Some parts of the civil service have waivers from the freeze. Where I work, government still can hire scientists and engineers, for example, but cannot hire for “administrative” or “contracting” roles. If you have a STEM degree, look around at the options.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry...pp above. I would stay put at 50.

Why?

Another PP: because job hunting is harder after 50. Being in a Fed job is often a lifeline for those who are older.

I would stay put, in one year the big blue wave will hault the insanity, and 2 years later, start the long journey to fixing the hell we've been through over the past year. The retirement and vacation make $20k no where close to worth leaving for, not to mention the best health insurance possible in a world where that is going to sh*t. Stay put

Anonymous wrote:Sorry...pp above. I would stay put at 50.

Why?

Sorry...pp above. I would stay put at 50.

At 50 I would stay out.

Anonymous wrote:$20k isn’t enough for me to change jobs.

Even with guaranteed hybrid role and more enjoyable work?

Anonymous wrote:Pick #2 - you’re only a decade in. You’re too young to be in a soul sucking job. Do something more enjoyable and perhaps go back to the Fed sector in a few years.

I’m 50 so not really young.

$20k isn’t enough for me to change jobs.

Pick #2 - you’re only a decade in. You’re too young to be in a soul sucking job. Do something more enjoyable and perhaps go back to the Fed sector in a few years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is this even a question?
Non-fed role.

That’s kind of lame job to transition to. With pension loss the salary is a wash.

Zero vacation? You should be able to negotiate for more advanced vacation accrual and a vacation signing bonus.

Depends on what kind of company you are transitioning too. Also right hours and worse benefits speak to a penny pinching culture.

Yeah the salary increase being a wash is part of my concern. I would lose my generous TSP match which also negates the salary increase.

I don’t think the more limited benefits reflects penny pinching. To me it’s more that I’ve been happy with federal benefits and the new role has fewer options.

Anonymous wrote:How is this even a question?
Non-fed role.

Why is it a slam dunk for you? Curious.

Anonymous wrote:How is this even a question?
Non-fed role.

That’s kind of lame job to transition to. With pension loss the salary is a wash.

Zero vacation? You should be able to negotiate for more advanced vacation accrual and a vacation signing bonus.

Depends on what kind of company you are transitioning too. Also right hours and worse benefits speak to a penny pinching culture.

How is this even a question?
Non-fed role.

What would you choose?

1) Current fed role, over a decade in with all the benefits that come from being around that long (accrued pension, tons of accrued leave, etc). Really not enjoying the work I do and don't see a way out of that with the hiring freeze. In-office 5 days/week but on a flex schedule so I can flex my start/end times each day based on kid commitments.

2) New non-fed role. Better pay, about $20K, but would start over with leave balances at zero and benefits not as good. The work speaks to my soul, a MUCH better fit than what I do now. Ability to telework a few days a week but start/end times are fixed. Commute on in-office days is about the same as current role.

What would you do?