks could leave for the private sector for an even higher salary.

Also easier to fly under the radar at government jobs. Can also be the case in the private sector but seemed to be more endemic in gov.

My husband was out of work for a year. He was an exec at a company that paid him some large amount of money and then was hired at another company that pays him an even larger salary.

Would you conclude in his year of unemployment that the entire executive suites of F500 companies are overpaid simply because he couldn’t find a new job? (BTW, they are grossly overpaid in my opinion. Senior Feds who manage similar portfolios are absolutely as good or better).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has your husband asked any of his peers to review his resume and cover letter and provide candid feedback? When one of my former colleagues was struggling to land interviews, I asked if I could help by reviewing their resume. Long story short: I edited it (dramatically) and they quickly landed a few interviews. Start there.

Is your husband doing anything to bring in cash? Door Dash/Instacart/Uber? Any cash is better than nothing.

I heard Gov. Moore say MD started a fast-track teacher certification program for former feds, etc. Good benefits, steady paycheck, plus the flexibility for a side hustle (tutoring, college application support, etc.).

If he managed grants and can handle budgets and basic accounting, perhaps lean into that?

Is he handy? Could you invest in real estate, flip a house, or become landlords?

This is terrible advice. Teaching is not nearly as flexible as DCUM thinks and it's really hard work. There's not much time or energy for a side hustle, especially for a career changer in the first few years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I say this with respect because I know there’s a lot of affected people here (in addition to the OP), but could someone please explain how/why the people at this org were paid so much before when it seems like their actual skills just didn’t warrant that high level of pay? Is this typical in government orgs? I knew government positions paid a lot more than I originally expected, but I was told that they need to pay those salaries (in addition to the security that has historically also come with government positions) in order to staff the positions.

+1

Also hear a lot about how a high salary is needed because folks could leave for the private sector for an even higher salary.

Also easier to fly under the radar at government jobs. Can also be the case in the private sector but seemed to be more endemic in gov.

Wasn't the OP's DH a contractor, not a fed? That's private sector and he probably had a higher salary than the fed equivalent. As a fed who works with contracting budgets, I'm getting pretty irritated with the "overpaid fed" line that is constantly repeated in this thread.

Or do only defense and tech contractors count as private sector, not "helping" functions? We sure pay some of those companies a LOT of taxpayer dollars. And I suspect the market for bombers and military equipment would also take a big hit if the government decided that wasn't a priority anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I say this with respect because I know there’s a lot of affected people here (in addition to the OP), but could someone please explain how/why the people at this org were paid so much before when it seems like their actual skills just didn’t warrant that high level of pay? Is this typical in government orgs? I knew government positions paid a lot more than I originally expected, but I was told that they need to pay those salaries (in addition to the security that has historically also come with government positions) in order to staff the positions.

This is because the whole industry was dependent on federal funding, so the floor dropped out, and all experts were suddenly redundant. However I think it’s very questionable to have been using taxpayer dollars to essentially create an industry that has no transferable value. It is tough to set appropriate compensation in the non-profit world as there is no ‘buyer’ to set prices. Practically and ethically, billionaires, like the gates foundation or true missionaries should be footing that bill instead of taxpayers.

You could say the same thing about the defense industry. And that's much bigger and employs far more people.

Well nobody has been saying what these nebulous skills are. Is it just grant writing? Making policy? Writing white papers? Won't somebody please be brave and say what people did? I'm sure some of it is transferable.

As for the denfense industry, I have only a good sense for IT and the different systems and needs are vast. But perhaps contracts management and procurement would be a highlighted feature in this industry? It seems that nobody in government is very good at it. If they are then their hands are tied with ridiculous regulations on how to choose and oversee contractors since it seems that there's no spending limit and no rules these days.

I am sure OP's DH has some good transferable skills and has thought about them if he's trying to get into other industries. It would be really, painfully stupid not to. The hard part is that right now the job market is very tough and it's hard to get hired on transferable skills if the other applicants have direct experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I say this with respect because I know there’s a lot of affected people here (in addition to the OP), but could someone please explain how/why the people at this org were paid so much before when it seems like their actual skills just didn’t warrant that high level of pay? Is this typical in government orgs? I knew government positions paid a lot more than I originally expected, but I was told that they need to pay those salaries (in addition to the security that has historically also come with government positions) in order to staff the positions.

+1

Also hear a lot about how a high salary is needed because folks could leave for the private sector for an even higher salary.

Also easier to fly under the radar at government jobs. Can also be the case in the private sector but seemed to be more endemic in gov.

My husband was out of work for a year. He was an exec at a company that paid him some large amount of money and then was hired at another company that pays him an even larger salary.

Would you conclude in his year of unemployment that the entire executive suites of F500 companies are overpaid simply because he couldn’t find a new job? (BTW, they are grossly overpaid in my opinion. Senior Feds who manage similar portfolios are absolutely as good or better).

+1. The job market is terrible right now. Almost all of the jobs that have been added in the past year are in health care or hospitality. Meanwhile, the federal government has shed over 300,000 jobs and many of these people have overlapping skillsets while looking for relevant work in industries that are also cutting jobs instead of adding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One of the hard realities of managing large, multimillion dollar contracts in a do-gooder aid organization with limited accountability is that this is not an easily transferrable "skill".

I call b.s. Would you actually know? I worked in a small agency right off the Mall for 8 years and I've worked at an F500 corporation for 25+. Skills are absolutely comparable. My government co-workers could have fit right in at my company.

It's fashionably dehumanizing to mock government work and suggest that people are magically smarter and more productive when there's a P&L somewhere on the private sector side. That's offensive and naive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My only advice is to apply out of the area, maybe even out of the country (like those countries that your DH has experience with). For years, we've been telling coal miners in WV to move to where the jobs are. I think white collar workers in DC need to be willing to do the same.

FWIW, I despise Trump and fully support USAID. I actually thought about working for them decades ago. If/when USAID ever comes back, you could potentially move back.

It sucks, but I also had to move to where the jobs were. In my case, it was the best decision ever. My career really took off, and I made a ton more money.

NP. What field are you in and where did you move to

This was a long time ago (I'm talking 30years), and not in the government. But, the point remains, when you are out of a job, and clearly need a new one, and the area you live in doesn't have jobs that fit you, you need to move to an area that has some jobs that you may be a fit for. That could be in a different city (me since the state I lived in was huge), or a different state, or even a different country.

IMO, it sucks to start over, but doubly so in your 50s (I'm 55). But, if you don't have much tying you to this area, like HS kids whom a move would be difficult for, with the DH's background, I'd look into jobs in other countries since OP can work anywhere.

I guess I'm projecting because if I could get a job in Spain, for example, I'd move there in a heartbeat right now. But my kids are in college, so it would be easier for us.

I appreciate the empathy but moving jobs and locations when you are 25 and have say 3 years of full time work experience is very very different

It's so clueless as to be offensive

IMO, you people are the clueless ones. Why can't a 55 yr old move to where the job offer is? What did you tell the 50 yr old coal miners in WV who have been out of a job for a year? You probably told them to pivot or move to where the jobs are, right?

It's offensive for exFed white collared workers who had cushy jobs to think they shouldn't have to move but expect blue collared workers to do so for jobs.

FWIW, my parents were uneducated blue collared workers who immigrated to this country with 4 kids under 10, without knowing how to speak English. I think if you can speak English, are educated, you can absolutely move to a different state/city at the age of 55 for a job. You just don't want to.

People move for jobs all the time. Companies relocate; close. Why do exFeds think they are special and shouldn't be expected to do this?

I'm sorry, but you guys come across as entitled and helpless. Very unbecoming. And I feel awful for DOGE'd feds.

DP

ICYMI: it’s nearly impossible for a 55 year old to land a white collar job without certain expertise and/or connections.

Ageism is real.

I hear ya. I'm 55. But, this is then even more reason to look beyond where you live.

Pride goeth before a fall.

Is it better to ...
1. remain unemployed
2. work at costco for the health insurance
3. broaden your search to outside where you live to get a job more related to your field and get health insurance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm being negative about other posters ideas but I honestly don't have better ones for you.

I'm an employer. In the last 2 year every single position that I've interviewed people for has been filled by outstanding candidates that fit exactly what we want. So there is no question of compromise on someone's background.

He needs to be a perfect fit even at Costco. So that means he either needs to lie about his resume or will stay unemployed :/

This is one of the problems. For every job posting there are almost always a few people whose background is a perfect fit—that is, they almost exactly match the job description.

The one person I know that lost his job working for a USAID contractor and has found work happened to find it by doing some independent consulting for that same contractor that laid him off. Everything else has been dead ends.

During a bad recession that happened to me. I ended up taking a $30/hour pay cut and no benefits doing outsourced work for my old employer that laid me off. For the exact group I was laid off from. In two years, I went back to my old employer as contract and eventually back to permanent. They pay the most and have more stability than other firms in my industry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My only advice is to apply out of the area, maybe even out of the country (like those countries that your DH has experience with). For years, we've been telling coal miners in WV to move to where the jobs are. I think white collar workers in DC need to be willing to do the same.

FWIW, I despise Trump and fully support USAID. I actually thought about working for them decades ago. If/when USAID ever comes back, you could potentially move back.

It sucks, but I also had to move to where the jobs were. In my case, it was the best decision ever. My career really took off, and I made a ton more money.

NP. What field are you in and where did you move to

This was a long time ago (I'm talking 30years), and not in the government. But, the point remains, when you are out of a job, and clearly need a new one, and the area you live in doesn't have jobs that fit you, you need to move to an area that has some jobs that you may be a fit for. That could be in a different city (me since the state I lived in was huge), or a different state, or even a different country.

IMO, it sucks to start over, but doubly so in your 50s (I'm 55). But, if you don't have much tying you to this area, like HS kids whom a move would be difficult for, with the DH's background, I'd look into jobs in other countries since OP can work anywhere.

I guess I'm projecting because if I could get a job in Spain, for example, I'd move there in a heartbeat right now. But my kids are in college, so it would be easier for us.

I appreciate the empathy but moving jobs and locations when you are 25 and have say 3 years of full time work experience is very very different

It's so clueless as to be offensive

IMO, you people are the clueless ones. Why can't a 55 yr old move to where the job offer is? What did you tell the 50 yr old coal miners in WV who have been out of a job for a year? You probably told them to pivot or move to where the jobs are, right?

It's offensive for exFed white collared workers who had cushy jobs to think they shouldn't have to move but expect blue collared workers to do so for jobs.

FWIW, my parents were uneducated blue collared workers who immigrated to this country with 4 kids under 10, without knowing how to speak English. I think if you can speak English, are educated, you can absolutely move to a different state/city at the age of 55 for a job. You just don't want to.

People move for jobs all the time. Companies relocate; close. Why do exFeds think they are special and shouldn't be expected to do this?

I'm sorry, but you guys come across as entitled and helpless. Very unbecoming. And I feel awful for DOGE'd feds.

Please read before you spout off. The OP said on page 1 that they would be open to moving and that he would be open to taking a lower salary. Everything is harder job wise in your 50s. Whether you are a coal miner or a white collar professional. Show some empathy.

I have empathy (as a 55 yr old). I was responding to the "It's so clueless as to be offensive " poster. And I bet lots of 50 yr old feds 5, 10 years ago didn't have that much empathy for coal miners when they kept saying that they wanted to stay in their jobs and not have to move and retrain.

What exactly am I clueless about? I've been laid off before; I was a contractor and have had several contracts termed (all private sector); I've moved for jobs.

So, if OP's DH is willing to move for a lower paying job, why is the poster saying "It's so clueless as to be offensive " to my post?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I say this with respect because I know there’s a lot of affected people here (in addition to the OP), but could someone please explain how/why the people at this org were paid so much before when it seems like their actual skills just didn’t warrant that high level of pay? Is this typical in government orgs? I knew government positions paid a lot more than I originally expected, but I was told that they need to pay those salaries (in addition to the security that has historically also come with government positions) in order to staff the positions.

+1

Also hear a lot about how a high salary is needed because folks could leave for the private sector for an even higher salary.

Also easier to fly under the radar at government jobs. Can also be the case in the private sector but seemed to be more endemic in gov.

My husband was out of work for a year. He was an exec at a company that paid him some large amount of money and then was hired at another company that pays him an even larger salary.

Would you conclude in his year of unemployment that the entire executive suites of F500 companies are overpaid simply because he couldn’t find a new job? (BTW, they are grossly overpaid in my opinion. Senior Feds who manage similar portfolios are absolutely as good or better).

For the commenter who heard about the "high salaries": after 10% of FDA staff was laid off by DOGE in 2025, another 10% of FDA staff left voluntarily for private industry.

For a while there, I knew at least one to two staff who left every week. Now the FDA commissioner is about to "spend more time with family" cause they can't get the fruit flavored vapes approved fast enough for this administration.

So yes, for many in STEM heavy agencies, they have been demoralized and have moved on to working for private industry or for other countries.

USAID staff are going to have a harder time, because their whole profession has been devastated by these cuts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the hard realities of managing large, multimillion dollar contracts in a do-gooder aid organization with limited accountability is that this is not an easily transferrable "skill".

I call b.s. Would you actually know? I worked in a small agency right off the Mall for 8 years and I've worked at an F500 corporation for 25+. Skills are absolutely comparable. My government co-workers could have fit right in at my company.

It's fashionably dehumanizing to mock government work and suggest that people are magically smarter and more productive when there's a P&L somewhere on the private sector side. That's offensive and naive.

That’s great. Then enlighten the rest of us on this thread. How did you sell your skills? Let me guess—you worked at USDA and went to work for a massive food conglomerate or something similar? Or are you a former development professional/USAIDer?

Much of this thread is about what the market deems valuable and in-demand for the development field.

[Anonymous]

I am 64 and got two unsolicited job offers in last 60 days for sr. Executive roles. It is not age alone, it is fact with age you are expected to know more. If you do same job and pigeon holed hard to get new job at 60.

I was taking to a woman at work just celebrated 25 years at my job. Only 46. She worked her way up. If she was fired tomorrow good luck, has a bs degree second tier school and no certifications, only knows our company.

Lot of Fed workers are like her.

[Anonymous]

I'm so sorry, PP. I am extremely luck to have held onto my international development job, and aware that it was pure luck in that I work on one of the only topics/places that this Administration does care about, a little.

With that said, I've seen a lot of folks struggle in the past year.

A few did the teacher route. PP was right that Gov. Moore has fast-tracked the credentialing programs, and my colleagues who went that path were in the classroom within 6 months. Now, it's hard work, with a ton of supervision your first couple of years, and so I'd only recommend it if he wants to teach.

My organization has posted a handful of positions in recent months but they've all been "field-based." Could you guys go abroad? A lot of development agencies are overstaffed in DC (still) but are still replacing normal turnover at the Chief of Party level.

I agree about looking in domestic nonprofits as well. WASH, disaster response, and health all have obvious domestic implications.

D/G and conflict resolution type jobs are harder to come by, but there are lots of foundations working on voting rights and stuff if that's his expertise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One of the hard realities of managing large, multimillion dollar contracts in a do-gooder aid organization with limited accountability is that this is not an easily transferrable "skill".

I call b.s. Would you actually know? I worked in a small agency right off the Mall for 8 years and I've worked at an F500 corporation for 25+. Skills are absolutely comparable. My government co-workers could have fit right in at my company.

It's fashionably dehumanizing to mock government work and suggest that people are magically smarter and more productive when there's a P&L somewhere on the private sector side. That's offensive and naive.

That’s great. Then enlighten the rest of us on this thread. How did you sell your skills? Let me guess—you worked at USDA and went to work for a massive food conglomerate or something similar? Or are you a former development professional/USAIDer?

Much of this thread is about what the market deems valuable and in-demand for the development field.

Much of this thread is ignorant about what the job market looks like. No amount of skills can overcome bad macro factors.

[Anonymous]

Zero skill