Staying in "mom job" vs pursuing goals

[Anonymous]

I could have written this 10 years ago.
I regret playing it safe. The "mom jobs" will always be out there. Take the chance while you can and you can always dial it back. That being said, don't sacrifice time with your kids when they are little. You never get that back and you NEED those memories to get through the teen years.
Good luck op.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I could have written this 10 years ago.
I regret playing it safe. The "mom jobs" will always be out there. Take the chance while you can and you can always dial it back. That being said, don't sacrifice time with your kids when they are little. You never get that back and you NEED those memories to get through the teen years.
Good luck op.

Sure mom jobs are always there — but you are contradicting yourself — the whole reason people opt for mom jobs is to be there for your kids when they are little. Did you mommy track yourself before even having kids — that’s not typical.

[Anonymous]

As a man I find it funny as 95 percent all jobs are “mom jobs”.

Not like a single person or Dad with a stay at home wife can go guess what I got time screw being a bank teller at JPMorgan Chase I will take Jamie Dimon’s job as CEO.

As someone in a “mom job” now who has had two big jobs they are tough to hang onto. Very stressful and peers have knives out.

[Anonymous]

I’m debating doing the opposite move, although my kids are a little older. I’ve taken up a hobby that I’d love to be able to pursue with more discipline than just whenever I can make time. But I also worry that a few years from now I’ll lose interest in my hobby and kick myself for the change, although in my field it will be possible to switch jobs again at that time. I do really enjoy my current job it’s just not a strict 40 hour job, whereas the other one is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I'm learning from this thread is that women in tech and law make obscene amounts of money and have low-stress jobs. Not interested in law school, but how do I get these high paying tech jobs? Give me more details on your career path!

Lawyers make a lot, but these women with low-stress jobs are talking about specific roles like in-house counsel (which are still prestigious IMO but they are NOT the "Big Law" firm jobs which can be 80-100 hours a week). Many of them had to get one of those stressful law firm jobs right out of law school to make their name. And lots of lawyers have school debt. I have thought about going to law school and would be an excellent lawyer (my job is lawyer-adjacent) but the debt and the prospect of extremely stressful employment just to eventually make it to a cushy in-house job is not worth it.

So I'm one of the PPs above with an in house job (I'm not sure I'd call it cushy, but it is FT WFH and 40-45 hours a week), and I took a pretty unique career path in that I only worked as a biglaw associate for one year, then did a lengthy stint in gov't as a Fed, and then transitioned to in house. I also just got all of my law school debt forgiven by the expanded PSLF waiver that went into effect last year. That said, it was pretty tough to land my in house job given my background, but I will say there are other routes to in house out there besides the typical 3-6 years in biglaw that most folks do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I'm learning from this thread is that women in tech and law make obscene amounts of money and have low-stress jobs. Not interested in law school, but how do I get these high paying tech jobs? Give me more details on your career path!

Lawyers make a lot, but these women with low-stress jobs are talking about specific roles like in-house counsel (which are still prestigious IMO but they are NOT the "Big Law" firm jobs which can be 80-100 hours a week). Many of them had to get one of those stressful law firm jobs right out of law school to make their name. And lots of lawyers have school debt. I have thought about going to law school and would be an excellent lawyer (my job is lawyer-adjacent) but the debt and the prospect of extremely stressful employment just to eventually make it to a cushy in-house job is not worth it.

PP Lawyer, and this is me. I grinded it out in professional services pre law school and then did 5+ years in BigLaw. I wouldn’t call my current job low stress (I’m not really sure if anything in the legal industry can be). And oh yes, I had $200K of debt when I graduated. I refused to leave BigLaw until those loans were paid off.

[Anonymous]

OP here. I've sat on this offer for a week tomorrow and talked it through with half my network. It's a close call but I think I'm going to stick with my current job and let the hiring manager know tomorrow (although I've taken so long to think about it, he probably won't be surprised). I'm a bit sad thinking about roads not taken because the job would be cool, and hope I won't regret it in the long run, but the bottom line is I'm not miserable in my current job and would need more money or motivation to make losing a regular telework schedule worth it. Wish me luck in...the rest of my career.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would stay at the current job. Don't think of it as a "mom job", ugh. I adore my job but would kill for that level of flexibility.

That's the thing, my job is decent but i don't adore it, I'm thinking about jumping for a job I might be more excited about. I'm worried it wouldn't be worth the cost, but also worried that 5 years from now I'll feel like worrying about school pickup was a dumb and fleeting reason.

You are going to be worried about school pick up until they are probably juniors in HS, that's not fleeting. It doesn't end with daycare and kindergarten. The daycare years or Nanny years are actually the easiest in regards to schedules. I'm in middle school hell when they have games that end at 3:30 on a weekday and endless ortho/derm appts. in the middle of the day. It doesn't get less complex as they get older.

For me, daycare pickup was still the most difficult by far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would stay at the current job. Don't think of it as a "mom job", ugh. I adore my job but would kill for that level of flexibility.

That's the thing, my job is decent but i don't adore it, I'm thinking about jumping for a job I might be more excited about. I'm worried it wouldn't be worth the cost, but also worried that 5 years from now I'll feel like worrying about school pickup was a dumb and fleeting reason.

You are going to be worried about school pick up until they are probably juniors in HS, that's not fleeting. It doesn't end with daycare and kindergarten. The daycare years or Nanny years are actually the easiest in regards to schedules. I'm in middle school hell when they have games that end at 3:30 on a weekday and endless ortho/derm appts. in the middle of the day. It doesn't get less complex as they get older.

For me, daycare pickup was still the most difficult by far.

You have to get there by 6 just like SACC and it opens early, it’s year round, and your kids are too young for lost activities in evening and have no homework? Maybe your kids had colic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, at 100k it's an excellent job (at least from my lower middle class vantage point). My colleague with a "mom job" during school hours makes 22k.

I would keep job #1 for the schedule consistency, unless, like the PP, it offers better long-term perks like retirement.

Nothing $100K is what most people would consider a mom job.

It’s a family friendly job with little room for upward advancement. Staying there because your stress level is low and the hours are good doesn’t make it a mom job. It just means you’re prioritizing personal life over your career in a high paying field. People do that for all sorts of reasons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, at 100k it's an excellent job (at least from my lower middle class vantage point). My colleague with a "mom job" during school hours makes 22k.

I would keep job #1 for the schedule consistency, unless, like the PP, it offers better long-term perks like retirement.

Nothing $100K is what most people would consider a mom job.

It’s a family friendly job with little room for upward advancement. Staying there because your stress level is low and the hours are good doesn’t make it a mom job. It just means you’re prioritizing personal life over your career in a high paying field. People do that for all sorts of reasons.

It’s a mom job in that it requires another spouse making the same or more for a MC lifestyle

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I've sat on this offer for a week tomorrow and talked it through with half my network. It's a close call but I think I'm going to stick with my current job and let the hiring manager know tomorrow (although I've taken so long to think about it, he probably won't be surprised). I'm a bit sad thinking about roads not taken because the job would be cool, and hope I won't regret it in the long run, but the bottom line is I'm not miserable in my current job and would need more money or motivation to make losing a regular telework schedule worth it. Wish me luck in...the rest of my career.

Remember new company could lay you off first week on job or during probation. We let people go during 90 day probation and when they do you get two weeks pay and shown the door.

Many new hires at my firm left big banks that give severance of 4 weeks pay for each year plus four weeks medical insurance per year plus pro-rated pay out in bonus. They are now unemployed with no safety net when let go my firm in first 90 days.

Grass is not always greener.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, at 100k it's an excellent job (at least from my lower middle class vantage point). My colleague with a "mom job" during school hours makes 22k.

I would keep job #1 for the schedule consistency, unless, like the PP, it offers better long-term perks like retirement.

Nothing $100K is what most people would consider a mom job.

It’s a family friendly job with little room for upward advancement. Staying there because your stress level is low and the hours are good doesn’t make it a mom job. It just means you’re prioritizing personal life over your career in a high paying field. People do that for all sorts of reasons.

It’s a mom job in that it requires another spouse making the same or more for a MC lifestyle

That’s still not a Mom job. What the spouse makes has nothing to do with anything. $100K is a lot of money, and very many people raise families quite well on it. I will never understand the posters on here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, at 100k it's an excellent job (at least from my lower middle class vantage point). My colleague with a "mom job" during school hours makes 22k.

I would keep job #1 for the schedule consistency, unless, like the PP, it offers better long-term perks like retirement.

Nothing $100K is what most people would consider a mom job.

It’s a family friendly job with little room for upward advancement. Staying there because your stress level is low and the hours are good doesn’t make it a mom job. It just means you’re prioritizing personal life over your career in a high paying field. People do that for all sorts of reasons.

It’s a mom job in that it requires another spouse making the same or more for a MC lifestyle

That’s still not a Mom job. What the spouse makes has nothing to do with anything. $100K is a lot of money, and very many people raise families quite well on it. I will never understand the posters on here.

Where the F do you live? Ohio?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, at 100k it's an excellent job (at least from my lower middle class vantage point). My colleague with a "mom job" during school hours makes 22k.

I would keep job #1 for the schedule consistency, unless, like the PP, it offers better long-term perks like retirement.

Nothing $100K is what most people would consider a mom job.

It’s a family friendly job with little room for upward advancement. Staying there because your stress level is low and the hours are good doesn’t make it a mom job. It just means you’re prioritizing personal life over your career in a high paying field. People do that for all sorts of reasons.

It’s a mom job in that it requires another spouse making the same or more for a MC lifestyle

That’s still not a Mom job. What the spouse makes has nothing to do with anything. $100K is a lot of money, and very many people raise families quite well on it. I will never understand the posters on here.

Where the F do you live? Ohio?

In a place where $100K doesn’t constitute mad money used to buy Botox and handbags.