To ask if anyone has quit their good, highly paid stressful job for a smaller one?

[joanneg36]

I am seriously struggling with the 'having it all' at the moment and interested in others' experiences. Has anyone ever quit their 'brilliant' (on paper) job for work/life balance reasons and how did you manage/what did you do next?

I work four days a week in a senior-ish job. London and well paid but not law/city type money. Husband works too and earns similar. My 'four days', like many people, is in reality 7 days work squeezed into 4 and I am on email all hours. Kids are 5 and 1 and I just feel exhausted and as though I can't go on like this.

We could cope financially with me earning less, we'd have to cut back but it would be sacrifices of the meals out/foreign holidays type rather than not being able to pay bills etc. My bigger fear is about risk to my future earning potential and just general fear of unknown. I don't know how easy it would be to find a 'smaller' more part-time job in my industry but I feel I could at least try....

Interested in all thoughts - feel free to tell me to stop moaning and get on with it!

normie - what a moving post! Wish I had a garden

Totally agree with uhtred, I find myself in a (very long) haze right now, so although I don't doubt the fact the kids will need me more in other ways as they get older I'm hoping my mental state will be in a better position to juggle that with my work demands.

Ps- 1 handbag here

Hi OP,

I don't think I can offer any experience, as such, but I am sending over my sympathies, and a bit of solidarity, in case that's of any use at all. Today I was at my desk (at a law firm) by 7, ran back though the door to see DD (who is 2) at dinner time but was so tired and what I believe is called hangry from lack of time to eat lunch that I was a horrible, grumpy mummy. Finally got DD into bed and started work again, like all the other female lawyers I know who are trying to do the juggle.

I have decided that this is enough. Actually, it's a long way past enough. That this isn't the life we worked all these years for. I have called up a friend who runs a flexible working recruitment agency and asked her what else she might have on her books. Even if its not something in my own professional field, that's ok. That probably doesn't count as experience. Sorry - it might not be very helpful. But the (sorry - rather convoluted) point is that I promise it's not just you.

Hope you are ok. (And sorry for the rant!)

I have been thinking about this a lot.
However, I think it can be very hard to know what will be right for you until you are in it, or that it will stay ok.
For me, I know that simply taking a pay cut will not necessarily make work life easier. I work hard in a demanding job for a very demanding boss and I get ill a lot. I recently got diagnosed with a chest infection that I didn't know I had, because I have pretty much forgotten what "well" is.

But - the worst paid / most junior jobs I have had have also been the most stressful. Nasty work environments; disorganised superiors; poor instructions; no scheduling, no autonomy, just "jump to it"; having to be very subservient; and so on. No fun and no satisfaction at all.

I'm not at all sure that I'm doing the right thing but I am hanging on for now because:

• we need the money. I'm the higher earner. I think if I earned what DP earned it would seem a lot less worth paying for childcare and I'd consider just stopping (would that even be manageable? Don't think so)

• I like financial independence

• it's good for the girls to see me working at a high level

• I don't like giving up. I have not done well in my "career" by many standards and I should have done better. I would like to give it one more good hard push

• It's actually easier to negotiate flexibility when senior, even if on an ad hoc basis

• The ill health thing: I have just accepted that I will get ill sometimes and that will take the form of a day when I just can't stop crying, have to phone in sick, get some sleep and probably anti-b's for something like a chest infection. It isn't great but it's actually easier than being at home on maternity leave with a newborn and a toddler and not having anyone to call in sick to, or anyone to relieve you. Illness is a part of life and I almost seem to schedule it now: I have never not turned up to an external meeting, but the days I do drag myself in rather than let someone down, I know that I'll find myself unable to leave the house a day or two later when the diary is clearer. It's better than day after day after day with a breastfeeding baby when everyone has a cold. I used to feel guilty about being ill, but now I don't; I know that germs and tiredness will hit, I know that it is unreasonable to ask more of my body than it can do (though I do, I'll have to pay it back)

Infact, children need you more as they get older!

By school year 4-5, there's the Secondary school hunt and prep for 11+ exams if that's one of your options.

Brilliant article, thanks so much Robotic Sealpup. Should be required reading.

"This thread made me think of an article I read the other day in Harvard business review. To sum up, researchers found that men who 'pretended' to work 60 hours were equally rewarded by their employers as colleagues who actually did. On the other hand, men who were upfront about taking time of for family commitments were penalised, just like women were.

hbr.org/2015/04/why-some-men-pretend-to-work-80-hour-weeks

What's the point in being a loyal, hard-working employee when employers just rate you on the basis of how busy you look? Such bullshit."

They aren't easy issues at all for men as well as women particularly those of us who are the primary earner (as now that 70% of graduates are female and women under 30 earn more than men in the UK). I am out the other side compared with some of the people on here as my youngest children leave school next year. It gets much easier and it's been hugely beneficial that I kept the full time (legal) career going and for me wonderful to own the firm and work for myself (and keep all the money ) which gives you money, power and control which you don't get in any job at the junior end.

In fact my advice to the children is pick careers you will enjoy, secondly which are intellectually satisfying and ideally well paid and also importantly pick ones where later you could own the business and work for yourself. Now my daughters are lawyers too I am certainly involved in discussing issues like work load - their graduate brother is a postman and finishes work by about 3 each day (and indeed collects his brothers from school). that is quite a contrast - obviously he earns much much less money than they do but has shorter hours (although much less power - the amusement I have that we have 3 lawyers, a banker and then him and we're juggling our family holidays around the availability of the royal mail post man.......because he has less power to pick when he is off work than the rest of us).

I know (about the postman and time off thing) - one of the hardest things about doing a junior job is the lack of flexibility. I found that hard enough before I had children but now I do I don't think I could go back to it.

20 days leave a year, no working from home, days' leave have to be applied for a certain time in advance and can be refused for any business reason. That's really tough, especially if you have a commute. I work long hours but I can WFH sometimes and other times I can juggle a few hours around to be where I need to be for the dcs. I can't imagine going back to a rigid 235 days in the office 9 - 6, with people noticing and tutting if it's 9.05. I would go mad.

I really object to the comments above that women work for "designer clothes and handbags". First, some jobs require smart dress so the "designer" clothes and a owning a bag a notch above BHS level are probably a necessary work expense rather than the goal. I have in the past earned well over 150k pa and never once have I bought a handbag that cost over 150 quid. I would never ever buy a brand new car even if I had millions as I think they are a total rip off. In my experience the women who buy the designer bags are usually the ones who can't actually afford them.

I work:
For intellectual stimulation
To be involved in the world beyond my front door
For the company of interesting people
To make the most of my state- funded education by giving something back to the economy
So I don't feel like DH lives in a different world
Because it made my parents proud (though both dead now).

The cash is only one of very many considerations, though it was obviously more important in the early days and I am very conscious that I am lucky to have been blessed with a brain that has allowed me to earn well.

I was also struck by momoftwoscallywags comment about having "all the debt associated with being in a good job and enjoying the perks". Isn't the principal perk of a good job NOT having any debt? Unless you just meant a big mortgage?

Anyway, a long winded way of saying that it's too simplistic to declare that giving up a demanding but well-paid job is a no-brainer because all you need to do is cut back on luxuries that you don't need. Jobs can give you a lot more that unnecessary luxuries.

Well said Jessie
Me too. Except I don't need to dress smartly for work (scientist) so don't ever buy expensive clothes!

The discussion on mumsnet is always fairly polarised on this, because most of us are making choices and not entirely choosing our life path out of financial necessity.

The difficulty is that it is so easy for people to become inflamed... one comment about designer handbags and now work is
"For intellectual stimulation
To be involved in the world beyond my front door
For the company of interesting people
To make the most of my state- funded education by giving something back to the economy
So I don't feel like DH lives in a different world
Because it made my parents proud (though both dead now)."

As though those things are only the preserve of paid employment vs designer handbags and pretty frocks, or women in the home have a markedly opposite experience.

I've done pretty much every type of arrangement - full-time/part-time work, all the way from sporadic temporary contract work to insanely long hours, part-time trainee, full-time student, shift working of a kind (evening training courses/weekend conferences) and I really can't say I feel any less intellectually stimulated at home than at work, or any less involved in the world beyond my front door, or divorced from the company of interesting people. As I like to say, mind broadens the travels (not the other way round).

I've found at times that work is a real squeeze on my bandwidth in terms of creativity, and at other times, that having breathing space to manage my own time has led to more fruitful working arrangements. And vice versa.

Ultimately though, an individual's perspective on someone else's choices that doesn't impact them in any real way is more or less irrelevant. They're all only stories we're telling ourselves. We really will be alive for a tiny blip in the context of the history of the world, of our universe. People will one day look at what we see as necessary to life as being archaic and weird and we can't possibly project into their perspective. So why engage in conflict in the here and now or be grossly offended by people who choose differently to you.

We all only kick the ball down the road, in evolutionary terms. It's actually fairly meaningless. Some people will get more out of their lives by spending more time at home, others at work. So be it.

I am not offended by people who choose differently to me.

I AM offended by people who purposely insult working women by claiming we are only doing it so as to buy handbags and frocks. Those people can fuck right off.

I'm not offended by any comments about handbags or frocks because

a - I missed them
b - they so clearly don't apply to me or my friends they're laughable
c - so what? Are women the only people who aren't allowed to have any fun or nice things? Do all men who work only buy lentils and wellington boots? Of course not. and why should they?

Fusionconfusion I never said that the things I listed were " only the preserve of paid employment".

I gave my personal list of things that I personally would not achieve by not working, given my own particular circumstances.

Nowhere did I generalise and it is wrong of you to suggest that I did.

It is also wrong to compare a well thought out post which lists positive aspects of working with a trite insult. As if they are somehow equivalent.

You are missing my point.

It's about how personally everyone takes everything. The point is we're all going to die, one way or the other, and what we spend our time doing is really irrelevant in any broader scheme, we just need to do what matters and feels important to us.

Language works in a funny way. If you make a proposition e.g.

"I wonder how many people wish they had worked less when they face death instead of working to buy nice things like designer handbags and frocks"

or

"I work for stimulation and to be involved in something outside my front door/give back to the economy"

in a context where people are discussing women's working, then typically what happens is that people will derive relationships e.g. I like x not y so x is better than y, I like x and it's opposite to y so if I say x is better, I am telling you y is poorer.

That's not personal, it's just how our language and cognition operate. I's why people get all het up about both in a context where women's choices are always scrutinised, judged, evaluated etc.

Unless you've really been involved in VERY few discussions on sahm/wohm on Mumsnet, you will know that if you start to talk about work in those kinds of terms in THIS CONTEXT in opposition to a means of earning cash the FUNCTION of your statements will be the same as the FUNCTION of "people only work for handbags and frocks". Both are informed by and reflect pretty anti-feminist but broad culturally-endorsed sentiment about what women do all day, be they at home or in the workplace. Men don't tend to justify why they work, either way.

Men don't tend to justify why they work, either way very true and they don't have the other expectations pinned on them either. My dh seems to think he can do as many hours as he likes and I'll pick up the slack at home because I am part time. I do any overtime I have to work out how it impacts on what I get done at home where he doesn't

Its incredibly personal and depends on a swirl of factors. Some people adore their jobs and light up when they talk about them. Others work to live rather than live to work - its something no one can advise you on, whats right for one isn't for another.

Personally worked in a big job (corporate lawyer in City lots of international work). I was ok at it but didnt love it. Plus the hours were crazed. Even as a single person I struggled with it (sent to Far East on 2 hour hours notice for 3 weeks. How the hell would you manage that with kids?!). I never went back after mat leave and was SAHM for 6 years. Set up on my own now and in June earned as much as DH who is a high earner ha! And means I am around after school for my DDs. Who are bookish home birds who would have hated after school club. Yes some months I don't earn much but its enough.

My work now brings me into contact a lot with people who are dying. Most of my clients are dead within 6 weeks of our meeting. Puts everything in perspective for me about what matters and what doesn't.

I would urge caution with 'downshifting'. The stress can be similar. The responsibility may be less but stress comes from being able to see exactly what is wrong in the organisation but being powerless to do anything about it. Management are often hugely threatened by anyone with bright ideas. You also have to sit by and watch while incompetent people are promoted above you.

In summary: you may be just as exhausted and stressed, but with less money and a big gap in your CV. Perhaps I've just been unlucky.

fusion the OP asked for people's personal experiences to help her make a decision of her own. Somewhere within the exchanges a poster made a comment about how some women just need to ditch the designer gear so they can take a step back from work. I think it was picked up by someone else telling an anecdote about a friend. I offered an alternative, personal viewpoint (albeit one I knew others would share) which also listed some personal pros of working which might have been of interest the OP or others with similar dilemmas.

That's all. I understand your sociolinguistic analysis but I think you are over- complicating a simple thread asking for experiences.

I think we can forget the handbags point. We all choose why we work. Some know I (lawyer) bought an island and funded 5 sets of school fees. What is one person's priority (I'd rather have shares or a pen knife than an expensive handbag) is someone else's frivolity.

I do think that as you age and rise in a career you get more money and more choices and it's a pity if you end up doing part time and losing those chances to have all th ebenefits you gain later in a career but not everyone wants the same thing and that applies to men too - plenty of those work a few days a week now and share childcare with a wife.

Some careers have got busier with longer hours than in the past and some have higher pay to compensate for that - my first annual salary was £6250 - our childcare cost a bit more than that although we were splitting it between two full time salaries.

So when I was junior and an employee I did not like expressing milk at work but I did it. With the twins when I was about 36 I owned my own firm and I usually had our nanny come to get me when they needed feeding and I'd feed them direct which was much nicer. (I have never bottle fed a baby actually personally despite having five babies - never put a bottle into its mouth)

I agree with Donald - be cautious about downshifting. So many people do it and think running a pub or cup cake business or whatever will be paradise but all they find is longer hours than before and just about no pay nor status. If down shifting is so much fun and such a wise move men would be rushing to do it.

Except that's not actually what the comment was. The comment was in relation to a post made by someone who had nearly died, and who said that experience made her re-evaluate her priorities. The designer handbag comment was made by someone who wondered if there were many people out there who, faced with death, would regret working for designer handbags. If your comments about working as intellectual stimulation/to contribute to society/to bolster the economy weren't intended to be generalisable, then really you also can't generalise from that one comment to "all women should give up work which we all know they are only doing for designer handbags".

We ALL live in a context that makes it quite likely that we might respond to comments like this as though they were personally aimed at us, because ALL women's choices are subject to this analysis. You might think that's "overcomplicating" it but I think it's something that is critical for any woman at a point of transition to consider.

A question someone asked me about an impending life decision of this type was something like, if no one could ever know that you were considering this [new career move/action etc] or if they did know you knew that no matter how you well explained your reasoning certain people wouldn't understand approve of it on many levels, would it still be important enough to YOU that you would still do it?

I feel if you can answer, yes, then it's probably a fairly good move for you and not likely to be something you will easily regret, even if it doesn't work out quite as you planned. The rest of it is just noise.

This is the ultimate dilemma for women, the 'can we have it all question'.
So is it possible to be successful in your career and also be a good mother and wife? Yes it is.

The difference is not every one will find it easy to perform all of those roles well, either due their personality, due to the nature of job, lack of extended family support etc. If 'having it all' leaves you feeling pulled in too many directions then you have to consider if there is a better way that will work better for you and your family.

she I appreciate that this is simplistic, but I once read the opinion that the answer to "Can you have it all?" is "Yes - but not all at once."

I took that to mean that there are times in life to prioritise career, and times when career needs to come second, when it's OK to tread water career-wise (or leave altogether, for some) because there are other things happening in your life, that in turn will need less of you later.

This obviously is made much harder when people are in roles with strong push factors I'm looking at you, corporate law, where the desire to step back might be exacerbated by family life, but may not be caused by it. (I for one got to a point where I simply wasn't invested in the work anymore.) So I think a clear-headed assessment is also needed when making a decision of this magnitude, as to whether the particular job/role is the issue (Is the environment supportive? Do you buy into the work? Do you want to be there / in that career long-term?).

I don't see anywhere near as much male angst going on over this stuff.