Question: would you double your hours for double your pay?

[Anonymous]

Hell no.

[Anonymous]

OP here. Well that's pretty much unanimous. Would anyone be swayed by the $400k offer being with a "hot" company and/or the prospects for advancement at current firm being "okay" but not stellar?

I'm guessing no, but I'll ask since I'm getting firm responses here.

[Anonymous]

No way.

[Anonymous]

No, you will ruin yourself mentally and physically and no money in the world will buy you a health. Doesn't worth it.

[Anonymous]

No. I wish I got something near 200k for my 60 hours. At least i can spread them over 7 days. Oh well, need to get off dcum to get some work done.

[Anonymous]

No if you have kids.

If not and you have no life go for it.

[Anonymous]

Nope. Unless you don't have a family and you love your job more than anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Well that's pretty much unanimous. Would anyone be swayed by the $400k offer being with a "hot" company and/or the prospects for advancement at current firm being "okay" but not stellar?

I'm guessing no, but I'll ask since I'm getting firm responses here.

No. There is no such thing as an 80 hour work week, particularly at a "hot" company. That $400k is buying you - all the time. Some weeks that might be 65 hours and most weeks it might be 80, but make no mistake, you are at their beck and call.

The only way I would consider doing it is if I had no/grown kids, a non-working spouse who could accompany me on business travel and was happy to handle everything at home/deal with my schedule, and if my career aspirations were to get to the C level at a big corporation. In that case, you have to put in those hours anyway, might as well make bank for them.

But, I don't think this is the case for you. You said: "I've always said that being rich means having lots of time more than lots of money." Stick to your values and beliefs that you came up with when you weren't being dazzled with an extra 200k. That belief doesn't change, you just are willing to sacrifice it because of temptation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Well that's pretty much unanimous. Would anyone be swayed by the $400k offer being with a "hot" company and/or the prospects for advancement at current firm being "okay" but not stellar?

I'm guessing no, but I'll ask since I'm getting firm responses here.

No. There is no such thing as an 80 hour work week, particularly at a "hot" company. That $400k is buying you - all the time. Some weeks that might be 65 hours and most weeks it might be 80, but make no mistake, you are at their beck and call.

The only way I would consider doing it is if I had no/grown kids, a non-working spouse who could accompany me on business travel and was happy to handle everything at home/deal with my schedule, and if my career aspirations were to get to the C level at a big corporation. In that case, you have to put in those hours anyway, might as well make bank for them.

But, I don't think this is the case for you. You said: "I've always said that being rich means having lots of time more than lots of money." Stick to your values and beliefs that you came up with when you weren't being dazzled with an extra 200k. That belief doesn't change, you just are willing to sacrifice it because of temptation.

OP here, thank you for the detailed response. My spouse works as well and while the additional income could probably afford us to drop to one worker, that seems like an unfair thing for my spouse to be obligated to accept. I also have kids, and while I certainly would love the C suite, I'm not cut out for it because, well frankly, I'm too lazy to ever make it there, and have little desire to put in the hours needed. Years ago I turned down a path at Goldman Sachs - odds are id be a multi millionaire by now had I gone, but I don't much lose sleep over it, although I'd also be lying if I didn't have a hint of envy watching my friends board their gulf streams while I check out southwest for my vacations hah! On the other hand, I have vacations, they have nannies who take the kids places.

And you are correct that they will own me. The job is operational in nature (think of manufacturing - something that run 24/7) so there's never ever any downtime; at least not if something happens. Worse, the operation is busiest at night given the time zone differences so I worry the possibility of the emergency 2am phone call is not just real, it's likely.

It's the best job I've ever been offered and by far the most lucrative - staying where I am now, I'd be happy to end my career with that kind of compensation... But, in my heart, as I sit here making marshmallows in the fire with my children, I don't know that I have the mental and emotional fortitude to do it. I just don't think I'm a strong enough person, even if there's a part of me that wishes I was. And perhaps, I even feel like it's my masculinity in question: society says a man should "provide" and in DCs particularly fucked socioeconomics it seems all that much more pressing.

This thread is helping me sort through my emotions a lot, thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:... I'm too lazy to ever make it there, and have little desire to put in the hours needed.

... But, in my heart, as I sit here making marshmallows in the fire with my children, I don't know that I have the mental and emotional fortitude to do it. I just don't think I'm a strong enough person, even if there's a part of me that wishes I was. And perhaps, I even feel like it's my masculinity in question: society says a man should "provide" and in DCs particularly fucked socioeconomics it seems all that much more pressing.

This thread is helping me sort through my emotions a lot, thanks.

I'm PP who gave the detailed response. I so get it (although I'm a woman, so not the masculinity thing) - I recently went through a similar soul searching when offered a job with a huge pay bump, increase in visibility, and basically the required step if I'm ever going to move up to the executive level. I ended it turning it down and staying in my "cushy" job, and in the 5 months since I've turned it down, I have been SO glad - as I've been hit with two illnesses, a family member died and my husband is the executor, etc.

Being willing to take on 80 hours a week doesn't make you a strong person. Going for the top of the corporate ladder doesn't make you strong. Having the courage to live a life that is authentic to what you really enjoy and where you are truly happy is what takes strength. For some people, that IS pursuing that hard-charging career. But it doesn't sound like that's what it is for you, and that is just fine. I'm not one to say "On your death bed, you'll wish you worked less." You're equally strong as someone who goes all out in their career, you just have different aspirations. It doesn't matter how fast you climb the ladder if it's not reaching a destination where you'd feel happy.

There is so, so much value in lots of down time, a good work-life balance, flexibility, etc. You have got the best of both worlds right now with $200k and 40 hours a week. Unless your heart is really in the hard-charging career path, the strongest thing you can do is to be true to your real desires, not what society tells you is "the good life."

I hope this helps. Stay true to your deepest, true feelings in your gut - whatever they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not totally hypothetical - current job is 40 hrs a week and about $200k. Other job is about $400k but likely more like 80 (8 to 8 daily plus a few hours at home, and some weekends).

I struggle with choice here: financially it's a no brainer, but I've always said that being rich means having lots of time more than lots of money.

NO. Never. My uncle, who was very entrepreneurial, told me to never trade time for money. If you make X widgets, and you get a demand for more, you can make 2x widgets, double your income but it will probably take you only a small amount of extra time. But if you sell your time for money, the only way to make 2x your money is to double your time.

I was still a kid at the time and didn't really understand his advice and forgot it. I remembered it the first day at my law firm, when they taught me how to bill every 6 minutes of my time. I specificially remember thinking, "Oh, so that's what Uncle Larlo meant when he told me not to trade time for money all those years ago!" Since then, I've had quite a few experiences involving more time/less time working and also more/less money, and I would take the less money/more time any day of the week.

It's amazing that we live in a time and place where we get to choose between these things, and how many people choose to put themselves into a prison of their own making.

Your gut is telling you the right thing, OP!

[Anonymous]

No, although I am already at/above $400k. I probably work 50-55 hours/week but have total flexibility so some weeks it might be 20. I could make more if I put in more time but have turned down projects or not pursued them because I value time more than money at this point. I might feel differently if my comp was lower but our combined comp covers a very comfortable life.

[Anonymous]

If you dont have kids, I say do it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No, although I am already at/above $400k. I probably work 50-55 hours/week but have total flexibility so some weeks it might be 20. I could make more if I put in more time but have turned down projects or not pursued them because I value time more than money at this point. I might feel differently if my comp was lower but our combined comp covers a very comfortable life.

This isn't investment mgmt unfortunately.

[Anonymous]

No. I work half time for half pay. I'm not crazy to spend that time away from my teenagers.