Anonymous wrote:OP,

Why is that your job must pay more than childcare and not your spouse's job that must pay more than childcare?

If you, in the short term, worked for less than the childcare cost, you would still be gaining over the long term because you will be more employable with a job and more likely to be paid more after you get promotions. But you can't get promotions without any job at all.

Just something to think about because too many women think they "have to earn more than childcare costs" for the job to be worth it. But, if hubby decides to leave you in the future, you will be in a better position by having worked.

Anonymous wrote:I think you need to take the long view. You've got to find a job and get someone to take a chance on you, and that first job isn't going to pay much. BUT I would plan on staying a year or two, updating my resume, and actively searching again, and then, with a job already, I think you'd be at $80k again, so at least where you left off, and maybe even higher.

So don't focus too much on the actual salary of the first job. Think about opportunity. Will this open doors for you, in or out of the company? Then great - might be $60k for a year or two, but that's no problem as long as you can move back up quickly. Getting your foot back in the door is going to be the hard part.

Anonymous wrote:OP,

Why is that your job must pay more than childcare and not your spouse's job that must pay more than childcare?

If you, in the short term, worked for less than the childcare cost, you would still be gaining over the long term because you will be more employable with a job and more likely to be paid more after you get promotions. But you can't get promotions without any job at all.

Just something to think about because too many women think they "have to earn more than childcare costs" for the job to be worth it. But, if hubby decides to leave you in the future, you will be in a better position by having worked.

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Thanks for the perspectives. There's a real option of trying to pursue and get into teaching, as that gets me time with my kids and I'm good at it; I started on that path but we had to leave that school and I couldn't teach there anymore, and the money just couldn't justify the choice.
So it seems like I should be taking whatever job I can find. Again I'm not totally new to the workforce - I had a decent career before I quit, and I did *something*, even though it wasn't a ton, in the interim...But yeah maybe in this market it's not enough.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d expect a salary commensurate with 8 years of experience. I’d target 100K, but it will vary based on industry and role. If you approach this from a place of fear and diminished worth, then you will get less pay. But, as a mom, your time is now more valuable than ever.

For the record, a man would NEVER go into this scenario thinking he should make anything less than 100K. And he’d get it.

OP here. I'm concerned that if I put the request too high in the application, I'll just be passed over as delusional, especially if it's towards the top of the range in the job posting. At least that send to have happened when I've applied to rules that seemed a good fit that I'd be qualified to do.

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Wish there were internships for people returning to the workforce.

Anyway, I'm not sure how to make a case in an online application that asks for "desired salary" for a job with a huge range, like $60-120k "commensurate with experience" - and the experience being 1-2 years in a rule that requires less questions with than I've done before. Is it too ambitious to put $80 as "desired salary"?