The great FIRE resignation?

Non-investing personal finance issues including insurance, credit, real estate, taxes, employment and legal issues such as trusts and wills.
User avatar
jh
Posts: 1998
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 11:36 am
Location: USA

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by jh »

.....
Last edited by jh on Tue Jan 18, 2022 3:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Retired in 2022 at the age of 46. Living off of dividends.
Firemenot
Posts: 1496
Joined: Wed Apr 01, 2020 8:48 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by Firemenot »

I don’t know anyone that FIRE resigned during Covid.
michaeljc70
Posts: 10837
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 3:53 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by michaeljc70 »

jh wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 3:31 pm
michaeljc70 wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 8:46 am
jh wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 10:40 pm This is why pensions suck. Any younger people that read this. Do not work for an employer that still uses a pension system. Take control of your own money.
There are some very lucrative pensions out there so I wouldn't put them all in the same category. In some jobs, like a teacher that doesn't plan on moving, it is pretty natural to stay in one district/pension system your whole career. Of course, all pensions are different. Some things I have seen though:

-Pensions that you are promoted on your last day so your pension is goosed for the rest of your life.
-Very generous pensions that the employee doesn't contribute anything.
-Pensions where a spouse that never worked a day in their life can collect 50% of the working spouse's pension. (My parents have this).
-Pensions with COLAs higher than the rate of inflation.

Some public pensions are very lucrative if you suddenly make a lot more in the last few years of your career. For example, I know a teacher/principal that became an interim superintendent for a short period. Pension is $180k- way more than they made except the last year of their career.
I agree that pensions can be very nice, but that just makes the situation more difficult. Once you get locked into one you are not going to want to leave.

"-Pensions that you are promoted on your last day so your pension is goosed for the rest of your life.
-Very generous pensions that the employee doesn't contribute anything.
-Pensions where a spouse that never worked a day in their life can collect 50% of the working spouse's pension. (My parents have this).
-Pensions with COLAs higher than the rate of inflation."

My pension has the last three items already. Its possible I could get the first one as well, who knows.

In hindsight I still think it is a trap and people are better off getting a generous 401k match, and maintaining their independence.

My employer has essentially no 401k match. Because of that I focused on building up my money in a taxable brokerage account, where I have roughly $800k and only put roughly $200k into the 401k/Roth 401k/Roth IRA. I'll be focusing on the Roth 401k and Roth IRA going forward as my taxable dividend income is now almost equivalent to my living expenses, and I don't need to get it any higher.

I'll stop commenting on the pension stuff as I don't want to hijack this message thread anymore than I have already.
I don't know where you (or the original poster about pensions being golden handcuffs work), but most pensions aren't all or none. For example, after 5 years of working for the federal government, your pension vests. Obviously if you work for them for 5 years you aren't going to get a big pension. But that is added to everything else (other pensions, IRA, 401k, Roth IRA, taxable savings, SS, etc.) I know someone that worked for the county and state government, taught part time at a college and worked in the corporate world for the first 10 years of their career. They are getting 4 pensions+SS.

As someone that was mostly self-employed (sometimes technically an employee, but paid hourly), I contributed to my 401k for the tax advantages. Only once in my career did I ever get to the point of getting any 401k matching vest and it was a trivial amount.
jharkin
Posts: 3469
Joined: Mon Mar 28, 2016 7:14 am
Location: Boston suburbs

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by jharkin »

jh wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 10:40 pm
This is why pensions suck. Any younger people that read this. Do not work for an employer that still uses a pension system. Take control of your own money.
If you sit down and do the math of the return rate that calculates out from the pension I think you would change your mind. Almost no other investment vehicles exist with such a high rerun to risk ratio other than social security… There is a reason industry started dropping them as soon as there was a viable alternative - putting the responsibility on employees (401k ) is MUCH cheaper for the business.

Fact is you don’t like your job, pension has nothing to do with it. If I where you I would leave, as long as the pension is vested so you get a partial you are not loosing anything ( and invested pensions often payout lump sum so even that is not as bad as it sounds)
User avatar
jh
Posts: 1998
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 11:36 am
Location: USA

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by jh »

.....
Last edited by jh on Tue Jan 18, 2022 3:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Retired in 2022 at the age of 46. Living off of dividends.
User avatar
jh
Posts: 1998
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 11:36 am
Location: USA

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by jh »

.....
Last edited by jh on Tue Jan 18, 2022 3:37 am, edited 1 time in total.
Retired in 2022 at the age of 46. Living off of dividends.
SnowBog
Posts: 4680
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 10:21 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by SnowBog »

michaeljc70 wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 3:40 pm
jh wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 3:31 pm
michaeljc70 wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 8:46 am
jh wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 10:40 pm This is why pensions suck. Any younger people that read this. Do not work for an employer that still uses a pension system. Take control of your own money.
There are some very lucrative pensions out there so I wouldn't put them all in the same category. In some jobs, like a teacher that doesn't plan on moving, it is pretty natural to stay in one district/pension system your whole career. Of course, all pensions are different. Some things I have seen though:

-Pensions that you are promoted on your last day so your pension is goosed for the rest of your life.
-Very generous pensions that the employee doesn't contribute anything.
-Pensions where a spouse that never worked a day in their life can collect 50% of the working spouse's pension. (My parents have this).
-Pensions with COLAs higher than the rate of inflation.

Some public pensions are very lucrative if you suddenly make a lot more in the last few years of your career. For example, I know a teacher/principal that became an interim superintendent for a short period. Pension is $180k- way more than they made except the last year of their career.
I agree that pensions can be very nice, but that just makes the situation more difficult. Once you get locked into one you are not going to want to leave.

"-Pensions that you are promoted on your last day so your pension is goosed for the rest of your life.
-Very generous pensions that the employee doesn't contribute anything.
-Pensions where a spouse that never worked a day in their life can collect 50% of the working spouse's pension. (My parents have this).
-Pensions with COLAs higher than the rate of inflation."

My pension has the last three items already. Its possible I could get the first one as well, who knows.

In hindsight I still think it is a trap and people are better off getting a generous 401k match, and maintaining their independence.

My employer has essentially no 401k match. Because of that I focused on building up my money in a taxable brokerage account, where I have roughly $800k and only put roughly $200k into the 401k/Roth 401k/Roth IRA. I'll be focusing on the Roth 401k and Roth IRA going forward as my taxable dividend income is now almost equivalent to my living expenses, and I don't need to get it any higher.

I'll stop commenting on the pension stuff as I don't want to hijack this message thread anymore than I have already.
I don't know where you (or the original poster about pensions being golden handcuffs work), but most pensions aren't all or none. For example, after 5 years of working for the federal government, your pension vests. Obviously if you work for them for 5 years you aren't going to get a big pension. But that is added to everything else (other pensions, IRA, 401k, Roth IRA, taxable savings, SS, etc.) I know someone that worked for the county and state government, taught part time at a college and worked in the corporate world for the first 10 years of their career. They are getting 4 pensions+SS.

As someone that was mostly self-employed (sometimes technically an employee, but paid hourly), I contributed to my 401k for the tax advantages. Only once in my career did I ever get to the point of getting any 401k matching vest and it was a trivial amount.
Personally, I worked for two companies in the private sector many years ago that had pensions. I am vested in both (and they both closed to new hires shortly after I got in). In those cases (best as I can recall), it was a straight % of salary contributed that grew at a straight defined benefit. The more you made and/or the longer you worked, your benefits scaled accordingly. So in these cases, other than getting harder (if not impossible in the private sector) to find employers with pensions, to some extent you are right - you could leave at any time and get a prorated portion of your pension.

But government pensions seem to be back end weighted.

To use your example, yes the person you know could have potentially received a pension from working for the city/county. But if they did so at the latter end of their career, they would receive far more than the beginning of their career. Often, the payout is some measure of top X years pay, which works out much better if later during higher paid years. Some pensions also have years of service and/or age as parameters as well.

Arguably, the idea is to retain talent by rewarding them for sticking around. Which is not dissimilar to RSUs/ISOs in the private sector.

While these can be very rewarding, I think the caution is try not to be dependent on them. If the only way your retirement plan works is by using these sorts of employer benefits, you arguably haven't been saving enough. As a result, you can end up "trapped" with your employer, and worse you can end up with a failed plan of your employer let's you go before you hit the point you needed.

So while I think people should absolutely leverage these sorts of benefits when available to them, your first responsibility is to take control over your savings needs and ensure you have a plan that works even if you decide to leave (or are let go unexpectedly) from the employer.
RichardRoman
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Jan 15, 2022 12:12 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by RichardRoman »

Wannaretireearly wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:58 am
RichardRoman wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 3:08 am
FIRE-adjacent, maybe. 😃 Mid-life crises and a pandemic helped put things into perspective. Looking back at my work history, I have a tendency to take a year long break every ten years or so. I have been very fortunate to have taken these breaks and such a long break this time. This is the first time spouse has not worked since they were 15 and has been focusing on building amps, pedals, etc. Stuff they find interesting.

Is your workplace amenable to your taking a sabbatical?
Nope. I haven’t seen it offered or anyone take this kind of personal break. Only thing close would be some kind of medical leave or absence to look after a family member.

Great that you’ve been able to take major breaks every 10 years!

I’d like one perhaps in a few years, just to test-drive early retirement :)
Can you ask for something like this without repercussions? Maybe I’m being naive, but if you’re a valuable and valued employee, workplaces will sometimes accommodate an ask for a couple of months off (un/paid). Or even part-time (3/9hr days versus 5/8hrs or whatever your schedule is)? A test drive or just a refresh. Either way, you get some time to think and be at your own pace.
ponyboy
Posts: 1224
Joined: Fri Feb 06, 2015 9:39 am

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by ponyboy »

I can only name one person who resigned during covid. And she had a baby she was staying home with. Not sure if the "great resignation" is even true
chipperd
Posts: 1674
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2011 5:58 am
Location: here and now

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by chipperd »

ponyboy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 4:23 am I can only name one person who resigned during covid. And she had a baby she was staying home with. Not sure if the "great resignation" is even true
Anecdotes aren't data:

https://www.statista.com/chart/26186/nu ... ed-states/

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/ ... -year.aspx
"A portfolio is like a bar of soap, the more it's handled, the less there is." Dr. William Bernstein
Ivygirl
Posts: 1212
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 1:36 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by Ivygirl »

Sharing an article that I think is spot-on: what is called "burnout" at work is in large part the effects of "moral injury" - participating in work that requires the worker to do immoral or harmful things on an ongoing basis. Or even just things that make no rational sense at all.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/car ... hp&pc=U531

Explains why the "appointment with a virtual shrink" and "conversation circles" and "yoga at noon" approach to employee burnout isn't working. Because it isn't burnout. It's moral distress.

On the topic of FIRE resignation: maybe employees who are financially close to retirement just decide to stop working early because work hurts.
stoptothink
Posts: 15368
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 8:53 am

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by stoptothink »

ponyboy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 4:23 am I can only name one person who resigned during covid. And she had a baby she was staying home with. Not sure if the "great resignation" is even true
My n=1, multiple people in my social circle who quit or were laid off since March '20 have told me that they have no intention of working again; two of them are my siblings (aged 41 and 28). How they intend to do that (because none of them are close to FI), I have no clue.
michaeljc70
Posts: 10837
Joined: Thu Oct 15, 2015 3:53 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by michaeljc70 »

chipperd wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 5:35 am
ponyboy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 4:23 am I can only name one person who resigned during covid. And she had a baby she was staying home with. Not sure if the "great resignation" is even true
Anecdotes aren't data:

https://www.statista.com/chart/26186/nu ... ed-states/

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/ ... -year.aspx
But aren't people just taking advantage of a tight job market? That isn't surprising to me. Are they really quitting and getting jobs that are unbelievably better than their old one? If they are, won't that balance itself out as the employers losing people will need to match what the new employers are offering? The pandemic has also made people look at work from a different perspective.

As I inferred in a post above, I think there is a hidden agenda in a lot of these stories (push for unions/higher minimum wage).
fortunefavored
Posts: 1418
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2015 8:18 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by fortunefavored »

Ivygirl wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:22 am Sharing an article that I think is spot-on: what is called "burnout" at work is in large part the effects of "moral injury" - participating in work that requires the worker to do immoral or harmful things on an ongoing basis. Or even just things that make no rational sense at all.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/car ... hp&pc=U531

Explains why the "appointment with a virtual shrink" and "conversation circles" and "yoga at noon" approach to employee burnout isn't working. Because it isn't burnout. It's moral distress.

On the topic of FIRE resignation: maybe employees who are financially close to retirement just decide to stop working early because work hurts.
I had somehow missed this article, but it absolutely sums up working at a megacorp. The evil of "profit at all costs" is impossible to mask and individuals are forced to perform all sorts of morally distasteful (or pointless, at lower levels) activities to enable it.

I know I had a significant increase in "burn out" feelings when an exciting email went out that announced the company achieved a negative tax rate (at a company that claims to be ethical and societal positive) That certainly accelerated my desire to quit as soon as possible.
robphoto
Posts: 585
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2018 12:42 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by robphoto »

novolog wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:09 pm
Wannaretireearly wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 1:33 pm Has anyone here either accelerated their plans for retiring early, OR decided to take a meaningful break form work (3 to 12 months, sabbatical etc)?

I think about the latter more and more.
i can relate

i find there is a negative correlation between my net worth, and my interest in my corporate job.

our net worth jumped quite a bit over the past year, so this is relationship became much more obvious (i am fully aware we are seeing unusually high returns to equities).

if i get stressed about something at work, used to plow right through it. recently, my thought process is something a long the lines of this:

“of the total annual increase in my net worth, the portion of that increase driven by my labor is decreasing at an accelerating rate. my money is making money at a faster clip than my own labor can make money. so why am i stressing out about my job and selling my own finite time on this earth for money, when my assets are already making money? my labor is slowly becoming less and less valuable to my life every year.”

i can’t seem to escape this thought process, and i can’t help but feel it’s not healthy, but I somehow can’t not think it… because I think it’s true?
It's true for us. Still it's very hard to move from being motivated to work by the need for money, to working for the satisfaction of doing something interesting. Especially since almost all work has aspects that you only put up with for the financial reward.
punkinhead
Posts: 349
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2021 4:02 am

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by punkinhead »

michaeljc70 wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 7:33 am
But aren't people just taking advantage of a tight job market? That isn't surprising to me. Are they really quitting and getting jobs that are unbelievably better than their old one? If they are, won't that balance itself out as the employers losing people will need to match what the new employers are offering? The pandemic has also made people look at work from a different perspective.
The data shows that it's not just one demographic. Some people are trading up to better jobs. Some people are taking some time off but intend to reenter the job market, and some people (like me) have enough saved and are throwing in the towel. News articles seem to focus on one segment, such as minimum wage service industry workers, and ignore the bigger picture.
User avatar
novolog
Posts: 449
Joined: Tue Jan 30, 2018 5:24 pm
Location: Greater Boston

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by novolog »

robphoto wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 7:41 am
novolog wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:09 pm
Wannaretireearly wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 1:33 pm Has anyone here either accelerated their plans for retiring early, OR decided to take a meaningful break form work (3 to 12 months, sabbatical etc)?

I think about the latter more and more.
i can relate

i find there is a negative correlation between my net worth, and my interest in my corporate job.

our net worth jumped quite a bit over the past year, so this is relationship became much more obvious (i am fully aware we are seeing unusually high returns to equities).

if i get stressed about something at work, used to plow right through it. recently, my thought process is something a long the lines of this:

“of the total annual increase in my net worth, the portion of that increase driven by my labor is decreasing at an accelerating rate. my money is making money at a faster clip than my own labor can make money. so why am i stressing out about my job and selling my own finite time on this earth for money, when my assets are already making money? my labor is slowly becoming less and less valuable to my life every year.”

i can’t seem to escape this thought process, and i can’t help but feel it’s not healthy, but I somehow can’t not think it… because I think it’s true?
It's true for us. Still it's very hard to move from being motivated to work by the need for money, to working for the satisfaction of doing something interesting. Especially since almost all work has aspects that you only put up with for the financial reward.
a blog post that resonates w/ me: http://lackingambition.com/?p=1103
S&P 500 + Bitcoin
desiderium
Posts: 1258
Joined: Sat Jan 04, 2014 10:08 am

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by desiderium »

Ivygirl wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:22 am Sharing an article that I think is spot-on: what is called "burnout" at work is in large part the effects of "moral injury" - participating in work that requires the worker to do immoral or harmful things on an ongoing basis. Or even just things that make no rational sense at all.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/car ... hp&pc=U531

Explains why the "appointment with a virtual shrink" and "conversation circles" and "yoga at noon" approach to employee burnout isn't working. Because it isn't burnout. It's moral distress.

On the topic of FIRE resignation: maybe employees who are financially close to retirement just decide to stop working early because work hurts.
Moral injury is an active topic in medicine https://www.statnews.com/2018/07/26/phy ... al-injury/. Pre-COVID, a third of physicians suffered symptoms of burnout and the suicide rate is twice that of the general population. Everything is worse with COVID. Stress and workload are up, staffing is short, support has gone down and takes way more time and effort to get fewer things accomplished. Oh, and since most physicians are paid on production, compensation has gone down in many cases. We do have corporate email spam about tips to avoid burnout, "conversation circles"and surveys. The healthcare delivery megacorp replicates the ideology of spreadsheet reductionism and creates a refuge for management ineptitude. Pushing back is continuous and exhausting. Like many physicians I have not wanted to leave in the midst of an emergency, and to be honest, the alternatives to working haven't been that attractive.

I am optimistic (or wishfully thinking) that come spring things will look better. I've had a good run and I'm grateful for my career. Once the immediate emergency passes, I will be negotiating my exit.
randomguy
Posts: 11285
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:00 am

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by randomguy »

stoptothink wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 7:27 am
ponyboy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 4:23 am I can only name one person who resigned during covid. And she had a baby she was staying home with. Not sure if the "great resignation" is even true
My n=1, multiple people in my social circle who quit or were laid off since March '20 have told me that they have no intention of working again; two of them are my siblings (aged 41 and 28). How they intend to do that (because none of them are close to FI), I have no clue.
Isn't that the big question? For years we have been told nobody has saved enough for retirement but now all of a sudden there are enough people who are FI to matter? Seems unlikely. I have no doubt there are a bunch of the 55+ crowd who are have decided that OMY is no longer a reason to work. But I sort of doubt there are enough of them to really move the markets. I expect there are a lot more people are in the place where they can take 6 months off (helps if there is a second income to help out) and will then be off looking for a new job.
User avatar
teen persuasion
Posts: 2319
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2015 1:43 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by teen persuasion »

Ivygirl wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:22 am Sharing an article that I think is spot-on: what is called "burnout" at work is in large part the effects of "moral injury" - participating in work that requires the worker to do immoral or harmful things on an ongoing basis. Or even just things that make no rational sense at all.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/car ... hp&pc=U531

Explains why the "appointment with a virtual shrink" and "conversation circles" and "yoga at noon" approach to employee burnout isn't working. Because it isn't burnout. It's moral distress.

On the topic of FIRE resignation: maybe employees who are financially close to retirement just decide to stop working early because work hurts.
Agree, this article is very apropos.

DH struggled with teaching during the failed state rollout of Common Core, well, partially the state's rollout, partially his administration's implementation of it. Loved teaching, worried about the students (a challenged group in an alternative school), but ultimately left teaching for "just a job" because we weren't quite FI, yet. But we had enough of a base that he could just quit w/o something immediately in hand. The new job had none of the moral injury, so in a few years he had recovered his equanimity, and began to miss teaching, again. Almost immediately a position in a different agency popped up: new place, better pay and benefits, etc. He jumped back to teaching, and enjoyed it again. But old agency merged with new agency, administration hit a tough patch, then Covid and a terrible lurch into remote learning. By now we'd hit our FIRE number. DH pushed thru OMY, because "they" needed him, knowing he could quit at any time if he'd had enough. Ultimately finished out the school year, but that was it.

His experience matched very well with this from the article:
Similarly, educators currently experience deadly impacts of the pandemic and struggle with adequate resources to meet student needs. Yet, even before the pandemic, K-12 professionals reported levels of moral injury similar to that of military veterans, with teachers being distressed when forced to implement poorly researched and potentially harmful curricular and disciplinary practices.
randomguy
Posts: 11285
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:00 am

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by randomguy »

SnowBog wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 4:16 pm While these can be very rewarding, I think the caution is try not to be dependent on them. If the only way your retirement plan works is by using these sorts of employer benefits, you arguably haven't been saving enough. As a result, you can end up "trapped" with your employer, and worse you can end up with a failed plan of your employer let's you go before you hit the point you needed.

So while I think people should absolutely leverage these sorts of benefits when available to them, your first responsibility is to take control over your savings needs and ensure you have a plan that works even if you decide to leave (or are let go unexpectedly) from the employer.
If your retirement works without your pension, you have been saving too much. It makes it a tough thing to balance out if things are back loaded (i.e. 2% for year of service of the average of the last 3 years salary) a lot. You place your bets and hope things work out.

The issue with 401(k)s versus pensions has always been that companies go from contributing like 10-20% of your salary to retirement with a pension to like 5%. Pensions aren't inherently better than self directed plans but they tend to be much better funded...
SnowBog
Posts: 4680
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 10:21 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by SnowBog »

randomguy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 8:57 am
SnowBog wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 4:16 pm While these can be very rewarding, I think the caution is try not to be dependent on them. If the only way your retirement plan works is by using these sorts of employer benefits, you arguably haven't been saving enough. As a result, you can end up "trapped" with your employer, and worse you can end up with a failed plan of your employer let's you go before you hit the point you needed.

So while I think people should absolutely leverage these sorts of benefits when available to them, your first responsibility is to take control over your savings needs and ensure you have a plan that works even if you decide to leave (or are let go unexpectedly) from the employer.
If your retirement works without your pension, you have been saving too much. It makes it a tough thing to balance out if things are back loaded (i.e. 2% for year of service of the average of the last 3 years salary) a lot. You place your bets and hope things work out.

The issue with 401(k)s versus pensions has always been that companies go from contributing like 10-20% of your salary to retirement with a pension to like 5%. Pensions aren't inherently better than self directed plans but they tend to be much better funded...
Agreed, but I didn't mean to imply it was "either or". I was trying to imply it should be "both".

If someone's sole (or majority) source of retirement income is their expected future pension, they are IMHO creating an unhealthy amount of risk in their plan. What if their employer ends, or drastically alters, the pension plan? What if they are terminated or otherwise unable to keep working there? What if working conditions get so poor they don't want to work there anymore?

To use a different analogy, many people don't recommend including 100% of social security in your plan, as you may end up getting less benefits. That does not mean you should ignore social security. But it means that you look at the situation and realize a spectrum of outcomes are possible, including having reduced benefits, and you plan (and save) accordingly.

Same here - don't make your plan dependent on getting a full pension, save as though you won't get the full pension, and you've bought yourself lots of options.
chipperd
Posts: 1674
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2011 5:58 am
Location: here and now

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by chipperd »

SnowBog wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 9:51 am
randomguy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 8:57 am
SnowBog wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 4:16 pm While these can be very rewarding, I think the caution is try not to be dependent on them. If the only way your retirement plan works is by using these sorts of employer benefits, you arguably haven't been saving enough. As a result, you can end up "trapped" with your employer, and worse you can end up with a failed plan of your employer let's you go before you hit the point you needed.

So while I think people should absolutely leverage these sorts of benefits when available to them, your first responsibility is to take control over your savings needs and ensure you have a plan that works even if you decide to leave (or are let go unexpectedly) from the employer.
If your retirement works without your pension, you have been saving too much. It makes it a tough thing to balance out if things are back loaded (i.e. 2% for year of service of the average of the last 3 years salary) a lot. You place your bets and hope things work out.

The issue with 401(k)s versus pensions has always been that companies go from contributing like 10-20% of your salary to retirement with a pension to like 5%. Pensions aren't inherently better than self directed plans but they tend to be much better funded...
Agreed, but I didn't mean to imply it was "either or". I was trying to imply it should be "both".

If someone's sole (or majority) source of retirement income is their expected future pension, they are IMHO creating an unhealthy amount of risk in their plan. What if their employer ends, or drastically alters, the pension plan? What if they are terminated or otherwise unable to keep working there? What if working conditions get so poor they don't want to work there anymore?

To use a different analogy, many people don't recommend including 100% of social security in your plan, as you may end up getting less benefits. That does not mean you should ignore social security. But it means that you look at the situation and realize a spectrum of outcomes are possible, including having reduced benefits, and you plan (and save) accordingly.

Same here - don't make your plan dependent on getting a full pension, save as though you won't get the full pension, and you've bought yourself lots of options.
If an employee shouldn't rely on a pension or social security for 100% of what's promised, what percentage of a promised pension or social security would you recommend an employee/U.S. citizen count on for planning purposes?
"A portfolio is like a bar of soap, the more it's handled, the less there is." Dr. William Bernstein
SnowBog
Posts: 4680
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 10:21 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by SnowBog »

chipperd wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:11 am
SnowBog wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 9:51 am
randomguy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 8:57 am
SnowBog wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 4:16 pm While these can be very rewarding, I think the caution is try not to be dependent on them. If the only way your retirement plan works is by using these sorts of employer benefits, you arguably haven't been saving enough. As a result, you can end up "trapped" with your employer, and worse you can end up with a failed plan of your employer let's you go before you hit the point you needed.

So while I think people should absolutely leverage these sorts of benefits when available to them, your first responsibility is to take control over your savings needs and ensure you have a plan that works even if you decide to leave (or are let go unexpectedly) from the employer.
If your retirement works without your pension, you have been saving too much. It makes it a tough thing to balance out if things are back loaded (i.e. 2% for year of service of the average of the last 3 years salary) a lot. You place your bets and hope things work out.

The issue with 401(k)s versus pensions has always been that companies go from contributing like 10-20% of your salary to retirement with a pension to like 5%. Pensions aren't inherently better than self directed plans but they tend to be much better funded...
Agreed, but I didn't mean to imply it was "either or". I was trying to imply it should be "both".

If someone's sole (or majority) source of retirement income is their expected future pension, they are IMHO creating an unhealthy amount of risk in their plan. What if their employer ends, or drastically alters, the pension plan? What if they are terminated or otherwise unable to keep working there? What if working conditions get so poor they don't want to work there anymore?

To use a different analogy, many people don't recommend including 100% of social security in your plan, as you may end up getting less benefits. That does not mean you should ignore social security. But it means that you look at the situation and realize a spectrum of outcomes are possible, including having reduced benefits, and you plan (and save) accordingly.

Same here - don't make your plan dependent on getting a full pension, save as though you won't get the full pension, and you've bought yourself lots of options.
If an employee shouldn't rely on a pension or social security for 100% of what's promised, what percentage of a promised pension or social security would you recommend an employee/U.S. citizen count on for planning purposes?
I'm not sure there's a universal "good" answer, but here's how I think about it.

Currently, we expect to work another 5-7 years, contributing to social security, and for my spouse their pension program.

But if we lost our jobs today, we have earned/vested enough in both that we'd still collect something.

For social security, we can get an estimate of what we'd collect based off current contributions. And knowing that social security may be reduced by IIRC 24% when it runs out of money, we'd discount by that (or similar) amount.

For spouse's pension, we can do the same, get an estimate of what they've earned based on current work/contributions. While it may be less likely (or more?) that their pension program is changed, I tend to discount by the same amount as social security for consistency and easy math.

With this, I know our "likely worst case" - if we could no longer work and contribute to these plans, what's left to make up from our portfolio. This let's us think through contingency plans. As an example, if my spouse wanted to leave their job and quit contributing to the pension, we have an idea of the "lost future pension income" we'd be giving up. If our plan didn't already allow for that, we could figure out what modifications would let it do so (aka save more, work longer, reduce expenses, etc.).

Each year, we get one year closer to getting the "full" (although in social security - likely still reduced) benefits.

My point is more about "diversification" (don't be so reliant on a pension that if you lose it you are screwed) and "adaptability" (understand how you could adapt if needed as your circumstances change, don't wait to get blindsided by unexpected layoff, etc.).

You don't need to take this to the extreme - as it's counterproductive to try to figure out and mitigate every possible scenario. But you should have some sort of contingency plan built in...

For what it's worth, that's one of the reasons I like longinvest's VPW spreadsheet. The "required flexibility" is a reminder that things don't always go according to plan, so ideally I'm accommodating for a range of potential outcomes.

Edited to add: I like the post that follows this, IMHO gives a great way of thinking about things - at least from a "how well is this program funded" viewpoint. This should adjust drastically underfunded pension down more representing the higher risk they likely have. While this does not factor in leaving before full pension, it still gives a more pessimistic outlook to again help you think through the range of potential outcomes. To me, that's the important part.
Last edited by SnowBog on Tue Jan 18, 2022 12:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
langelgjm
Posts: 308
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:02 am
Location: India

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by langelgjm »

chipperd wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 11:11 am
SnowBog wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 9:51 am Agreed, but I didn't mean to imply it was "either or". I was trying to imply it should be "both".

If someone's sole (or majority) source of retirement income is their expected future pension, they are IMHO creating an unhealthy amount of risk in their plan. What if their employer ends, or drastically alters, the pension plan? What if they are terminated or otherwise unable to keep working there? What if working conditions get so poor they don't want to work there anymore?

To use a different analogy, many people don't recommend including 100% of social security in your plan, as you may end up getting less benefits. That does not mean you should ignore social security. But it means that you look at the situation and realize a spectrum of outcomes are possible, including having reduced benefits, and you plan (and save) accordingly.

Same here - don't make your plan dependent on getting a full pension, save as though you won't get the full pension, and you've bought yourself lots of options.
If an employee shouldn't rely on a pension or social security for 100% of what's promised, what percentage of a promised pension or social security would you recommend an employee/U.S. citizen count on for planning purposes?
For both Social Security and pensions, you can look up the actuarial reports and find the long-term actuarial funding ratio for the plan.

For Social Security, the current intermediate-cost long-term funding ratio (out to 2095) is 72%.

For public pensions, there should be an actuarial report published by the employer, typically annually. Look for the "funded ratio", which reports long term actuarial calculations about what proportion of promised pension benefits can be funded given the plan's current investments and projected growth (in investments, contributions, and payouts). Also note what "discount rate" assumptions are used - many public plans use unrealistically high discount rates, which inflate the funded ratio.

For private pensions, there are likely similar reports but they may not be publicly available.
"Simplicity is the master key to financial success." - John Bogle | "If I am what I have and if what I have is lost, who then am I?" - Erich Fromm
FireSekr
Posts: 1383
Joined: Tue Apr 02, 2013 9:54 am

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by FireSekr »

randomguy wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 2:33 pm
retiringwhen wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 2:07 pm
visualguy wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 1:57 pm I don't think most tech companies ever had this. It is possible to take a leave of absence, but nothing is guaranteed at the end of it, and it's very rare for anyone to go on such a leave.
Intel is the only tech company with sabbaticals I know.

BTW, I was thinking of retiring in 2020, but the pandemic gave me reason to stick around (I was stuck at home already! and I have been a 100% telecommuter for a decade).

I am starting the transition to retirement this year. If 18 hrs/week doesn't mess with my desires, I may keep at it for a while! There is little financial incentive for me to stick around, except somewhat cheaper health benefits. I do like some of the challenges.
The half dozen I applied to/worked with in the 90s/early 00s all had them. I have no clue if they still do. The reality was it was never much of an incentive. If after 4+ years you couldn't afford to take 12-16 weeks off without pay, things hadn't gone well. And if your boss didn't value you enough that they would give you unpaid leave, the company sure didn't want to retain you... Again if this was a valuable perk that people really cared about, all the companies competing for talent would have it. It hasn't been.

There have also been a couple of cycles with remote work versus everyone on a central campus. We will see if remote work sticks this time after the companies have basically been forced to do it for 2 years.

And of all the people I know who were "retiring" in their 30s/40s, pretty much all of them would have keep working if they could have done 20-24/hr weeks. Things like job sharing get a lot of press but I have seen very few examples of it. Maybe if the worker shortage continues...
The one I previously worked for still has them and the company I am currently at has them. I know several colleagues who have taken a few months off at one point or another under these programs.
Slacker
Posts: 1032
Joined: Thu May 26, 2016 8:40 am

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by Slacker »

My personal anecdote:
Me - 45, Spouse - 43

Both been working from home since 2015.
Planned to FIRE no later than August 2024, but had different goals and checkpoints to re-evaluate for 2023, 2022, and 2021. This plan was setup around 2017.

We've been tired of our jobs for quite awhile and FI since early 2021 so around that time I set my FIRE date for October (immediately after the end of the government Fiscal Year) with the option to extend if need be.

COVID didn't specifically cause our plans to change as far as I can tell. We didn't face burnout from COVID and have been working from home for a while. Work time just interfered with what we wanted to do with our time and we no longer need the paychecks to live the life we want to live. Being early retired has changed some of our plans though - we were fine in our smallish home in NC, but now that I have time to really get into cooking and baking, I find our kitchen far too small and we'll be moving back into our much larger home in CO this year.
randomguy
Posts: 11285
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:00 am

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by randomguy »

langelgjm wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 12:12 pm

For both Social Security and pensions, you can look up the actuarial reports and find the long-term actuarial funding ratio for the plan.

For Social Security, the current intermediate-cost long-term funding ratio (out to 2095) is 72%.

For public pensions, there should be an actuarial report published by the employer, typically annually. Look for the "funded ratio", which reports long term actuarial calculations about what proportion of promised pension benefits can be funded given the plan's current investments and projected growth (in investments, contributions, and payouts). Also note what "discount rate" assumptions are used - many public plans use unrealistically high discount rates, which inflate the funded ratio.

For private pensions, there are likely similar reports but they may not be publicly available.
I am guessing for most people the years of service (i.e. retiring at 30 instead of 35) is far more likely to change your numbers than the funding ratio. You can get vastly different savings needs between things like retiring at 62 (only need to fund like 5 years till SS and you get say 55% your salaray) and 55 (say 45% pension and 7+ years) if SS and the pension would be covering most of your expenses. How to balance out the risks is hard. It is easy to say just save a more but for a lot of us there is huge opportunity costs as there are things you would like to do with money now instead of later.
gogreen
Posts: 393
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:38 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by gogreen »

ponyboy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 4:23 am I can only name one person who resigned during covid. And she had a baby she was staying home with. Not sure if the "great resignation" is even true
It's way more 'great shuffle'. Smart companies started to advertise 'permanent remote' or 'remote first', top talent started to switch.
SnowBog
Posts: 4680
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 10:21 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by SnowBog »

randomguy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 12:46 pm
langelgjm wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 12:12 pm

For both Social Security and pensions, you can look up the actuarial reports and find the long-term actuarial funding ratio for the plan.

For Social Security, the current intermediate-cost long-term funding ratio (out to 2095) is 72%.

For public pensions, there should be an actuarial report published by the employer, typically annually. Look for the "funded ratio", which reports long term actuarial calculations about what proportion of promised pension benefits can be funded given the plan's current investments and projected growth (in investments, contributions, and payouts). Also note what "discount rate" assumptions are used - many public plans use unrealistically high discount rates, which inflate the funded ratio.

For private pensions, there are likely similar reports but they may not be publicly available.
I am guessing for most people the years of service (i.e. retiring at 30 instead of 35) is far more likely to change your numbers than the funding ratio. You can get vastly different savings needs between things like retiring at 62 (only need to fund like 5 years till SS and you get say 55% your salaray) and 55 (say 45% pension and 7+ years) if SS and the pension would be covering most of your expenses. How to balance out the risks is hard. It is easy to say just save a more but for a lot of us there is huge opportunity costs as there are things you would like to do with money now instead of later.
Agreed, there's no easy answer. Everything has a tradeoff somewhere.

But, let's compare two scenarios.

1) Someone who expects to get a full pension + full social security when they retire at 67, which will cover all their retirement expenses for life, and thus they don't save (or significantly save anyway) for retirement.

2) If that same person realizes that regardless of their plan, life happens, and they may not be able to stay employed at the same employer until 67. So they "plan" as though they'd only get - let's say 75% of their benefits (or whatever other estimate makes sense for them).

Yes, if life goes according to their plan, #2 sacrificed from current spending and ended up over saving.

But if life does not go according to plan, #1 may have inadequate funds with little they can do about it (depending on when and under what circumstances), while #2 may be just fine.

To drop the pension side of this... Before finding BH, I assumed I'd work until "normal" retirement age. A major reorg at work, combined with annual restructuring, and the awareness that not many people 50+ are still doing what I'm doing at my employer, made me realize that I needed to plan for contingencies. Specifically, I revised our plan so that we'd be FI by 50, so I didn't feel trapped by my employer - or even being employed - after that point. This met curtailing spending and increasing savings (which was greatly helped by higher expected income and market returns the last few years).

Thus the ever conflicting challenge of trying to enjoy today as we aren't promised tomorrow while simultaneously saving for tomorrow in case we end up there. Each of us will balance these differently. Personally, as long as I'm still enjoying the journey, I'd rather err on the side of over saving. But we've been life long savers who have always lived below our means, so that's fairly natural to us anyway...
goos_news
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Jun 10, 2019 7:14 pm
Location: Northern California/French Riviera

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by goos_news »

Don't conflate the Great Resignation with resignation due to FIRE. The latter is only a relatively small portion of the total number of resignations, based on surveys done by human capital consultancies (and echoed in my megacorp) Pay, working conditions, work/life balance, new industry, temporary break in a more flexible labor market is contributing. The higher incidence of workplace outbreaks may also be an influence in this wave. Even college enrollment is down, especially junior college (quite the opposite of the Great Recession).

For myself, the current times have worsened the one more year syndrome. Remote working, high compensation and the ongoing waves limiting some activities have made doing OMY very much an issue for us. My spouse however, is seeing some accelerated early retirements at work, anecdotally (and through their HR stats).

I had two sabbaticals in the past, both company paid. Eight weeks off was a great thing. Got to see some places, at the right time in history.
Tommy
Posts: 317
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2016 10:47 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by Tommy »

I personally don't know anybody who quit job. What I know that remote work became joke.
When I was working from office I came to office at 8-8:30 and worked till 6-7 PM. Often late.
Now - I come to computer around 9 - 9:30. Check email, reply on email, some meeting (stand-up).
After this I'm taking dog for a walk. All my neighbors outside - walking their dogs or walking themselves. Some of them working in the same company as me(very big, very well known company).
After walk I can do some work and go to kitchen for lunch. In the office I ate lunch on the desk while working. Now - my lunch last at least 2 hours ( I can do quick nap).
A little work (meeting) and at 5 pm I'm done. Of course I'm pretending that I'm working hard. I can stop by computer at 9 pm and send email :) All people do the same :)
Task that require 2 hours work I estimate and allocate 1 day. Sometimes more. And I'm modest :-) ..
Other people, especially from off-shore allocate 3 weeks for 2 days work..
Impossible to reach anybody on Teams - everybody set status to Do not Disturb (pretend they are busy).
User avatar
mrmass
Posts: 1507
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2018 6:35 pm
Location: MA

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by mrmass »

Tommy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:06 pm I personally don't know anybody who quit job. What I know that remote work became joke.
When I was working from office I came to office at 8-8:30 and worked till 6-7 PM. Often late.
Now - I come to computer around 9 - 9:30. Check email, reply on email, some meeting (stand-up).
After this I'm taking dog for a walk. All my neighbors outside - walking their dogs or walking themselves. Some of them working in the same company as me(very big, very well known company).
After walk I can do some work and go to kitchen for lunch. In the office I ate lunch on the desk while working. Now - my lunch last at least 2 hours ( I can do quick nap).
A little work (meeting) and at 5 pm I'm done. Of course I'm pretending that I'm working hard. I can stop by computer at 9 pm and send email :) All people do the same :)
Task that require 2 hours work I estimate and allocate 1 day. Sometimes more. And I'm modest :-) ..
Other people, especially from off-shore allocate 3 weeks for 2 days work..
Impossible to reach anybody on Teams - everybody set status to Do not Disturb (pretend they are busy).
Sounds like where I work.
JD2775
Posts: 1503
Joined: Thu Jul 09, 2015 10:47 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by JD2775 »

Tommy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:06 pm I personally don't know anybody who quit job. What I know that remote work became joke.
When I was working from office I came to office at 8-8:30 and worked till 6-7 PM. Often late.
Now - I come to computer around 9 - 9:30. Check email, reply on email, some meeting (stand-up).
After this I'm taking dog for a walk. All my neighbors outside - walking their dogs or walking themselves. Some of them working in the same company as me(very big, very well known company).
After walk I can do some work and go to kitchen for lunch. In the office I ate lunch on the desk while working. Now - my lunch last at least 2 hours ( I can do quick nap).
A little work (meeting) and at 5 pm I'm done. Of course I'm pretending that I'm working hard. I can stop by computer at 9 pm and send email :) All people do the same :)
Task that require 2 hours work I estimate and allocate 1 day. Sometimes more. And I'm modest :-) ..
Other people, especially from off-shore allocate 3 weeks for 2 days work..
Impossible to reach anybody on Teams - everybody set status to Do not Disturb (pretend they are busy).
I like your honesty :) :sharebeer

Question though....did your workload drastically reduce when you started to work from home? Or did you become a master of wasting time while stuck in the office all day before the pandemic?
SnowBog
Posts: 4680
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 10:21 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by SnowBog »

mrmass wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:19 pm
Tommy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:06 pm I personally don't know anybody who quit job. What I know that remote work became joke.
When I was working from office I came to office at 8-8:30 and worked till 6-7 PM. Often late.
...
Impossible to reach anybody on Teams - everybody set status to Do not Disturb (pretend they are busy).
Sounds like where I work.
I'm not sure if this makes me feel better - or worse... :sharebeer
hoeboe
Posts: 79
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 10:43 am

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by hoeboe »

SnowBog wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:33 pm
mrmass wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:19 pm
Tommy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:06 pm I personally don't know anybody who quit job. What I know that remote work became joke.
When I was working from office I came to office at 8-8:30 and worked till 6-7 PM. Often late.
...
Impossible to reach anybody on Teams - everybody set status to Do not Disturb (pretend they are busy).
Sounds like where I work.
I'm not sure if this makes me feel better - or worse... :sharebeer
Funny- I see this as well from myself and my immediate team. 2020 I kept a pretty normal work schedule and output, circumstances permitting. 2021 I know I took a step back... and continue to-I took a mountain bike break today. Honestly, the projects I am working on are completely pointless (I am in a research organization) and I'm working on FIREing right now. My manager knows it but is struggling to maintain his own relevancy.

But, I try not to let my team down. I show up to and try to participate in every meeting, answer emails, phone calls, and texts promptly, and ensure that no one ever is waiting on me. The other folks on my team, who need the job and $$$ much more than I do, frequently skip meetings, seldom give any inputs, and take painfully long (weeks even) to answer simple questions. It's definitely gotten worse over COVID. Two people, including my prior manager, left in the last year out of a team of 6.
Topic Author
Wannaretireearly
Posts: 4847
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:39 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by Wannaretireearly »

RichardRoman wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 2:00 am
Wannaretireearly wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 9:58 am
RichardRoman wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 3:08 am
FIRE-adjacent, maybe. 😃 Mid-life crises and a pandemic helped put things into perspective. Looking back at my work history, I have a tendency to take a year long break every ten years or so. I have been very fortunate to have taken these breaks and such a long break this time. This is the first time spouse has not worked since they were 15 and has been focusing on building amps, pedals, etc. Stuff they find interesting.

Is your workplace amenable to your taking a sabbatical?
Nope. I haven’t seen it offered or anyone take this kind of personal break. Only thing close would be some kind of medical leave or absence to look after a family member.

Great that you’ve been able to take major breaks every 10 years!

I’d like one perhaps in a few years, just to test-drive early retirement :)
Can you ask for something like this without repercussions? Maybe I’m being naive, but if you’re a valuable and valued employee, workplaces will sometimes accommodate an ask for a couple of months off (un/paid). Or even part-time (3/9hr days versus 5/8hrs or whatever your schedule is)? A test drive or just a refresh. Either way, you get some time to think and be at your own pace.
Possibly. But, I won’t hold my breath with current boss/team.
They are all great people, but have workaholic tendencies. E.g. not taking more than 5 days off for many years. Not taking even close to their allotted vacation time etc. Personally, taking the extended time off at the right time is key. So, this is likely something I’ll try when I’m truly FI, hopefully in a few more years, perhaps a year or two before finally quitting around age 50 (fingers crossed)
“At some point you are trading time you will never get back for money you will never spend.“ | “How do you want to spend the best remaining year of your life?“
softwaregeek
Posts: 951
Joined: Wed May 08, 2019 8:59 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by softwaregeek »

EddyB wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 8:58 am
michaeljc70 wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 8:46 am
jh wrote: Sun Jan 16, 2022 10:40 pm This is why pensions suck. Any younger people that read this. Do not work for an employer that still uses a pension system. Take control of your own money.
There are some very lucrative pensions out there so I wouldn't put them all in the same category. In some jobs, like a teacher that doesn't plan on moving, it is pretty natural to stay in one district/pension system your whole career. Of course, all pensions are different. Some things I have seen though:

-Pensions that you are promoted on your last day so your pension is goosed for the rest of your life.
-Very generous pensions that the employee doesn't contribute anything.
-Pensions where a spouse that never worked a day in their life can collect 50% of the working spouse's pension. (My parents have this).
-Pensions with COLAs higher than the rate of inflation.

Some public pensions are very lucrative if you suddenly make a lot more in the last few years of your career. For example, I know a teacher/principal that became an interim superintendent for a short period. Pension is $180k- way more than they made except the last year of their career.
While I’ve heard of such outcomes (abuses?), my impression is that they’ve been determined to be unsustainable and are much less likely to be available to new workers today.
Pensions at many government agencies have been pared back over time. In California, which I am intimately familiar with, employees who started pre-2011 get 2%@55, meaning 2% of their final annual salary times the number of years worked at age 55 retirement. In 2012, that went to 2@60, and now is 2@62. Also changed to calculate on last three years average earnings. In addition, pre 2011 you could actually buy "air time" which was up to five years of pension credits, at a discount rate equal to the CALPERS rate of return, which was, as I recall, 8%. So you could basically get a guaranteed 8% return. However, my wife probably makes 30% less than she could make in the open market. Still worth it because there are few white collar jobs that are straight 40 hours a week fixed, with four weeks of vacay.
Topic Author
Wannaretireearly
Posts: 4847
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:39 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by Wannaretireearly »

novolog wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 8:23 am
robphoto wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 7:41 am
novolog wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 3:09 pm
Wannaretireearly wrote: Wed Jan 12, 2022 1:33 pm Has anyone here either accelerated their plans for retiring early, OR decided to take a meaningful break form work (3 to 12 months, sabbatical etc)?

I think about the latter more and more.
i can relate

i find there is a negative correlation between my net worth, and my interest in my corporate job.

our net worth jumped quite a bit over the past year, so this is relationship became much more obvious (i am fully aware we are seeing unusually high returns to equities).

if i get stressed about something at work, used to plow right through it. recently, my thought process is something a long the lines of this:

“of the total annual increase in my net worth, the portion of that increase driven by my labor is decreasing at an accelerating rate. my money is making money at a faster clip than my own labor can make money. so why am i stressing out about my job and selling my own finite time on this earth for money, when my assets are already making money? my labor is slowly becoming less and less valuable to my life every year.”

i can’t seem to escape this thought process, and i can’t help but feel it’s not healthy, but I somehow can’t not think it… because I think it’s true?
It's true for us. Still it's very hard to move from being motivated to work by the need for money, to working for the satisfaction of doing something interesting. Especially since almost all work has aspects that you only put up with for the financial reward.
a blog post that resonates w/ me: http://lackingambition.com/?p=1103
That’s a great blog post and resonates with me too.
Thank you and others for sharing your thoughts :sharebeer
“At some point you are trading time you will never get back for money you will never spend.“ | “How do you want to spend the best remaining year of your life?“
Topic Author
Wannaretireearly
Posts: 4847
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:39 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by Wannaretireearly »

Slacker wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 12:40 pm My personal anecdote:
Me - 45, Spouse - 43

Both been working from home since 2015.
Planned to FIRE no later than August 2024, but had different goals and checkpoints to re-evaluate for 2023, 2022, and 2021. This plan was setup around 2017.

We've been tired of our jobs for quite awhile and FI since early 2021 so around that time I set my FIRE date for October (immediately after the end of the government Fiscal Year) with the option to extend if need be.

COVID didn't specifically cause our plans to change as far as I can tell. We didn't face burnout from COVID and have been working from home for a while. Work time just interfered with what we wanted to do with our time and we no longer need the paychecks to live the life we want to live. Being early retired has changed some of our plans though - we were fine in our smallish home in NC, but now that I have time to really get into cooking and baking, I find our kitchen far too small and we'll be moving back into our much larger home in CO this year.
Fantastic! Living the dream 👍. Congrats
“At some point you are trading time you will never get back for money you will never spend.“ | “How do you want to spend the best remaining year of your life?“
Topic Author
Wannaretireearly
Posts: 4847
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:39 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by Wannaretireearly »

goos_news wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 3:17 pm Don't conflate the Great Resignation with resignation due to FIRE. The latter is only a relatively small portion of the total number of resignations, based on surveys done by human capital consultancies (and echoed in my megacorp) Pay, working conditions, work/life balance, new industry, temporary break in a more flexible labor market is contributing. The higher incidence of workplace outbreaks may also be an influence in this wave. Even college enrollment is down, especially junior college (quite the opposite of the Great Recession).

For myself, the current times have worsened the one more year syndrome. Remote working, high compensation and the ongoing waves limiting some activities have made doing OMY very much an issue for us. My spouse however, is seeing some accelerated early retirements at work, anecdotally (and through their HR stats).

I had two sabbaticals in the past, both company paid. Eight weeks off was a great thing. Got to see some places, at the right time in history.
Well said…
“At some point you are trading time you will never get back for money you will never spend.“ | “How do you want to spend the best remaining year of your life?“
Topic Author
Wannaretireearly
Posts: 4847
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:39 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by Wannaretireearly »

Tommy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:06 pm I personally don't know anybody who quit job. What I know that remote work became joke.
When I was working from office I came to office at 8-8:30 and worked till 6-7 PM. Often late.
Now - I come to computer around 9 - 9:30. Check email, reply on email, some meeting (stand-up).
After this I'm taking dog for a walk. All my neighbors outside - walking their dogs or walking themselves. Some of them working in the same company as me(very big, very well known company).
After walk I can do some work and go to kitchen for lunch. In the office I ate lunch on the desk while working. Now - my lunch last at least 2 hours ( I can do quick nap).
A little work (meeting) and at 5 pm I'm done. Of course I'm pretending that I'm working hard. I can stop by computer at 9 pm and send email :) All people do the same :)
Task that require 2 hours work I estimate and allocate 1 day. Sometimes more. And I'm modest :-) ..
Other people, especially from off-shore allocate 3 weeks for 2 days work..
Impossible to reach anybody on Teams - everybody set status to Do not Disturb (pretend they are busy).
Lol. Shhh. Don’t share all the secrets ;)
Every time my boss asks ‘what’s next challenge’ etc, I try to regurgitate one that I’m already doing, how I can do it better etc. set the bar low and achieve it!

Walking the dog is something I look forward to, except I’m usually stacked with meetings in the AM. Overall, yep, it would be hard to go back to the old commute/office schedule.
“At some point you are trading time you will never get back for money you will never spend.“ | “How do you want to spend the best remaining year of your life?“
Topic Author
Wannaretireearly
Posts: 4847
Joined: Wed Mar 31, 2010 4:39 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by Wannaretireearly »

Harry Livermore wrote: Mon Jan 17, 2022 2:30 pm The past two years have been pure torture for me.
I have had a terrific 30+ year career, doing what I always wanted to do. Everyone in my industry is self-employed, and I not only navigated those uncertain waters, but have had a truly charmed life, working no more than 150 days per year in my busiest years, and as I worked my way up the food chain in terms of position and pay, had recently whittled that down to about 95 days per year. My income curved upwards throughout the course of my career, eventually putting me into the 98th percentile in terms of income for at least 8 years starting in 2008, and certainly I have always been in the top quintile. My spouse and I saved aggressively throughout the course of our marriage and we have a very solid nest egg.
My work-life balance was a dream come true. Many days off to be a stay at home parent, help out and volunteer, do my own home repairs and manage our rental property, and run a successful side business leasing equipment used in my industry. We were on target to retire soon after our youngest (currently a sophomore in high school) went off to college. Even as technology and culture shifts have changed my business, it was still fun and rewarding and I knew I could bumble along for another 8-10 years.
The COVID scare, rolling lockdowns, and continuing canceling of projects meant that in 2020, I made about 30% of what I'd make in a normal year. I did a little better last year, up to about 50%. And working hard all day in a mask, sometimes also with a face shield, with constant testing and filling in "COVID questionnaires" prior to the start of EACH working day is an added slog and stress. The worst part is having absolutely NOTHING to throw my energy at when I'm not at work. I'm not starting a new venture if I sit in front of the computer worried about how I'm paying the mortgage this month, for the 19th month in a row. I'm just passing time until my kids get out of college...
Financially, we have been OK, I guess? I keep a large emergency fund, and we have sizable taxable investments that we can (and have) tapped. But it's like turning the Queen Elizabeth. Each month, money gets burned in the furnace and you can't just shut some of this stuff off overnight... we went through our budget with a fine tooth comb, whittling things down here and there, I held off on buying some professional equipment, and we have deferred some repairs on our home. We've decided to accelerate downsizing, and plan to sell our single family home rental property within the next year or two. But we are somewhat stuck with our home until our kids get launched... that's a choice, not an imperative, and I understand that.
It's been a lousy end to a wonderful career. Without being too bitter or political about it, COVID (whatever its actual lethality) has brought me to RE, while barely being FI. All as a result of what I'd consider a massive overreaction and poor risk assessment on the part of governments and corporations alike. In the end, we'll be just fine. But it's not what I would have wished for.
I am happy for all the office drones for whom life continues as before, with the added bonus of working in your PJs. Just understand that it's been hard on some of us...
Cheers
Wanted to chime in and thank you for posting Harry. Sorry to hear the troubles over the past pandemic 2 years. Goes to show nothing (good or bad) lasts forever. Congrats on RE, I bet you’ll work out the FI part ;).

Many roads to Dublin, and when you have a decent stash, even Ramen and beer is a good day. I’m sure you’re enjoying your retirement!
“At some point you are trading time you will never get back for money you will never spend.“ | “How do you want to spend the best remaining year of your life?“
Ivygirl
Posts: 1212
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 1:36 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by Ivygirl »

Unpopular opinion: I could have told you remote working is unsustainable. I am an administrative assistant who works in the (large and almost empty) office. There is a profound lack of seriousness about the work that reminds me of the last half of senior year in high school. Yesterday I had to remind a senior manager about an important client deadline. Had no clue. Had not checked. A junior person I cc'd then did what was necessary.

What is actionable in terms of finance: expect the tsunami effects of a wave of unproductivity in business. The folks like Mr. Dimon who make their people come in to the office will pull far ahead of the fully remote.

Wish it wasn't so, but it is. People do not work unless they are made to do so. There is no escaping into the metaverse. Tote that barge and lift that bale.

Remote work at least partially is an option for me but I go in to the office. I have years to go before I can retire and I have to keep my head in the game.
User avatar
Devil's Advocate
Posts: 646
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2012 4:18 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by Devil's Advocate »

mrmass wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:19 pm
Tommy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:06 pm I personally don't know anybody who quit job. What I know that remote work became joke.
When I was working from office I came to office at 8-8:30 and worked till 6-7 PM. Often late.
Now - I come to computer around 9 - 9:30. Check email, reply on email, some meeting (stand-up).
After this I'm taking dog for a walk. All my neighbors outside - walking their dogs or walking themselves. Some of them working in the same company as me(very big, very well known company).
After walk I can do some work and go to kitchen for lunch. In the office I ate lunch on the desk while working. Now - my lunch last at least 2 hours ( I can do quick nap).
A little work (meeting) and at 5 pm I'm done. Of course I'm pretending that I'm working hard. I can stop by computer at 9 pm and send email :) All people do the same :)
Task that require 2 hours work I estimate and allocate 1 day. Sometimes more. And I'm modest :-) ..
Other people, especially from off-shore allocate 3 weeks for 2 days work..
Impossible to reach anybody on Teams - everybody set status to Do not Disturb (pretend they are busy).
Sounds like where I work.
Any openings? And where's my stapler?!

DA
chazas
Posts: 851
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2017 1:22 pm
Location: NoVa

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by chazas »

Tommy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:06 pm I personally don't know anybody who quit job. What I know that remote work became joke.
When I was working from office I came to office at 8-8:30 and worked till 6-7 PM. Often late.
Now - I come to computer around 9 - 9:30. Check email, reply on email, some meeting (stand-up).
After this I'm taking dog for a walk. All my neighbors outside - walking their dogs or walking themselves. Some of them working in the same company as me(very big, very well known company).
After walk I can do some work and go to kitchen for lunch. In the office I ate lunch on the desk while working. Now - my lunch last at least 2 hours ( I can do quick nap).
A little work (meeting) and at 5 pm I'm done. Of course I'm pretending that I'm working hard. I can stop by computer at 9 pm and send email :) All people do the same :)
Task that require 2 hours work I estimate and allocate 1 day. Sometimes more. And I'm modest :-) ..
Other people, especially from off-shore allocate 3 weeks for 2 days work..
Impossible to reach anybody on Teams - everybody set status to Do not Disturb (pretend they are busy).
Wow. Varies by job, a lot. Biglaw here and WFH has just meant the erasure of the last vestiges of any boundary between work and home life. My practice has been insanely busy. Everyone is expected to work basically 24/7, by clients and colleagues. My plan is 2 more years - if life is intolerable I have enough that I could leave earlier, if when I get to my date they want to pay me for part time for a couple of years, might consider that too. But my the end date I have scheduled in my mind is much sooner than it was pre-pandemic. Upside is compensation has been very high because we’re making a lot of money.

On the other hand, my assistant (and the other secretaries/assistants)? As far as I can tell they’ve been doing very little over the past couple of years. Out of sight, out of mind. Something I’d ask for and get in a couple hours at the office can take a couple of days to get now, and it’s not because of increased workload. And they’re benefiting from all of the bonuses due to our profitability.
User avatar
JoeRetire
Posts: 15381
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:44 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by JoeRetire »

chazas wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 7:12 am On the other hand, my assistant (and the other secretaries/assistants)? As far as I can tell they’ve been doing very little over the past couple of years. Out of sight, out of mind. Something I’d ask for and get in a couple hours at the office can take a couple of days to get now, and it’s not because of increased workload. And they’re benefiting from all of the bonuses due to our profitability.
Get a new assistant and find a better way to direct their work when they WFH.
Not all do what you suspect your assistant of doing.
This isn't just my wallet. It's an organizer, a memory and an old friend.
User avatar
cockersx3
Posts: 707
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2016 3:55 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by cockersx3 »

chazas wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 7:12 am
Tommy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:06 pm I personally don't know anybody who quit job. What I know that remote work became joke.
When I was working from office I came to office at 8-8:30 and worked till 6-7 PM. Often late.
Now - I come to computer around 9 - 9:30. Check email, reply on email, some meeting (stand-up).
After this I'm taking dog for a walk. All my neighbors outside - walking their dogs or walking themselves. Some of them working in the same company as me(very big, very well known company).
After walk I can do some work and go to kitchen for lunch. In the office I ate lunch on the desk while working. Now - my lunch last at least 2 hours ( I can do quick nap).
A little work (meeting) and at 5 pm I'm done. Of course I'm pretending that I'm working hard. I can stop by computer at 9 pm and send email :) All people do the same :)
Task that require 2 hours work I estimate and allocate 1 day. Sometimes more. And I'm modest :-) ..
Other people, especially from off-shore allocate 3 weeks for 2 days work..
Impossible to reach anybody on Teams - everybody set status to Do not Disturb (pretend they are busy).
Wow. Varies by job, a lot. Biglaw here and WFH has just meant the erasure of the last vestiges of any boundary between work and home life. My practice has been insanely busy. Everyone is expected to work basically 24/7, by clients and colleagues. My plan is 2 more years - if life is intolerable I have enough that I could leave earlier, if when I get to my date they want to pay me for part time for a couple of years, might consider that too. But my the end date I have scheduled in my mind is much sooner than it was pre-pandemic. Upside is compensation has been very high because we’re making a lot of money.

On the other hand, my assistant (and the other secretaries/assistants)? As far as I can tell they’ve been doing very little over the past couple of years. Out of sight, out of mind. Something I’d ask for and get in a couple hours at the office can take a couple of days to get now, and it’s not because of increased workload. And they’re benefiting from all of the bonuses due to our profitability.
LOL yeah, that's what I saw as well in my last year at MegaCorp. 2020 through early 2021 was insanely busy, pretty much like you described - zero boundaries between work and life. Everyone assumed that the additional work / results would be recognized and rewarded when merit increases and bonus came around.

Unfortunately, the wise people at my MegaCorp decided that would be a **great** time to clamp down on comp, by eliminating reviews and making it darn near impossible for anyone to get anything above an "average" comp increase. After that we started to see significant turnover, and the people who remained had clearly clocked out at that point. There are a few people in my neighborhood that work for my MegaCorp, and I would frequently see them out in the middle of the day walking their dogs, or spending time with the kids at the neighborhood pool. (Note that I saw them largely while doing the same thing 8-) ) Can't say I blame them - hard to care when the extra efforts you put in are not reciprocated. As a manager of people it was even worse, since I felt like I owed them an explanation of this nonsense that was just impossible to explain. Ultimately I decided to leave and become a consultant, with the overall plan of just hanging it up when it got boring - just felt funny quitting even though we are FI.
Ivygirl
Posts: 1212
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 1:36 pm

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by Ivygirl »

JoeRetire wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 7:22 am
chazas wrote: Wed Jan 19, 2022 7:12 am On the other hand, my assistant (and the other secretaries/assistants)? As far as I can tell they’ve been doing very little over the past couple of years. Out of sight, out of mind. Something I’d ask for and get in a couple hours at the office can take a couple of days to get now, and it’s not because of increased workload. And they’re benefiting from all of the bonuses due to our profitability.
Get a new assistant and find a better way to direct their work when they WFH.
Not all do what you suspect your assistant of doing.
I am an assistant - a career secretary - and I agree. Don't accept "a couple of days" as a result. And show up in person regularly, ask for your mail, inquire about the progress of your projects. Be around. Be the boss. Your team needs a boss. An electronic status button on a softphone is no substitute for a boss.
stoptothink
Posts: 15368
Joined: Fri Dec 31, 2010 8:53 am

Re: The great FIRE resignation?

Post by stoptothink »

hoeboe wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 10:00 pm
SnowBog wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:33 pm
mrmass wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:19 pm
Tommy wrote: Tue Jan 18, 2022 6:06 pm I personally don't know anybody who quit job. What I know that remote work became joke.
When I was working from office I came to office at 8-8:30 and worked till 6-7 PM. Often late.
...
Impossible to reach anybody on Teams - everybody set status to Do not Disturb (pretend they are busy).
Sounds like where I work.
I'm not sure if this makes me feel better - or worse... :sharebeer
Funny- I see this as well from myself and my immediate team. 2020 I kept a pretty normal work schedule and output, circumstances permitting. 2021 I know I took a step back... and continue to-I took a mountain bike break today. Honestly, the projects I am working on are completely pointless (I am in a research organization) and I'm working on FIREing right now. My manager knows it but is struggling to maintain his own relevancy.

But, I try not to let my team down. I show up to and try to participate in every meeting, answer emails, phone calls, and texts promptly, and ensure that no one ever is waiting on me. The other folks on my team, who need the job and $$$ much more than I do, frequently skip meetings, seldom give any inputs, and take painfully long (weeks even) to answer simple questions. It's definitely gotten worse over COVID. Two people, including my prior manager, left in the last year out of a team of 6.
I made an internal transfer in November '20, previously I was senior director of a ~30-person team, but getting some staff to remain productive during WFH was a nightmare so I decided that I wasn't willing to oversee WFH employees anymore. I now direct a program, but zero actual employees. I was initially hired for one specific project; he and others apparently expected it to take a year...I finished my component in less than two months. I've spent the last year updating the content and essentially spinning my wheels as the project I am working on keeps getting delayed by other factors. The boss thinks I'm some sort of wizard (gave me a perfect score on end-of-year review and much larger raise and bonus than I was expecting) because I finish everything he gives me way ahead of his expectations, when in reality I've never worked less. Biggest factor for me is I went from like 15-20 meetings per week to 3, and most weeks at least one of those meetings gets cancelled (2 got cancelled this week).

I really have no idea what the experience with my colleagues is like, I've remained WFH while 95%+ of the staff has been back in office for more than a year. I haven't seen or even conversed with most of them in that time period. I do know that we have lost A TON of staff over the past year as competitors tend to pay better and offer more WFH opportunities. Me, although we're essentially financially independent right now I'm hoping to ride out this dream another 10yrs and retire; I could get more money from competitors tomorrow, but I can't imagine having a better overall working experience and environment, and work/life balance.
Post Reply