Corporate Life vs Fed Employment

[Anonymous]

I work at a pretty good work life balance agency, we regulate a thriving industry (think FTC or FCC type work) and occasionally we have people exit our agency to work corporate.

But invariably they return to our agency, having been pushed out of a consulting role or having to work long hours, always on-demand, even on Christmas for their corporation, with critical bosses. The stories I hear, it makes it sound like corporate America is a capitalist grind stone full of bullies.

I think things are a bit different in some fields, like BigTech is a little bit less corporate shark bro? But is this really that stark a difference? I was hoping to go corporate after my kids go to college, but all these boomerang employees with horror stories make me wonder if I will thrive??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The stories I hear, it makes it sound like corporate America is a capitalist grind stone full of bullies.

well...yes. Corporations exist to maximize shareholder value. That is it. If you don't want that lifrestyle, riding out 20 years as a 14/15 is better on a $/hr scale.


I was a GS13 in DC and probably worked 10-15 hours a week of actual work with the rest filled with BS. I just didn't have a lot going on. Now i'm a director at a F500 and I work 60+ hours a week and rarely get a day off. My pay reflects that, but I only have to do this for like 3-4 more years, pay off the house, and then I can just ride into the sunset in a GS role.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The stories I hear, it makes it sound like corporate America is a capitalist grind stone full of bullies.

well...yes. Corporations exist to maximize shareholder value. That is it. If you don't want that lifrestyle, riding out 20 years as a 14/15 is better on a $/hr scale.


I was a GS13 in DC and probably worked 10-15 hours a week of actual work with the rest filled with BS. I just didn't have a lot going on. Now i'm a director at a F500 and I work 60+ hours a week and rarely get a day off. My pay reflects that, but I only have to do this for like 3-4 more years, pay off the house, and then I can just ride into the sunset in a GS role.

Well in your scenario I assume you are making $800k or so, like 4x the salary. These were fairly lateral moves making $250k, so maybe $75k over their GS14/15 salaries.

[Anonymous]

Ive done both. hypocrisy was worse with the feds. pay is better in corporate. stability better in feds. benefits better in corporate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ive done both. hypocrisy was worse with the feds. pay is better in corporate. stability better in feds. benefits better in corporate.

All true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ive done both. hypocrisy was worse with the feds. pay is better in corporate. stability better in feds. benefits better in corporate.

None of which I was really talking about — I’m talking about huge demands of time, excessive criticism, and long hours and extreme expectations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ive done both. hypocrisy was worse with the feds. pay is better in corporate. stability better in feds. benefits better in corporate.

None of which I was really talking about — I’m talking about huge demands of time, excessive criticism, and long hours and extreme expectations.

Yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ive done both. hypocrisy was worse with the feds. pay is better in corporate. stability better in feds. benefits better in corporate.

None of which I was really talking about — I’m talking about huge demands of time, excessive criticism, and long hours and extreme expectations.

they are the same. bureaucracy may be a tad worse with the feds, so there is an argument that can be made that the stuff you talk about is worse in the feds. Meetings about meetings is worse in the feds. I thought corporate made better use of my time until the super frequent layoffs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Well in your scenario I assume you are making $800k or so, like 4x the salary. These were fairly lateral moves making $250k, so maybe $75k over their GS14/15 salaries.

It’s not linear, and thinking it is shows you have no clue what you’re talking about. Going from gs15 at 150k with no bonus to 250k total comp is still something that would allow someone ti retire way earlier assuming no lifestyle creep.

[Anonymous]

Making 170k with the feds, I could ride this out for 20 years and retire early.

I need a truly big jump in compensation to consider switching. My number is 400k, excluding 401k match, health insurance etc. Otherwise, it makes no sense to go corporate

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Making 170k with the feds, I could ride this out for 20 years and retire early.

I need a truly big jump in compensation to consider switching. My number is 400k, excluding 401k match, health insurance etc. Otherwise, it makes no sense to go corporate

As of anyone wants a lazy bone for 400k

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Well in your scenario I assume you are making $800k or so, like 4x the salary. These were fairly lateral moves making $250k, so maybe $75k over their GS14/15 salaries.

It’s not linear, and thinking it is shows you have no clue what you’re talking about. Going from gs15 at 150k with no bonus to 250k total comp is still something that would allow someone ti retire way earlier assuming no lifestyle creep.

My salary as a GS14 is $180k and the pension is worth about $30k (early FERS). $46k after tax is something, but once you factor in the risk of layoffs it’s an actuarial wash. You best be planning to retire early because you will be laid off well before 62 in corporate unless you have leapfrogged into the executive suite. And then you are making serious money, so it’s really just : how likely are you to rise up the ladder?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Making 170k with the feds, I could ride this out for 20 years and retire early.

I need a truly big jump in compensation to consider switching. My number is 400k, excluding 401k match, health insurance etc. Otherwise, it makes no sense to go corporate

As of anyone wants a lazy bone for 400k

Sure this PP is lazy, but as OP I am far from it — but I do have young children and somewhat surprised by how many of my colleagues left to private and boomeranged within 2-3 years, and if it’s just not compatible to our lifestyle?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Making 170k with the feds, I could ride this out for 20 years and retire early.

I need a truly big jump in compensation to consider switching. My number is 400k, excluding 401k match, health insurance etc. Otherwise, it makes no sense to go corporate

I'm making $250k with the feds, my number is more like $600k to go corporate to make up for the likelihood that i'd be laid off in a few years. I got to a third round interview for a position in that range, but didn't quite pull it off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Making 170k with the feds, I could ride this out for 20 years and retire early.

I need a truly big jump in compensation to consider switching. My number is 400k, excluding 401k match, health insurance etc. Otherwise, it makes no sense to go corporate

As of anyone wants a lazy bone for 400k

Idk why you insinuate I’m lazy. I’m in an office full of PhDs and our private sector is the same job and talent, but pays double with way more hours. I work my 40 hours and yes some days are slow. But when litigation comes it’s all hands on deck. The $/hr is not necessarily better in private sector for me: it’s gonna be quite job dependent