Would you stop working if you could afford it?

[Ibitebats]

I'm 48 and suddenly realise we're in a position that I do not need to work for the money. I could give up and there'd be no need to change our lifestyle, holidays etc. Pensions are good.

I do not enjoy my job. I'm an auditor - I get paid a reasonable amount for not much - frankly. And we now have to be in the office 4 days a week (I work 4 days so that means every day for me - it's not pro rata). The children are 10 and 8 so approaching secondary school. Dd2 likely to need more help than DD1 with homework etc.

I am really wrestling with whether to stop working. I sway between thinking it's good for the DDs to see me working and thinking how much easier our lives would be if I am around more to do everything. Plus being around in the school holidays.

Would you stay at home if you could?

@Ibitebats I don't think I'd immediately jump to giving up entirely, but the 100% office based is rubbish. I'd try to negotiate with them, on the basis that it's leave or stay with some Wfh, because I doubt they will want to lose you completely. If you could do 2 days wfh and 2 days office based, or go down to 3 days and do 1 or 2 in the office, would that work for you?

In a heartbeat. I know some people rely on the routine of a working life for mental health benefits but im lucky enough to not depend on work for this. I work simply to earn money and socialise a bit perhaps but nothing more.

Yes absolutely without a second thought

I could go to the gym at 930 am rather than 6am

I could go and help my dad out during the the week rather than on Saturday

I would get on top of the diy and gardening
I would be could go swimming again

Omg the freedom and fun I would have would be amazing instead of rushing around being a good employee and a shite daughter, wife and mother

My and dog would be so skinny from our mountain frolics

Without a doubt.

@SqueakyDinosaur It's a firm rule for all. No negotiations. The accountants / consultants on the thread probably know who I work for as the 4 days rule has been controversial. But it's going to stay. If we don't like it, we can indeed leave. I could jump to a different employer. But I'm not sure I want that.

I am liking the idea of not seeing it as retirement but as a career break while kids are in secondary.

I used to be an auditor, there's not enough money anyone could pay me to do that again, so if you have a choice then don't.

If I were in your position, I'd probably get a Bookkeeper/Finance Manager type role working from home perhaps 2-3 days a week to keep your active and ticking over.

If I didn’t have to work, I would look for a job 2 or 3 days a week in a lovely jewellery shop, or one that sells nice pottery and art cards.

I would, I think that we sometimes minimise the need kids have for support going into high school, because they are more independent. I'd argue that given how much of their core personalities can be formed, affected by choices in high schools, having a strong parental figure always available is an advantage. I don't see why we minimise the positives of having a parent at home. If you can do, I would, but most need to work. As long as the home role is recognised and respected, I don't think that you are doing anything wrong by wanting to and being in the position you can be there for your kids

I work to live. That is all. If I didn't need to, I'd be off that hamster wheel in a shot and fill my life with things 'I' want to be doing. I now work part-time which is a lot better and really really value my time off, it's made a world of difference. I enjoy walking my dog, reading, gardening, cooking, visiting my elderly Mum- just doing whatever I want to. We only get one shot at life and I don't really want to spend it working for any company that would replace me in a heartbeat if I died. I want to be enjoying my own life doing my own thing.

@Ibitebats that's cheered me up, as despite over 20 years as a consultant at let's call them QxD, I have no idea who you're referring to (I left in 2020). Fair enough, if it's a (ridiculous) hard and fast rule then it's their loss.

Op it depends just how big the inheritance and investments are.

We don't know what's around the corner.

I would find a part time job that suits you, there must be other companies out there. If your instincts are telling you to be there for dc then do it.

Personally I would always have an occupation, i like being with people.
Having said that I work almost part time I'm here when dc get back from school and dh works from home and is able to do school run and whilst working it's joyful that he is here also and our dc get lots of us.

As soon as it hits 5 30 he is done.

I was also a sahm when dc little and it's gone in a blip now one is a late teen and work, school, going out with friends all come into the mix you don't have them like you used too

If I were in your shoes I'd either drop a couple of days or do another role.

Not at the job I currently do, no, I do really enjoy it. It is always nice to have the option though!

I don't do my job for the intellectual stimulation and the money is rubbish (TA), it is a very satisfying job though and I absolutely love working with children.

But if I stopped tomorrow I'd have no trouble filling my time.

I would leave. There is so much more that you could do without having the shackles of work to contend with. Offer them consultancy if you really want to drop off more slowly.

@SqueakyDinosaur The law firms started with the ridiculous mandates and we followed. The youth are leaving in packs - but you'll know how easy it is to get more. Leadership talk of it being a culture shift phase...

@Ibitebats that's interesting. I can kind of see it from both sides, and actually in some ways it's the younger ones who can benefit from being in the office - you learn so much more from working with someone good. In your case, it's entirely ridiculous that you can't at least do one day a week from home. I assume it's causing a lot of bad feeling across the board?

I remember doing some partner interviews when I had an internal role, and one of them saying "The firm says it wants to hire independent, flexible thinkers. What it actually wants is to recruit people who will behave like corporate robots until they're quite senior, and then suddenly turn back into independent flexible thinkers when they get to a leadership role". I think Gen Z are probably very challenging to incorporate into the standard firm model!

My kids definitely needed me more through secondary school. Now they're 16 and 20, I would stop work in a nanosecond if I could. When they were small, I'd still have loved not to work so many hours. Depends if you have lots you want to do to fill your time and use your brain.

From what you've said, sounds like looking for a different part time/more flexible role might be a good first step?