Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Non-investing personal finance issues including insurance, credit, real estate, taxes, employment and legal issues such as trusts and wills.
DrGrnTum
Posts: 190
Joined: Sat Oct 24, 2015 11:22 am

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by DrGrnTum »

jplee3 wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 5:22 pm
123 wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 5:19 pm Sometimes working in a government job (city/county/state) can be pretty boring. We've got a relative who switched to a government job for the pension plan. He looked forward to the holidays and vacation days as his favorite perk. But he soon found out that the standard in his department was to minimize the number of vacation days actually taken so you could save them up endlessly for the higher retirement benefits based on length of service. So when he took a vacation his co-workers didn't like it since they organized the department's work with the expectation that pretty much everyone would be there every day.
Yikes, that sounds awful!

Wait, so if you don't take your PTO/vacation, this leads to higher retirement benefits? I'm not understanding that part... I never take much vacation (a day off here and there and maybe a week or two every couple years or so but nothing crazy). I guess this depends on the group you're with right? But how do you "vet" for things like this while interviewing? Lol
The State department I worked for did not let you add your vacation hours to your retirement. You had to cash those hours out. Many people would use up all their vacation hours right before they retired. You had to get approval from your boss to do this. Your sick leave hours can be added to your retirement time.

I recently retired from a State job after 42 years of service. I worked 20 years in one District in one city and the rest in another District in another city. In both places there were those “special” people that seemed to take advantage of the system. The majority of my co-workers where the type that did their work as directed. They put their 8 hours in and then went home. There were also those that did their work with a lot more initiative. Those were the “GO TO” people. I found in my case that if you made a name for yourself, you become a wanted commodity. You get assigned more challenging and interesting work. When advancements come around, you are in a position to take advantage of them.

Good luck.
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

Those of you who are in IT/tech for the state (and particularly anyone in infosec), do you feel like you've gained a lot of experience and learned enough to keep up with tech in general so that if you were to look for private sector jobs you would be able to make the change?

I can understand the stigma of being a public sector employee if that's all you've ever known. But I tend think if that have private sector experience, then moved over to the public sector (state or whatever), and then eventually decided you wanted to go back to the private sector, that "stigma" wouldn't really be as big of an issue (especially if you leave it off your resume LOL). And if you're able to upkeep the skills even through the state job then I just don't see how you wouldn't be marketable in the private sector.

Or do most IT/tech state employees let their skills lapse or atrophy to the point where most of them would never be able to go back to the private sector? I find this a bit hard to believe especially for infosec...
Jeepergeo
Posts: 876
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2020 1:33 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by Jeepergeo »

The Tech Sector in California has pulled most capable individuals into the private sector where hard work, innovation, and efficiency are rewarded, and this has been going on for years now. What this means is that those less capable in Tech have gone to the public sector, and this too has gone on for years and now means the public sector management teams include many, longevity-promoted, less capable individuals into management.

Sure, public sector Tech needs capable, innovative, and effective staff, but the managers in Public Sector Tech don't have a clue how to lead that group. So when the Public Tech Sector needs capable and innovative work, they scream staff shortage and then outsource the work to the Private Sector Tech.

If you go to Public Tech, it is likely a one way door. If you go, go for the pension, easy hours, and many holidays, and accept that your biggest challenges will be the lack of stimulating projects, management by longevity types, and loss of credibility in the Tech profession.
User avatar
LilyFleur
Posts: 3499
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2018 9:36 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by LilyFleur »

Jeepergeo wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:23 pm The Tech Sector in California has pulled most capable individuals into the private sector where hard work, innovation, and efficiency are rewarded, and this has been going on for years now. What this means is that those less capable in Tech have gone to the public sector, and this too has gone on for years and now means the public sector management teams include many, longevity-promoted, less capable individuals into management.

Sure, public sector Tech needs capable, innovative, and effective staff, but the managers in Public Sector Tech don't have a clue how to lead that group. So when the Public Tech Sector needs capable and innovative work, they scream staff shortage and then outsource the work to the Private Sector Tech.

If you go to Public Tech, it is likely a one way door. If you go, go for the pension, easy hours, and many holidays, and accept that your biggest challenges will be the lack of stimulating projects, management by longevity types, and loss of credibility in the Tech profession.
The flip side of this is not getting laid off in your 50s.
Firemenot
Posts: 1497
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2020 8:48 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by Firemenot »

LilyFleur wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:33 pm
Jeepergeo wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:23 pm The Tech Sector in California has pulled most capable individuals into the private sector where hard work, innovation, and efficiency are rewarded, and this has been going on for years now. What this means is that those less capable in Tech have gone to the public sector, and this too has gone on for years and now means the public sector management teams include many, longevity-promoted, less capable individuals into management.

Sure, public sector Tech needs capable, innovative, and effective staff, but the managers in Public Sector Tech don't have a clue how to lead that group. So when the Public Tech Sector needs capable and innovative work, they scream staff shortage and then outsource the work to the Private Sector Tech.

If you go to Public Tech, it is likely a one way door. If you go, go for the pension, easy hours, and many holidays, and accept that your biggest challenges will be the lack of stimulating projects, management by longevity types, and loss of credibility in the Tech profession.
The flip side of this is not getting laid off in your 50s.
I’d actually love to be laid off right now in my 40s so I could get a severance package and negotiate holding onto my options.
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

Jeepergeo wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:23 pm The Tech Sector in California has pulled most capable individuals into the private sector where hard work, innovation, and efficiency are rewarded, and this has been going on for years now. What this means is that those less capable in Tech have gone to the public sector, and this too has gone on for years and now means the public sector management teams include many, longevity-promoted, less capable individuals into management.

Sure, public sector Tech needs capable, innovative, and effective staff, but the managers in Public Sector Tech don't have a clue how to lead that group. So when the Public Tech Sector needs capable and innovative work, they scream staff shortage and then outsource the work to the Private Sector Tech.

If you go to Public Tech, it is likely a one way door. If you go, go for the pension, easy hours, and many holidays, and accept that your biggest challenges will be the lack of stimulating projects, management by longevity types, and loss of credibility in the Tech profession.

Good insight. I just had the interview and it went pretty well overall. The guys interviewing me seemed to know what they were talking about (LOL) and the project the hiring manager was talking about ramping up sounded like there are lots of moving pieces of things to pickup and learn/apply. I don't how common it is to interview at the state level and hear how "promising" it is only to be sorely disappointed once hired.
Interestingly, I was asked TWICE if I'd be willing to relocate to Sacramento - once at the beginning and once at the end. I said both times that it would be open to consideration. Towards the end I asked what the impact of telework has been there and if they see telework becoming a long-term option. The hiring manager skirted and deferred the question to "it's based on what the state dictates to us" hahaha (this can't be true since some other positions I've seen clearly say "open for telework"). He went on to say that things have been positive regarding telework productivity. Then immediately after the other consulting manager (former ITM/ITS who was a long-term state employee and is on the team for short-term consultancy) asked if I'd be willing to relocate to Sacramento :| I gave him the "it's open for consideration but I'd have to check with my wife to be fair to her" answer LOL. I tried to keep it open but they probably see it as a pretty hard "No" which is fine because I'm pretty sure we're not relocating to Sacramento right now.
Jeepergeo
Posts: 876
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2020 1:33 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by Jeepergeo »

jplee3 wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 4:54 pm
Jeepergeo wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:23 pm The Tech Sector in California has pulled most capable individuals into the private sector where hard work, innovation, and efficiency are rewarded, and this has been going on for years now. What this means is that those less capable in Tech have gone to the public sector, and this too has gone on for years and now means the public sector management teams include many, longevity-promoted, less capable individuals into management.

Sure, public sector Tech needs capable, innovative, and effective staff, but the managers in Public Sector Tech don't have a clue how to lead that group. So when the Public Tech Sector needs capable and innovative work, they scream staff shortage and then outsource the work to the Private Sector Tech.

If you go to Public Tech, it is likely a one way door. If you go, go for the pension, easy hours, and many holidays, and accept that your biggest challenges will be the lack of stimulating projects, management by longevity types, and loss of credibility in the Tech profession.

Good insight. I just had the interview and it went pretty well overall. The guys interviewing me seemed to know what they were talking about (LOL) and the project the hiring manager was talking about ramping up sounded like there are lots of moving pieces of things to pickup and learn/apply. I don't how common it is to interview at the state level and hear how "promising" it is only to be sorely disappointed once hired.
Interestingly, I was asked TWICE if I'd be willing to relocate to Sacramento - once at the beginning and once at the end. I said both times that it would be open to consideration. Towards the end I asked what the impact of telework has been there and if they see telework becoming a long-term option. The hiring manager skirted and deferred the question to "it's based on what the state dictates to us" hahaha (this can't be true since some other positions I've seen clearly say "open for telework"). He went on to say that things have been positive regarding telework productivity. Then immediately after the other consulting manager (former ITM/ITS who was a long-term state employee and is on the team for short-term consultancy) asked if I'd be willing to relocate to Sacramento :| I gave him the "it's open for consideration but I'd have to check with my wife to be fair to her" answer LOL. I tried to keep it open but they probably see it as a pretty hard "No" which is fine because I'm pretty sure we're not relocating to Sacramento right now.
The State would likely benefit greatly from your skill set and drive as evidenced by your time in the private sector.
It won't likely be a question of whether you can do the job, but whether you will want to do the job.

I'm in the private sector and have been for 30+ years and our business is basically to do outsourced public sector type projects. Most of the State's Project Managers have very little experience and almost no project development and delivery experience...the State's 20 year PM has less technical experience than my 3-5 year since degree staff. The PM once told me he appreciates my company's monthly invoices because he can completely review one in a day! And that's just a $50-$100K monthly invoice! He has also mentioned he misses "getting his hands dirty" by which he means deeper into design.

The State does have a management fast track program and I will admit it has produced some really good state leaders. You might want to ask about it. I don't know how they select candidates.

Good luck with your decision... there are a lot of pros and cons to weigh!
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

Jeepergeo wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:16 pm
jplee3 wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 4:54 pm
Jeepergeo wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:23 pm The Tech Sector in California has pulled most capable individuals into the private sector where hard work, innovation, and efficiency are rewarded, and this has been going on for years now. What this means is that those less capable in Tech have gone to the public sector, and this too has gone on for years and now means the public sector management teams include many, longevity-promoted, less capable individuals into management.

Sure, public sector Tech needs capable, innovative, and effective staff, but the managers in Public Sector Tech don't have a clue how to lead that group. So when the Public Tech Sector needs capable and innovative work, they scream staff shortage and then outsource the work to the Private Sector Tech.

If you go to Public Tech, it is likely a one way door. If you go, go for the pension, easy hours, and many holidays, and accept that your biggest challenges will be the lack of stimulating projects, management by longevity types, and loss of credibility in the Tech profession.

Good insight. I just had the interview and it went pretty well overall. The guys interviewing me seemed to know what they were talking about (LOL) and the project the hiring manager was talking about ramping up sounded like there are lots of moving pieces of things to pickup and learn/apply. I don't how common it is to interview at the state level and hear how "promising" it is only to be sorely disappointed once hired.
Interestingly, I was asked TWICE if I'd be willing to relocate to Sacramento - once at the beginning and once at the end. I said both times that it would be open to consideration. Towards the end I asked what the impact of telework has been there and if they see telework becoming a long-term option. The hiring manager skirted and deferred the question to "it's based on what the state dictates to us" hahaha (this can't be true since some other positions I've seen clearly say "open for telework"). He went on to say that things have been positive regarding telework productivity. Then immediately after the other consulting manager (former ITM/ITS who was a long-term state employee and is on the team for short-term consultancy) asked if I'd be willing to relocate to Sacramento :| I gave him the "it's open for consideration but I'd have to check with my wife to be fair to her" answer LOL. I tried to keep it open but they probably see it as a pretty hard "No" which is fine because I'm pretty sure we're not relocating to Sacramento right now.
The State would likely benefit greatly from your skill set and drive as evidenced by your time in the private sector.
It won't likely be a question of whether you can do the job, but whether you will want to do the job.

I'm in the private sector and have been for 30+ years and our business is basically to do outsourced public sector type projects. Most of the State's Project Managers have very little experience and almost no project development and delivery experience...the State's 20 year PM has less technical experience than my 3-5 year since degree staff. The PM once told me he appreciates my company's monthly invoices because he can completely review one in a day! And that's just a $50-$100K monthly invoice! He has also mentioned he misses "getting his hands dirty" by which he means deeper into design.

The State does have a management fast track program and I will admit it has produced some really good state leaders. You might want to ask about it. I don't know how they select candidates.

Good luck with your decision... there are a lot of pros and cons to weigh!
Thanks. I wish they'd be open to more flex/telework situations especially nowadays. The hiring manager even said the new project they're building out is all cloud-based. It would be different if we were talking about needing to access server racks at data centers but it doesn't sound like this is the case at all. I get it that face-to-face interaction is important but I've been working 5-6 years full time telework and I don't have issues with that aspect. Our team *was* doing annual on-sites back in Charlotte every year but that has since been on hold due to changes on the team and such. I don't get why state wouldn't opt for this model - let people work from home and then have them travel in quarterly if you need the face-to-face. But I'm sure all the red tape and bureaucracy won't allow for this to happen in most cases.

I have a feeling they're going to pass me up for other candidates. If they were to make an exception allowing me to telework indefinitely with the condition that I fly or travel once every couple months, I think I'd be OK with that. But I don't know how comfortable I am about uprooting the family
and relocating to Sacramento.
Normchad
Posts: 5648
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:20 am

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by Normchad »

jplee3 wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 9:37 pm
Jeepergeo wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 8:16 pm
jplee3 wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 4:54 pm
Jeepergeo wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:23 pm The Tech Sector in California has pulled most capable individuals into the private sector where hard work, innovation, and efficiency are rewarded, and this has been going on for years now. What this means is that those less capable in Tech have gone to the public sector, and this too has gone on for years and now means the public sector management teams include many, longevity-promoted, less capable individuals into management.

Sure, public sector Tech needs capable, innovative, and effective staff, but the managers in Public Sector Tech don't have a clue how to lead that group. So when the Public Tech Sector needs capable and innovative work, they scream staff shortage and then outsource the work to the Private Sector Tech.

If you go to Public Tech, it is likely a one way door. If you go, go for the pension, easy hours, and many holidays, and accept that your biggest challenges will be the lack of stimulating projects, management by longevity types, and loss of credibility in the Tech profession.

Good insight. I just had the interview and it went pretty well overall. The guys interviewing me seemed to know what they were talking about (LOL) and the project the hiring manager was talking about ramping up sounded like there are lots of moving pieces of things to pickup and learn/apply. I don't how common it is to interview at the state level and hear how "promising" it is only to be sorely disappointed once hired.
Interestingly, I was asked TWICE if I'd be willing to relocate to Sacramento - once at the beginning and once at the end. I said both times that it would be open to consideration. Towards the end I asked what the impact of telework has been there and if they see telework becoming a long-term option. The hiring manager skirted and deferred the question to "it's based on what the state dictates to us" hahaha (this can't be true since some other positions I've seen clearly say "open for telework"). He went on to say that things have been positive regarding telework productivity. Then immediately after the other consulting manager (former ITM/ITS who was a long-term state employee and is on the team for short-term consultancy) asked if I'd be willing to relocate to Sacramento :| I gave him the "it's open for consideration but I'd have to check with my wife to be fair to her" answer LOL. I tried to keep it open but they probably see it as a pretty hard "No" which is fine because I'm pretty sure we're not relocating to Sacramento right now.
The State would likely benefit greatly from your skill set and drive as evidenced by your time in the private sector.
It won't likely be a question of whether you can do the job, but whether you will want to do the job.

I'm in the private sector and have been for 30+ years and our business is basically to do outsourced public sector type projects. Most of the State's Project Managers have very little experience and almost no project development and delivery experience...the State's 20 year PM has less technical experience than my 3-5 year since degree staff. The PM once told me he appreciates my company's monthly invoices because he can completely review one in a day! And that's just a $50-$100K monthly invoice! He has also mentioned he misses "getting his hands dirty" by which he means deeper into design.

The State does have a management fast track program and I will admit it has produced some really good state leaders. You might want to ask about it. I don't know how they select candidates.

Good luck with your decision... there are a lot of pros and cons to weigh!
Thanks. I wish they'd be open to more flex/telework situations especially nowadays. The hiring manager even said the new project they're building out is all cloud-based. It would be different if we were talking about needing to access server racks at data centers but it doesn't sound like this is the case at all. I get it that face-to-face interaction is important but I've been working 5-6 years full time telework and I don't have issues with that aspect. Our team *was* doing annual on-sites back in Charlotte every year but that has since been on hold due to changes on the team and such. I don't get why state wouldn't opt for this model - let people work from home and then have them travel in quarterly if you need the face-to-face. But I'm sure all the red tape and bureaucracy won't allow for this to happen in most cases.

I have a feeling they're going to pass me up for other candidates. If they were to make an exception allowing me to telework indefinitely with the condition that I fly or travel once every couple months, I think I'd be OK with that. But I don't know how comfortable I am about uprooting the family
and relocating to Sacramento.
Don’t get too attached to this one opportunity. If it’s not the right one for you, that’s okay.

Keep at it, you’ll find one that’s a good first for your career and your family.
vfinx
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 9:35 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by vfinx »

If job stability is truly the primary goal, then I would think that some of the cash-rich tech behemoths would be more stable than the state, and would probably pay more as well. I suspect that the average Google/Apple/Microsoft employee had more job stability than the average CA state employee during the depths of the pandemic. I suppose a federal government job would be different since the feds can print money, but states have to balance their budget.
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

vfinx wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:01 pm If job stability is truly the primary goal, then I would think that some of the cash-rich tech behemoths would be more stable than the state, and would probably pay more as well. I suspect that the average Google/Apple/Microsoft employee had more job stability than the average CA state employee during the depths of the pandemic. I suppose a federal government job would be different since the feds can print money, but states have to balance their budget.

That's true. I have major imposter syndrome even thinking about applying for the tech giants. I just don't think I can get my foot in the door or get far even if I do :T
vfinx
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 9:35 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by vfinx »

jplee3 wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 12:18 am
vfinx wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:01 pm If job stability is truly the primary goal, then I would think that some of the cash-rich tech behemoths would be more stable than the state, and would probably pay more as well. I suspect that the average Google/Apple/Microsoft employee had more job stability than the average CA state employee during the depths of the pandemic. I suppose a federal government job would be different since the feds can print money, but states have to balance their budget.

That's true. I have major imposter syndrome even thinking about applying for the tech giants. I just don't think I can get my foot in the door or get far even if I do :T
If this is really the primary issue, then I highly recommend applying to 3-5 companies that you do not want to work for, and do the interviews. It will be exhausting, but it will hopefully get rid of the pedestal that you’ve put these companies on in your head. After a while, it will actually be quite boring to go through these processes, which is much better than it being nerve-wracking. You’ll probably fail a few interviews, and quickly realize how silly it was to worry about it.
CuriousJoe
Posts: 134
Joined: Tue Sep 24, 2013 4:39 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by CuriousJoe »

vfinx wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:01 pm If job stability is truly the primary goal, then I would think that some of the cash-rich tech behemoths would be more stable than the state, and would probably pay more as well. I suspect that the average Google/Apple/Microsoft employee had more job stability than the average CA state employee during the depths of the pandemic. I suppose a federal government job would be different since the feds can print money, but states have to balance their budget.
True, but federal agencies may consolidate sites/bases as austerity measures, and offer transfer to new locations. So one may have job stability but must be willing to relocate
fortunefavored
Posts: 1424
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2015 8:18 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by fortunefavored »

vfinx wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:01 pm If job stability is truly the primary goal, then I would think that some of the cash-rich tech behemoths would be more stable than the state, and would probably pay more as well. I suspect that the average Google/Apple/Microsoft employee had more job stability than the average CA state employee during the depths of the pandemic. I suppose a federal government job would be different since the feds can print money, but states have to balance their budget.
I laughed out loud at this. The tech giants regularly (if not officially, de facto) have "up or out" policies resulting in regular culls and layoffs. Additionally endless internal reorganizations can leave you without a position. If you're in high demand & top talent, you can "find a new job" - just internally instead of externally.

I don't think job security exists outside of union jobs. You need to be constantly learning, pushing and developing in tech to stay relevant and to be able to hop jobs as required. Or you find yourself in a rut at an "ok" company and hope that rut lasts. That seems to be where the OP is at - they don't want to be pushing non-stop and have allowed their value to drop.
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

fortunefavored wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 8:32 am
vfinx wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:01 pm If job stability is truly the primary goal, then I would think that some of the cash-rich tech behemoths would be more stable than the state, and would probably pay more as well. I suspect that the average Google/Apple/Microsoft employee had more job stability than the average CA state employee during the depths of the pandemic. I suppose a federal government job would be different since the feds can print money, but states have to balance their budget.
I laughed out loud at this. The tech giants regularly (if not officially, de facto) have "up or out" policies resulting in regular culls and layoffs. Additionally endless internal reorganizations can leave you without a position. If you're in high demand & top talent, you can "find a new job" - just internally instead of externally.

I don't think job security exists outside of union jobs. You need to be constantly learning, pushing and developing in tech to stay relevant and to be able to hop jobs as required. Or you find yourself in a rut at an "ok" company and hope that rut lasts. That seems to be where the OP is at - they don't want to be pushing non-stop and have allowed their value to drop.

Yea, I've gotten a little burnt out (not sure if I mentioned before but a career change has been in the back of my mind too). If anything, I'll do the bare minimum to "stay relevant" but it's tiring trying to keep up with the tech cycle after a while. I know that more training and more education (like getting a masters degree etc) would prop that value back up but I just don't know if I want to go through all that. It's a large investment of time and money that doesn't sound as motivating in my current circumstances. If anything, I'm trying to learn more automation in the current role and I'll probably try to pursue getting my CISSP (which is a lot more reasonable compared to going back to school for a masters).
Invictus002
Posts: 194
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2019 11:49 am

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by Invictus002 »

jplee3 wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 12:54 am Hey all,

Wanted to get some feedback on a situation I'm facing... currently at high-paying job with a Fortune 500 company (finance/banking) and while the pay and benefits (including fulltime WFH even before COVID) have been great, there have been many changes in the past year leading to highly questionable stability of my position. This is in engineering/tech (QA) btw. I don't hate what I do but it can be boring. Aside from that, I'm growing increasingly concerned about the higher level management decisions, which will likely impact job security. There have been numerous reports of layoffs as of late which doesn't help.

Given this, is it a bad idea to jump ship *now* and try to get a job with the state where there would be *at least* a 25% paycut and possibly more depending on experience, etc? I know state jobs are generally going to offer more stability, on the flipside.
Or should I hold out for the layoffs (I'd get probably around 10 weeks of severance) and look for something after?

I've already started applying just to put the feelers out and actually have an interview for a position with the state soon. Wanted to get some feedback especially from anyone who has made the jump from private or public to state, specifically. BTW: I'm 40 and married with two kids (5 and 4). Wife is SAHM currently and we live in a HCOL area (Orange County) currently renting and trying to wait for the housing madness to blow over lol.
I did this transition over a decade ago. It can't be better as long as the total comp is somewhat in a lower range of market. After some amount of $, life does not really change for those extra $, especially combined with pension and time off.

Can't put a $value to benefits public sector provides.
vfinx
Posts: 656
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2018 9:35 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by vfinx »

fortunefavored wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 8:32 am
vfinx wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 11:01 pm If job stability is truly the primary goal, then I would think that some of the cash-rich tech behemoths would be more stable than the state, and would probably pay more as well. I suspect that the average Google/Apple/Microsoft employee had more job stability than the average CA state employee during the depths of the pandemic. I suppose a federal government job would be different since the feds can print money, but states have to balance their budget.
I laughed out loud at this. The tech giants regularly (if not officially, de facto) have "up or out" policies resulting in regular culls and layoffs. Additionally endless internal reorganizations can leave you without a position. If you're in high demand & top talent, you can "find a new job" - just internally instead of externally.

I don't think job security exists outside of union jobs. You need to be constantly learning, pushing and developing in tech to stay relevant and to be able to hop jobs as required. Or you find yourself in a rut at an "ok" company and hope that rut lasts. That seems to be where the OP is at - they don't want to be pushing non-stop and have allowed their value to drop.
In tech, there is usually a level designated as a "career level" where it's explicitly stated that it's perfectly acceptable not to pursue further promotions. Up until that point, I suppose there is an "up or out" culture, but it's not a cut-throat mentality and more about weeding out those who probably shouldn't be in the industry to begin with. At 40, OP is already long past this threshold. I know many "lifers" in big tech, who are able to prioritize family/lifestyle and just cruise. I think it's one of the best deals around if one is not ambitious.

We're probably talking about different kinds of risk when you say that job security doesn't exist outside of union jobs. My spouse is in a large union and definitely had some sleepless nights last year. A union protects you from some of the more whimsical risk (e.g. a VP decides to shut down a project), but doesn't help much with systemic risk of a company/government just failing. Google/Microsoft/etc. have >$100B in cash, and are incredibly resilient. They can weather multi-year disruptions to their business without liquidity becoming a problem, while CA state employees faced the prospect of layoffs/furloughs just months into the pandemic.
Valuethinker
Posts: 49035
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 11:07 am

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by Valuethinker »

jplee3 wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 12:54 am Hey all,

Wanted to get some feedback on a situation I'm facing... currently at high-paying job with a Fortune 500 company (finance/banking) and while the pay and benefits (including fulltime WFH even before COVID) have been great, there have been many changes in the past year leading to highly questionable stability of my position. This is in engineering/tech (QA) btw. I don't hate what I do but it can be boring. Aside from that, I'm growing increasingly concerned about the higher level management decisions, which will likely impact job security. There have been numerous reports of layoffs as of late which doesn't help.

Given this, is it a bad idea to jump ship *now* and try to get a job with the state where there would be *at least* a 25% paycut and possibly more depending on experience, etc? I know state jobs are generally going to offer more stability, on the flipside.
Or should I hold out for the layoffs (I'd get probably around 10 weeks of severance) and look for something after?

I've already started applying just to put the feelers out and actually have an interview for a position with the state soon. Wanted to get some feedback especially from anyone who has made the jump from private or public to state, specifically. BTW: I'm 40 and married with two kids (5 and 4). Wife is SAHM currently and we live in a HCOL area (Orange County) currently renting and trying to wait for the housing madness to blow over lol.
The main advantage of a public sector job is if you are hard working and intelligent, and not too influenced by the work ethic of your colleagues, you *can* (note not *will*) manoeuvre yourself into quite interesting roles - be a "go to" guy (or gal) because people know that you make things happen for them.

However the down side of that is that many of your colleagues will work 8-5, and there won't be a lot of sanction against them if they are not productive. You can get stuck in a very boring job, counting the days to retirement ...
Tribonian
Posts: 312
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 6:33 am

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by Tribonian »

jplee3 wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 4:54 pm
Jeepergeo wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:23 pm The Tech Sector in California has pulled most capable individuals into the private sector where hard work, innovation, and efficiency are rewarded, and this has been going on for years now. What this means is that those less capable in Tech have gone to the public sector, and this too has gone on for years and now means the public sector management teams include many, longevity-promoted, less capable individuals into management.

Sure, public sector Tech needs capable, innovative, and effective staff, but the managers in Public Sector Tech don't have a clue how to lead that group. So when the Public Tech Sector needs capable and innovative work, they scream staff shortage and then outsource the work to the Private Sector Tech.

If you go to Public Tech, it is likely a one way door. If you go, go for the pension, easy hours, and many holidays, and accept that your biggest challenges will be the lack of stimulating projects, management by longevity types, and loss of credibility in the Tech profession.

Good insight. I just had the interview and it went pretty well overall. The guys interviewing me seemed to know what they were talking about (LOL) and the project the hiring manager was talking about ramping up sounded like there are lots of moving pieces of things to pickup and learn/apply. I don't how common it is to interview at the state level and hear how "promising" it is only to be sorely disappointed once hired.
Interestingly, I was asked TWICE if I'd be willing to relocate to Sacramento - once at the beginning and once at the end. I said both times that it would be open to consideration. Towards the end I asked what the impact of telework has been there and if they see telework becoming a long-term option. The hiring manager skirted and deferred the question to "it's based on what the state dictates to us" hahaha (this can't be true since some other positions I've seen clearly say "open for telework"). He went on to say that things have been positive regarding telework productivity. Then immediately after the other consulting manager (former ITM/ITS who was a long-term state employee and is on the team for short-term consultancy) asked if I'd be willing to relocate to Sacramento :| I gave him the "it's open for consideration but I'd have to check with my wife to be fair to her" answer LOL. I tried to keep it open but they probably see it as a pretty hard "No" which is fine because I'm pretty sure we're not relocating to Sacramento right now.
After living and working in Boston, Rome, Milan and elsewhere, I was reluctant to move to Sacramento but it turned out to be a great place to raise a family. (N.B. Sac Unified School District is in perpetual crisis, but neighboring districts good). 160+ miles of bike trails along the American and Sacramento Rivers. Great hospitals, large middle class supporting many great restaurants, centers for performing arts (G1 Arena new has excellent vantage points, currently rebuilding the Center for performing arts, so same acts as LA Live, off Broadway) museums etc. Easy drive to Tahoe, Yosemite, SF Bay Area. Dozens of cheap daily flights to LA and elsewhere if you wish.

You might be very comfortable owning a house in Folsom, sending your kids to excellent public schools with children of Intel engineers and taking the light rail door-to-door to downtown Sac a few times a week or month while loading both 401(k) and 457.

Sacramento has a stigma and will never be as glamorous as So Cal, but you can live very well for a lot less.
Tribonian
Posts: 312
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 6:33 am

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by Tribonian »

telework.govops.ca.gov shows the current policy which is expected to be replaced after the May Budget revise. The Administration called for 5% reduction in overhead costs, much of which was and remains reliant on telecommuting. All state agencies were directed to plan for post pandemic telecommuting and to prioritize figuring out which functions require a physical presence in the office. But no one can make commitments until after the Department of General Services promulgates the new state standard, likely after the May revise.

Good Luck!
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

Tribonian wrote: Fri Apr 09, 2021 2:38 pm
jplee3 wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 4:54 pm
Jeepergeo wrote: Thu Apr 08, 2021 3:23 pm The Tech Sector in California has pulled most capable individuals into the private sector where hard work, innovation, and efficiency are rewarded, and this has been going on for years now. What this means is that those less capable in Tech have gone to the public sector, and this too has gone on for years and now means the public sector management teams include many, longevity-promoted, less capable individuals into management.

Sure, public sector Tech needs capable, innovative, and effective staff, but the managers in Public Sector Tech don't have a clue how to lead that group. So when the Public Tech Sector needs capable and innovative work, they scream staff shortage and then outsource the work to the Private Sector Tech.

If you go to Public Tech, it is likely a one way door. If you go, go for the pension, easy hours, and many holidays, and accept that your biggest challenges will be the lack of stimulating projects, management by longevity types, and loss of credibility in the Tech profession.

Good insight. I just had the interview and it went pretty well overall. The guys interviewing me seemed to know what they were talking about (LOL) and the project the hiring manager was talking about ramping up sounded like there are lots of moving pieces of things to pickup and learn/apply. I don't how common it is to interview at the state level and hear how "promising" it is only to be sorely disappointed once hired.
Interestingly, I was asked TWICE if I'd be willing to relocate to Sacramento - once at the beginning and once at the end. I said both times that it would be open to consideration. Towards the end I asked what the impact of telework has been there and if they see telework becoming a long-term option. The hiring manager skirted and deferred the question to "it's based on what the state dictates to us" hahaha (this can't be true since some other positions I've seen clearly say "open for telework"). He went on to say that things have been positive regarding telework productivity. Then immediately after the other consulting manager (former ITM/ITS who was a long-term state employee and is on the team for short-term consultancy) asked if I'd be willing to relocate to Sacramento :| I gave him the "it's open for consideration but I'd have to check with my wife to be fair to her" answer LOL. I tried to keep it open but they probably see it as a pretty hard "No" which is fine because I'm pretty sure we're not relocating to Sacramento right now.
After living and working in Boston, Rome, Milan and elsewhere, I was reluctant to move to Sacramento but it turned out to be a great place to raise a family. (N.B. Sac Unified School District is in perpetual crisis, but neighboring districts good). 160+ miles of bike trails along the American and Sacramento Rivers. Great hospitals, large middle class supporting many great restaurants, centers for performing arts (G1 Arena new has excellent vantage points, currently rebuilding the Center for performing arts, so same acts as LA Live, off Broadway) museums etc. Easy drive to Tahoe, Yosemite, SF Bay Area. Dozens of cheap daily flights to LA and elsewhere if you wish.

You might be very comfortable owning a house in Folsom, sending your kids to excellent public schools with children of Intel engineers and taking the light rail door-to-door to downtown Sac a few times a week or month while loading both 401(k) and 457.

Sacramento has a stigma and will never be as glamorous as So Cal, but you can live very well for a lot less.

Good to know - what is "N.B. Sac Unified School District btw?

The primary reason we are in our current area is for a Mandarin immersion program for the kids. Our oldest just got accepted into the program. We would feel awful having to uproot ourselves with that in mind. The only other place I've looked into moving, that has a similar immersive program (from K-12...most only go K-5 or K-6) is in the PNW, and I think that would be a very last resort move for us. I actually applied for a 'remote' position at BPA in Portland, which will be interesting if I get contacted back about it.
But in terms of things to do, Sacramento actually would be a great hub at least for myself. I love fishing and I don't think there would be a shortage of places to do that around there LOL.
Tribonian
Posts: 312
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 6:33 am

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by Tribonian »

N.B. = nota bene, or “take note.” The Sacramento Unified School District is in constant crisis- funding shortfalls, teacher layoffs and strikes, etc.

There is a substantial Chinese community in Sacramento. Our friends who have adopted 2 children from China send them to after school programs to learn Mandarin.
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

Quick update on a potential development - my current manager just texted me letting me know someone contacted him for a referral and gave me the name of the person, which he spelled wrong, but sounds an awful lot like the hiring manager who I interviewed with at the state hahaha. So I think the hiring manager is starting to ping my referral contacts and there might be a chance they extend the offer to me.

After going through the interview and contemplating it I'm still very concerned about:
1) The pay cut (It's actually going to be more like a 27% pay cut, minimum, with the current pay reduction for this year - once those are up the pay cut will be at 22%... this is *assuming* they offer a salary in the highest pay scale range for this position).
2) They will likely want me to relocate or be willing to relocate (and possibly make the offer contingent upon this) to Sacramento... it's not something I particularly would consider desirable after getting some more feedback here. We like OC and are somewhat invested in the Mandarin immersion program here that we just got our son accepted into. It would be very difficult to uproot and give that up, go to a school district with constant issues (even if there's a MIP program at one or two schools), AND take the pay cut all at the same time. There's a chance they'll allow me to WFH 'flex' (that being that I fly up every quarter or so to spend a week in Sac in person) but... I'd still be very concerned taking such a big pay cut like that where we're located now (VHCOL/HCOL area)...
JD2775
Posts: 1503
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 10:47 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by JD2775 »

jplee3 wrote: Mon Apr 19, 2021 3:28 pm Quick update on a potential development - my current manager just texted me letting me know someone contacted him for a referral and gave me the name of the person, which he spelled wrong, but sounds an awful lot like the hiring manager who I interviewed with at the state hahaha. So I think the hiring manager is starting to ping my referral contacts and there might be a chance they extend the offer to me.

After going through the interview and contemplating it I'm still very concerned about:
1) The pay cut (It's actually going to be more like a 27% pay cut, minimum, with the current pay reduction for this year - once those are up the pay cut will be at 22%... this is *assuming* they offer a salary in the highest pay scale range for this position).
2) They will likely want me to relocate or be willing to relocate (and possibly make the offer contingent upon this) to Sacramento... it's not something I particularly would consider desirable after getting some more feedback here. We like OC and are somewhat invested in the Mandarin immersion program here that we just got our son accepted into. It would be very difficult to uproot and give that up, go to a school district with constant issues (even if there's a MIP program at one or two schools), AND take the pay cut all at the same time. There's a chance they'll allow me to WFH 'flex' (that being that I fly up every quarter or so to spend a week in Sac in person) but... I'd still be very concerned taking such a big pay cut like that where we're located now (VHCOL/HCOL area)...

Little late now, but I definitely would NOT have used my current manager as a referral unless you were absolutely certain you wanted to leave. Even then I wouldn't have (is there anyone else? old coworkers etc?). If you don't get the job its going to be awkward now at your current job, unless you guys are good friends and he "gets it". It doesn't sound like you even want this other job. Sounds like you got yourself into a tough situation. Good luck.
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

JD2775 wrote: Mon Apr 19, 2021 4:09 pm
jplee3 wrote: Mon Apr 19, 2021 3:28 pm Quick update on a potential development - my current manager just texted me letting me know someone contacted him for a referral and gave me the name of the person, which he spelled wrong, but sounds an awful lot like the hiring manager who I interviewed with at the state hahaha. So I think the hiring manager is starting to ping my referral contacts and there might be a chance they extend the offer to me.

After going through the interview and contemplating it I'm still very concerned about:
1) The pay cut (It's actually going to be more like a 27% pay cut, minimum, with the current pay reduction for this year - once those are up the pay cut will be at 22%... this is *assuming* they offer a salary in the highest pay scale range for this position).
2) They will likely want me to relocate or be willing to relocate (and possibly make the offer contingent upon this) to Sacramento... it's not something I particularly would consider desirable after getting some more feedback here. We like OC and are somewhat invested in the Mandarin immersion program here that we just got our son accepted into. It would be very difficult to uproot and give that up, go to a school district with constant issues (even if there's a MIP program at one or two schools), AND take the pay cut all at the same time. There's a chance they'll allow me to WFH 'flex' (that being that I fly up every quarter or so to spend a week in Sac in person) but... I'd still be very concerned taking such a big pay cut like that where we're located now (VHCOL/HCOL area)...

Little late now, but I definitely would NOT have used my current manager as a referral unless you were absolutely certain you wanted to leave. Even then I wouldn't have (is there anyone else? old coworkers etc?). If you don't get the job its going to be awkward now at your current job, unless you guys are good friends and he "gets it". It doesn't sound like you even want this other job. Sounds like you got yourself into a tough situation. Good luck.
Yea, my brother was saying that was a bad idea to list him - he actually was saying that the manager is creating liability by being willing to be a reference (because if things go sideways and he gives a reference that isn't as 'stellar' or influences the decision unfavorably, I could potentially come back and sue the company). The reason I listed him was because, at the time, he was my prior manager (I was producing deliverables for his team but just not reporting to him directly) - I actually asked him if I could use him as a reference back then and he had no objections. We still have a good working relationship and we have developed a good rapport there as well as at a personal level too. I previously expressed to him my dissatisfaction having been transferred out of his team prior and how I was then having to report to another manager who lacked direction. I even asked him, if he ever saw a position open back up/vacany on his immediate team, if he'd take me into consideration for it (and he did, as a position opened but but it didn't pan out due to higher level issues the company blocked that went over his head). I was reporting to this other manager for the past year and he knew I wasn't happy and wanted out of the team, whether that was by going back to his team or leaving the company. It's just that the timing of all this is all screwed up - I got pulled back into his group last week in a recent turn of events. Honestly, I wasn't anticipating that they would continue moving forward - usually when they get to the references part that's a big thing (at least from what I understand) and means there's a good chance they'll make an offer once they clear this 'hurdle'

The other big factor with all this is that the company's reputation has gone down the drain in the past several years. Most people, if they had the choice I believe, would not give second thought on bailing. I can tell my manager is also not ecstatic about this and is just playing "keep alive" in the current climate. I think he was trying to keep a couple of us afloat with him too. In fact, my immediate peer got stuck with the old manager and is very unhappy about that... *if* I were to leave I think my manager would then seek to pull him over as backfill. I'm not trying to justify all this but just trying to think through the overall context of the situation and why I think he would be pretty understanding of the circumstances. Normally I wouldn't ever consider using a current manager as a reference.

But yea, I should have just left him out of the fray completely -- lesson learned.
Last edited by jplee3 on Mon Apr 19, 2021 4:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Tribonian
Posts: 312
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 6:33 am

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by Tribonian »

Checking references means you are definitely “reachable” per civil service rules.

Just FYI, Sacramento also has immersion in Mandarin:
https://www.scusd.edu/program/william-l ... on-program
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

Tribonian wrote: Mon Apr 19, 2021 4:50 pm Checking references means you are definitely “reachable” per civil service rules.

Just FYI, Sacramento also has immersion in Mandarin:
https://www.scusd.edu/program/william-l ... on-program
I'm not sure I understand what is meant by "reachable" here. Can you elaborate?

I did see the immersion program offered. Aside from the various notes of instability throughout the Sacramento school district, that makes things slightly more appealing. But still likely not enough to consider this a "no brainer"
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

Update: I was extended an offer but there were no details provided about the salary amount, benefits or relocation requirement (or if they'll allow work from home indefinitely). I requested details on these items. I'm still leaning towards not going through with it but we'll see...
Thegame14
Posts: 1879
Joined: Mon May 07, 2018 11:53 am

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by Thegame14 »

jplee3 wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 12:54 am Hey all,

Wanted to get some feedback on a situation I'm facing... currently at high-paying job with a Fortune 500 company (finance/banking) and while the pay and benefits (including fulltime WFH even before COVID) have been great, there have been many changes in the past year leading to highly questionable stability of my position. This is in engineering/tech (QA) btw. I don't hate what I do but it can be boring. Aside from that, I'm growing increasingly concerned about the higher level management decisions, which will likely impact job security. There have been numerous reports of layoffs as of late which doesn't help.

Given this, is it a bad idea to jump ship *now* and try to get a job with the state where there would be *at least* a 25% paycut and possibly more depending on experience, etc? I know state jobs are generally going to offer more stability, on the flipside.
Or should I hold out for the layoffs (I'd get probably around 10 weeks of severance) and look for something after?

I've already started applying just to put the feelers out and actually have an interview for a position with the state soon. Wanted to get some feedback especially from anyone who has made the jump from private or public to state, specifically. BTW: I'm 40 and married with two kids (5 and 4). Wife is SAHM currently and we live in a HCOL area (Orange County) currently renting and trying to wait for the housing madness to blow over lol.
to me you cant beat stability and benefits, I expect inflation to go up a lot in the future so a job with COLA could outpace a private sector job as well as have better benefits, more stability and of course state retirement plans cant be beat.
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

Thegame14 wrote: Mon Apr 19, 2021 11:57 pm
jplee3 wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 12:54 am Hey all,

Wanted to get some feedback on a situation I'm facing... currently at high-paying job with a Fortune 500 company (finance/banking) and while the pay and benefits (including fulltime WFH even before COVID) have been great, there have been many changes in the past year leading to highly questionable stability of my position. This is in engineering/tech (QA) btw. I don't hate what I do but it can be boring. Aside from that, I'm growing increasingly concerned about the higher level management decisions, which will likely impact job security. There have been numerous reports of layoffs as of late which doesn't help.

Given this, is it a bad idea to jump ship *now* and try to get a job with the state where there would be *at least* a 25% paycut and possibly more depending on experience, etc? I know state jobs are generally going to offer more stability, on the flipside.
Or should I hold out for the layoffs (I'd get probably around 10 weeks of severance) and look for something after?

I've already started applying just to put the feelers out and actually have an interview for a position with the state soon. Wanted to get some feedback especially from anyone who has made the jump from private or public to state, specifically. BTW: I'm 40 and married with two kids (5 and 4). Wife is SAHM currently and we live in a HCOL area (Orange County) currently renting and trying to wait for the housing madness to blow over lol.
to me you cant beat stability and benefits, I expect inflation to go up a lot in the future so a job with COLA could outpace a private sector job as well as have better benefits, more stability and of course state retirement plans cant be beat.
I think it depends on the private sector job you have and if the what the year of year promotions and or inflationary increases are like. Also, if the demand for your skillset is high enough to where you can easily jump from company to company (especially FANG and the likes), there's probably not much to worry about I guess. It seems expanding your skillset/education is primarily what creates stability for private sector jobs. Whereas with state/federal jobs once you're in, you're pretty much in and you don't have to worry about furthering your education (unless you're really driven to) if you just want something stable and don't care much about promotions.
State benefits, especially health, I think are generally better than *many* private companies but I wouldn't say for all - don't some private sector companies fully cover healthcare costs? Although, if you work for LA county they give you an additional voucher that pretty much covers your monthly premium and then some (if you choose Kaiser, for instance).


BTW: The hiring manager responded to my request on salary and said that the final number is subject to HR's review of my experience and credentials. It seems like I won't know the exact number until after I accept/sign the dotted line. This seems inherently risky...
Jacotus
Posts: 586
Joined: Sun Jun 14, 2009 2:07 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by Jacotus »

jplee3 wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 12:04 pm BTW: The hiring manager responded to my request on salary and said that the final number is subject to HR's review of my experience and credentials. It seems like I won't know the exact number until after I accept/sign the dotted line. This seems inherently risky...
That can't be real. Nobody accepts a job without knowing the compensation and benefits. It's not a serious offer until you know those things, and you should treat it as such.
oldfatguy
Posts: 1434
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 12:38 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by oldfatguy »

Jacotus wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 12:23 pm
jplee3 wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 12:04 pm BTW: The hiring manager responded to my request on salary and said that the final number is subject to HR's review of my experience and credentials. It seems like I won't know the exact number until after I accept/sign the dotted line. This seems inherently risky...
That can't be real. Nobody accepts a job without knowing the compensation and benefits. It's not a serious offer until you know those things, and you should treat it as such.
Agreed. Something fishy here.
Tribonian
Posts: 312
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2017 6:33 am

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by Tribonian »

It’s probably real that the hiring manager does not yet know what HR will ultimately determine, but the manager should not expect an answer from you until all pertinent details are clarified.
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

Tribonian wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 12:36 pm It’s probably real that the hiring manager does not yet know what HR will ultimately determine, but the manager should not expect an answer from you until all pertinent details are clarified.
He is calling it a "tentative offer pending reference checks. personnel file review and HR approvals" so maybe that's all part of it. Yet in the same email he asked for my written response to "accept the offer" in order to move forward.

But for me, in order to move forward I need those numbers (as well as a solid answer on the telework situation). I'm going to speak with him on the phone later to hopefully clear all this up.

Regardless, I have a feeling I may pass the opportunity up - this was a good way to go through the hiring process/experience and gauge my own 'marketability' and I think will be the first time I reject a job offer. It's just really difficult to accept taking the pay cut especially with the recent changes at my current position (I've moved back under my former manager who I enjoy working with/for but stability is still questionable due to a lot of upper management decisions and company reputation)
That said, there's still a lot I can do to improve my own marketability though... I've sent my resume out over a dozen times and this is the only interview I've received.
Lexx
Posts: 376
Joined: Mon Dec 21, 2020 5:21 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by Lexx »

I'm not in tech, but I do know of 3 people that quite their private practice dentistry careers to go work for the state of California. One guy actually dropped out of a surgical specialty residency to go become a police officer. All of them are making really good salaries (the cop is making over $200k/yr). The dentists are making well above that. MD's are making over $400k/yr. They all tell me it's a cakewalk as in zero pressure at all. Get called back to handle an emergency? You get massive overtime. Retirement benefits are huge and ironclad. In fact during the last recession, it was my state employee retiree patients who were vacationing and having the time of their lives because their pension checks kept rolling in. My brother had a friend quit his private sector engineering job to go work for the city of San Francisco. He said he was getting complaints from his new co-workers "stop working so fast, you're making us look bad!" So my impression is folks don't go into government jobs for career fulfillment as much as they do for the benefits and low pressure environment.
User avatar
baconavocado
Posts: 787
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2017 3:03 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by baconavocado »

Maybe rather than reject it outright, tell them you'll accept if they meet your current salary (probably unlikely for them)?

Way back when, before I knew how government jobs worked, I rejected an offer from a university because I thought the compensation was too low. The researcher I had interviewed with phoned me up and called me every name in the book. I felt like I had dodged a bullet after that interaction.

In any case, I think you're making the right decision by passing this up.
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

baconavocado wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 1:30 pm Maybe rather than reject it outright, tell them you'll accept if they meet your current salary (probably unlikely for them)?

Way back when, before I knew how government jobs worked, I rejected an offer from a university because I thought the compensation was too low. The researcher I had interviewed with phoned me up and called me every name in the book. I felt like I had dodged a bullet after that interaction.

In any case, I think you're making the right decision by passing this up.

LOL nice - yea, I probably won't do that. I knew very well, up front, what the salary ranges are going into it :) At that time I was more willing to jump because I didn't like the outlook with the prior team. So part of this was a desperation move.
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

Lexx wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 1:23 pm I'm not in tech, but I do know of 3 people that quite their private practice dentistry careers to go work for the state of California. One guy actually dropped out of a surgical specialty residency to go become a police officer. All of them are making really good salaries (the cop is making over $200k/yr). The dentists are making well above that. MD's are making over $400k/yr. They all tell me it's a cakewalk as in zero pressure at all. Get called back to handle an emergency? You get massive overtime. Retirement benefits are huge and ironclad. In fact during the last recession, it was my state employee retiree patients who were vacationing and having the time of their lives because their pension checks kept rolling in. My brother had a friend quit his private sector engineering job to go work for the city of San Francisco. He said he was getting complaints from his new co-workers "stop working so fast, you're making us look bad!" So my impression is folks don't go into government jobs for career fulfillment as much as they do for the benefits and low pressure environment.
I believe if you're in medicine, law or law enforcement/public safety, government positions are definitely one of the ways to go if you want low stress/low pressure but really great benefits. The pay for medical, even if lower than private or hospitals, will still be stupid money (just less stupid than working at a private hospital or whatever) but quality of life will still be really great and you'll have job stability while being paid really well. I think with tech and many other roles, it's not quite the same unless you're at a managerial or director level coming over to the state.
oldfatguy
Posts: 1434
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2018 12:38 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by oldfatguy »

jplee3 wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 1:17 pm
Tribonian wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 12:36 pm It’s probably real that the hiring manager does not yet know what HR will ultimately determine, but the manager should not expect an answer from you until all pertinent details are clarified.
He is calling it a "tentative offer pending reference checks. personnel file review and HR approvals" so maybe that's all part of it. Yet in the same email he asked for my written response to "accept the offer" in order to move forward.
I've never heard of a job offer like that, public or private, and there is no way I would give an answer without full details of all compensation.

Just a guess, but it seems like the hiring manager doesn't want to go through the effort/process of putting you forward as the candidate to hire if he thinks you are going to turn the job down. This would be a huge red flag to me.
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

oldfatguy wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 1:51 pm
jplee3 wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 1:17 pm
Tribonian wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 12:36 pm It’s probably real that the hiring manager does not yet know what HR will ultimately determine, but the manager should not expect an answer from you until all pertinent details are clarified.
He is calling it a "tentative offer pending reference checks. personnel file review and HR approvals" so maybe that's all part of it. Yet in the same email he asked for my written response to "accept the offer" in order to move forward.
I've never heard of a job offer like that, public or private, and there is no way I would give an answer without full details of all compensation.

Just a guess, but it seems like the hiring manager doesn't want to go through the effort/process of putting you forward as the candidate to hire if he thinks you are going to turn the job down. This would be a huge red flag to me.
I thought it was a little strange. He could be tentative with me because of the whole telework thing. I think I mentioned this before but when I interviewed with them each interviewer asked me if I was willing to relocate (once at the beginning of the interview and then once at the end before hanging up). I thought it was a little odd they were discretely pushing it on me, considering there's a full webpage dedicated to outlining telework policies here - https://www.calhr.ca.gov/employees/Page ... olicy.aspx
Furthermore, the hiring manager deferred to telework being at the discretion and direction of the state office as far as whether they will mandate returning to work in office. It seems relatively clear to me that telework options are at the discretion of each group and team...

So I think it actually may have more to do with their preference that I show up "butt in seat" once it's safe to return to office than it does anything else but I could just be making assumptions. Maybe, as tribonian is saying, he really doesn't know what range HR is going to put me in. It sounds like you can actually negotiate what range you are in but there's no way I'm going to accept an offer and try to negotiate that after the fact.
ahmadcpa
Posts: 150
Joined: Sun Sep 23, 2012 5:58 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by ahmadcpa »

A governmental job isn't much of a difference compared to a private industry client if you're asking about the pay. I work with governments and for profits and the trick is in the benefits. At a fortune 500, you still have to contribute to a 401K yet a government will contribute on your behalf, guarantee the retirement amount and adjust it for COLA. Your retirement bonus at a government is cashing out a $100K in accumulated vacation. Health insurance is great during employment and post-employment. Some even offer health insurance till death. It's crazy!

The only problem with a governmental job is politics. Unbearable in some instances. Very bureaucratic. Multiple signatures required, multiple reviews over decisions that takes a couple of seconds to make in the for profit industry. I would think a governmental job is good for someone who is in his fifties with about ten years until retirement. Many who comes from private industry at a young age end up leaving.
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

ahmadcpa wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 2:05 pm A governmental job isn't much of a difference compared to a private industry client if you're asking about the pay. I work with governments and for profits and the trick is in the benefits. At a fortune 500, you still have to contribute to a 401K yet a government will contribute on your behalf, guarantee the retirement amount and adjust it for COLA. Your retirement bonus at a government is cashing out a $100K in accumulated vacation. Health insurance is great during employment and post-employment. Some even offer health insurance till death. It's crazy!

The only problem with a governmental job is politics. Unbearable in some instances. Very bureaucratic. Multiple signatures required, multiple reviews over decisions that takes a couple of seconds to make in the for profit industry. I would think a governmental job is good for someone who is in his fifties with about ten years until retirement. Many who comes from private industry at a young age end up leaving.
Is that the same for state though? I'm pretty sure state doesn't contribute anything to your retirement account - my understanding was that CalPERS pension is the "contribution" towards your retirement assuming some or all of it vests. They do have the 457b that you can contribute to, which I guess is the 'better' equivalent of a 401k since you can withdraw early from it at no penalty (? I thought I heard).
BerkeleyChris
Posts: 104
Joined: Sat Feb 09, 2013 10:23 am

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by BerkeleyChris »

The California state budget is a rollercoaster and so are legislative priorities. If you go for a state job, do it because you love public service and want to give back -- not because you want comfort or security. Be prepared for furloughs, layoffs, taking on the duties of others who were let go or not replaced in retirement, salary freezes, compensation that is decoupled from merit and accomplishments, public disclosure of your finances and communications, inadequate resources to get the job done the way you could in the private sector. Having worked in both the public and private sector, I have found greater personal reward in the public sector and greater financial reward and security in the private sector.
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

I just spoke with the hiring manager on the phone... some salient points of consideration:

1) He was telling me that he and the rest of the leadership in his department are very much open to the idea of telework - in short: he would be fine with me teleworking but....
1b) with the caveat that any future requirements there are to meet in person, I would *not* be reimbursed for travel/commute (and presumably food and lodging) expenses
1c) I pointed out the policy for telework and reimbursements (https://www.calhr.ca.gov/employees/Page ... olicy.aspx and https://www.calhr.ca.gov/employees/Page ... ments.aspx) and he
was reminding me that the travel reimbursement is strictly for the purpose of training type events, in which case showing up for an on-site meeting is not under the umbrella of (thinking about this, I don't see why he
couldn't just budget for "all team training" once or twice a year and that way I could get reimbursement, even if it's partial)


2) The position is EXEMPT so there is no overtime. He countered that by saying that they are very flexible and would come up with arrangements to 'make up' for any time worked outside hours (sounded like comp time) They are very "conscious of work/life balance" and try to honor it based on what he was saying. I'm not sure what the time keeping process is with the state but per the telework policy it seems you have to fill out a daily time card/report..?

3) The salary numbers are currently being worked on by HR and he told me it would take probably 2-3 days or so for them to get the exact number/compensation. I told him this is very important for me to be able to viably make a decision but also hinted that it is not the only thing dictating whether or not I will take the position.

NOTE: Regarding the telework situation, the hiring manager told me at first that as they slowly open things back up for "return to office" he may want to meet in person more frequently but he was not divulging much about how often that would be. At first he said maybe twice or every month. Then as we talked more about telework/remote work and my current situation his tone slightly changed to being "more flexible" and maybe asking for in person meetings once or twice a year or once a quarter.

I should say that I have it in my mind that I'm very much leaning towards NOT taking the position just due to the pay reduction concern. While I understand the state benefits are mostly great, it would still be difficult to make a sensible justification to drop down from my current salary.

EDIT: just saw the snippet regarding "commute" in the midst of telework -
"Expenses Incurred While Working a Telework Schedule
Expenses incurred as a result of working a telework schedule will not be reimbursed by the State including, but not limited to, the following: usage fees for privately owned computers, utility costs associated with the use of telephone, computer or occupation of the home, or travel to the Central office if required to come in on a telework day."

So it also sounds like they may not provide a work computer/laptop or phone and that I'd have to use my personal computer and VPN in? Not sure how I feel about that as currently I have a dedicate work laptop and phone.
User avatar
dziuniek
Posts: 1402
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 2:54 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by dziuniek »

I work for a specific field not really found outside of state employment - aka public utility regulation.
The folks I work with have very specific knowledge that is:

a) not really easily transferable elsewhere
b) hard to get

So to me, everyone outside of my state agency is a paper pusher and not the other way around. :sharebeer
Get rich or die tryin'
BogleFan510
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2020 2:13 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by BogleFan510 »

removed by author
Last edited by BogleFan510 on Fri Jul 09, 2021 6:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Topic Author
jplee3
Posts: 1755
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:15 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by jplee3 »

BogleFan510 wrote: Tue Apr 20, 2021 7:46 pm
calwatch wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 12:31 pm Every agency is different and has different work cultures so it's worth an interview. Some are more go-getting private sector based and innovative, while others are less comfortable with change and more bureaucratic.

On the benefit/pension side, one aspect not mentioned is reciprocity. You could work in the state and move to other public sector jobs in the state and still have your pension calculated based on your final three years' salary, provided that you don't overlap and your gap between jobs is no more than six months. Most small cities are also members of CalPERS but some aren't. Most of the big counties are on their own retirement system. https://www.calpers.ca.gov/docs/forms-p ... ystems.pdf

While the State of California pays into Social Security most local and county governments don't. Given that you don't have 30 years of substantial income, but the years of substantial income are not negligible, this is something to keep in mind. The State has an option to pay less into a pension with an optional "second tier" bu most people do better staying with the normal "first tier" and having a larger guaranteed benefit.
This is good advice. You might check out agency employee reviews at Glassdoor.com. Consider that counties, cities, state and quasi state entities all exist (e.g. regional parks, transit agencies, toll authorities, development groups, planning groups, water and sewer, compliance, insurance, housing etc.). Each has their own culture and qualities and might be worth consideration.

Govt is an elephant with many parts and some comments suggest the fable of the blind person who only touched the tail, tusk, or leg.
I looked up this particular division/dept and it's pretty small - I only saw two reviews. One 4 star and one 1 star haha. The 4 star reviewer said they have interesting and innovative projects but seemed to indicate a poor outlook on management/leadership and even indicated "doesn't recommend" with a "neutral outlook" (this was back in May). The 1 star review is from 2018 and was from a contractor - they were complaining about the manager not being very good. But interestingly, the same reviewer said it's a good place to work as a developer. The work seemed relatively interesting and I think would sharpen some of my skillset but at the cost of a pretty hefty paycut.

It's slightly discouraging because I've sent my resume out to over a dozen other places and this is literally the only interview (and offer) I've received.
BogleFan510
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Aug 04, 2020 2:13 pm

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by BogleFan510 »

removed by author
Last edited by BogleFan510 on Fri Jul 09, 2021 6:11 pm, edited 2 times in total.
ADower
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 10:45 am

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by ADower »

jplee3 wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 12:54 am Hey all,

Wanted to get some feedback on a situation I'm facing... currently at high-paying job with a Fortune 500 company (finance/banking) and while the pay and benefits (including fulltime WFH even before COVID) have been great, there have been many changes in the past year leading to highly questionable stability of my position. This is in engineering/tech (QA) btw. I don't hate what I do but it can be boring. Aside from that, I'm growing increasingly concerned about the higher level management decisions, which will likely impact job security. There have been numerous reports of layoffs as of late which doesn't help.

Given this, is it a bad idea to jump ship *now* and try to get a job with the state where there would be *at least* a 25% paycut and possibly more depending on experience, etc? I know state jobs are generally going to offer more stability, on the flipside.
Or should I hold out for the layoffs (I'd get probably around 10 weeks of severance) and look for something after?

I've already started applying just to put the feelers out and actually have an interview for a position with the state soon. Wanted to get some feedback especially from anyone who has made the jump from private or public to state, specifically. BTW: I'm 40 and married with two kids (5 and 4). Wife is SAHM currently and we live in a HCOL area (Orange County) currently renting and trying to wait for the housing madness to blow over lol.
My wife's friend is a civil engineer with the state of CA. If you're even remotely motivated you can get into management easily. She makes 145K. The pay isn't as bad as you think.
Last edited by ADower on Wed Apr 21, 2021 8:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
ADower
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 10:45 am

Re: Taking a paycut for a more stable state job (CA)?

Post by ADower »

neverpanic wrote: Wed Apr 07, 2021 6:37 pm I never knew any state employees in CA who hated their retirement or medical benefits. None are rich or famous, but they were comfortable enough through their 30s and 40s, then were well-positioned for retirement once they hit their mid-50s.

I went on a little getaway to a small, coastal town in CA last month and had a chat over coffee with a former state worker I'd just met. He said he had retired at 55. By appearances, I thought he might be early 60s. He said he'd recently turned 74. That's just one retiree and it's possible he hit the lottery on everything health-wise, but from an outsider's perspective, I think there has to be some value in not having the stress of worrying about job security, especially as we get older.

This is all anecdotal. YMMV, but it's worth a thought.
My wife and I are both state workers. Our pensions combined when retired will be nearly 180K.
Post Reply