To accept a public sector job over a Big4?

[somewhereovertherainboww]

Job offer 1: public sector (finance), central London location so a fairly easy commute, 9-5 hybrid with 2 days WFH

Job offer 2: one of the Big 4, audit, regional office, a 1.5 hour (pricey) commute by train, very long hours and rarely WFH

I am returning to full time employment after years of being a SAHM to 2 DC(4&6 y.o.).

My heart says option 1 is more family friendly and “meaningful” but my head says a Big 4 in my CV can set me up for life, offers better progression opportunities and pay.
DH is not on six figures and my earning potential is definitely higher, which puts pressure on me to go for option 2. DH is happy to do school drop offs and pick up from clubs in the evening to allow me to work long hours but I worry I will barely get to see the children on weekdays.

Local government every day of the week. IME, promotions arise fairly regularly if you want to climb the slippery pole.

I truly wish I'd stayed in local government. And you're CV will not be negatively affected cos its about the work you did and successes not who you worked for per se.

I've worked in Big 4 all my career pretty much (2 of them) and don't recognise the horror stories but will qualify that by saying a, I don't work in audit and b I've not worked for Deloitte.

Hours can be long sometimes of course but I don't work disproportionately longer than friends/family in other industries. And days get flexed, there is a focus on wellbeing (I am quite cynical about this but they are trying).

I am surprised re WFH as certainly everyone in our office can/does in the very department.

But but but I'd be cautious re the salary prospects. Yet it's well paid but friends who have moved mid tier or in house earn similarly and we actually are struggling to retain at the moment as salary bandings have remained static and it's only really by promotion that people see pay progression.

I'd say the Big 4 is better on your CV. But it's also a long commute and long hours. And it will be long hours. Audit roles in the Big 4 in my experience are relentlessly long hours. Although depends on your seniority.

Personally with young kids and the stage of life I'm at now where I'm not chasing a good CV I'd take job 1. More flexibility and a better pension (public sector pension wins out over private any day).

My gut tells me to go for option 1. I used to be very career-oriented (pre-kids), not so much now. My values and priorities have changed and I want to be there for my children, however, I worry about progression opportunities, should I chose to go down the public sector route. Both roles are at a fairly junior level but I’m looking at it from a long term perspective.

In which case, go for the public sector. I went from press officer to head of comms in four years in local government.

Definitely option 1. Have you done audit before? I found it soul destroying (top 4 firm). Deathly boring, long hours, working off-site in random places, zero job satisfaction.

Someone else has already said this but you can end up working anywhere in the country doing audit. Are you prepared to do this, sometimes for weeks at a time, rushing home on a Friday for a brief weekend before going back Sunday evening?

Also, much as some client teams were lovely it is not the same as being part of a proper team as you are moving from client to client and often working with different colleagues from one job to the next. The whole experience definitely impacted my mental health.

I now work in the public sector (non-finance role now) and I knew it was the right move immediately. Yes there are lots of things that frustrate the hell out of it but ultimately the work is a lot more satisfying/ worthwhile and I am so much happier. Many friends who stayed out ended up leaving once they had kids too. Just wasn’t compatible despite what they like to make out. But…it depends what you want the most. Remember, the top 4 will be there in a few years if you wanted. And they’ll always be looking for people to join the audit team (there’s a reason!!).

I don’t tell many people what I used to do - it’s definitely not an asset on my cv.

Personally I'd go for big 4 and get it on my CV for 2 to 3 years. Better chance of progression and wide range of experiences.

@SickAndTiredAgain

Ernst and Young, or EY as they now preferred to be called... why does everyone call them Ernest and Young?!

I think that’s why they changed to EY. That’s why Deloitte put a dot after their name... so that everyone stopped called them Deloittes 😂

I have done all sorts in all sorts of firms inc in the public sector. I was shocked at the lack of professionalism and pride in a lot of areas of public sector pissed me off. People with ‘jobs for life’ who couldn’t be bothered to respond to emails, or answer basic queries. You don’t get that as much in the private sector as they would be sacked. Also pay grades and no bonuses means if you work hard it won’t be financially rewarded or recognised - leading the aforementioned lack of professionalism.

I’ve worked for Big 4. I wouldn’t be where I am without them. I have got every job I’ve interviewed for since. Six figures before 30. Learned a lot.

big 4 also has a HUGE flexible working policy so you’d 100% be able to wfh a lot!

I would go for the Big 4 role if it were based in one location and was hybrid. I would also go for Big4 if you could then transfer internally to their Public Services division (and audit Public Service clients) - then you get the PS hours, but the Big 4 name. I worked in private sector audit for PwC but did summers in their Public Services division and really enjoyed it although it was quite a different culture.

PwC were a fantastic employer when I trained with them - the biggest benefit was definitely to my CV. I subsequently moved into industry and have never struggled to find a job, I’ve combined three employers (5 roles) with having four children and have found it easy to ask for flexible working and work 3/4 days because big corporates really like and rate ex-Big 4 employees. In the long-term, pay is better, progression is better, bonuses are better - do 2 or 3 years and you will be set for life.

Just became a non equity partner in a big 4 firm - not audit- and the money is good. I have lots of flexibility in terms of remote working and managing my workload - but obviously it can be hard work.

im happy where I am for now though will need to see if it’s sustainable long term. The commute and balance is important

I had a few thoughts on this.

Could you ask for part-time at the big four? My impression is that they are struggling to recruit in many fields at the moment and are keen to appear more family friendly so they may well agree to this. Might make it more manageable though you'd have to be sure that it would genuinely be part time and not just working 5 days for lower pay than your colleagues.

I also doubt that it is Big Four with a 1.5 hr commute or nothing. If you've been offered two jobs you'll be offered more similar ones and mostly it's an employees market in these fields.

I'd also suggest calculating your likely pay per hour in both roles. I'm a lawyer but there's some overlap between what I do and the Big Four - I'm supposed to work a minimum of 36 hours per week (and that's recorded hours where I'm doing something productive) on a 4 day contact though frequently it's more than that in practice. In the public sector a full time contract would be c. 36 hours and you get time off in lieu if you work over that. So though I'm still paid more than I would be in the public sector for the hours the difference is nothing like as much per hour as you would think.

The progression opportunities are much better where I am now though and if I want to make really serious money at some point I have much better options for it having had the private sector experience.

There's a question of how far you realistically see yourself progressing at the Big Four. If you can't imagine ever being a partner, it may not be worth working in more junior roles trying to prove yourself there. The Big Four ask for a lot of their mid level employees for pay which is often not spectacular in the scheme of things relative to the hours and responsibility involved. They can partly do this due to the potential rewards of partnership. If you don't want that you can end up working very hard for years without ever seeing the real reward for it. It's a dilemma I often have myself as I can't really imagine partnership alongside young children.

If it really is more of a junior role I would not do Big 4 with young kids. All my friends training in audit lived in hotels Monday to Friday as they had to be on client site (which could be anywhere so may well be further than your 1.5 hour away office) - it’s not conducive to family life.

I’d go Big 4 purely for the long term gain, even if you just do 2-3 years then move on. I worked for EY in the dim and distant and, while it wasn’t a great environment, I can honestly say that it set my career up and is still a reference point 25 years later. I also recruit senior people in the finance field and I do lean towards Big 4 experience or training, particularly people who have come from regional offices rather than London, because I have found that they work to higher standards. Maybe that is snobbery (and the best person I ever worked with was ex BDO which disproves my own point), but Big 4 is definitely a CV positive. I have also see a lot of senior finance specs over the years and most still want Big 4.
It’s harder to jump between public and private sector in finance, largely because the requirements are so different (probably easier to go from private to public than vice versa), so choosing public sector now could definitely limit your future options.

I think you should go for option 1, that way you will be able to see your children more.

Option 1 without question!

If job 1 is an accountancy option take it. If it’s what I think it is, you can end up on the same path as big 4 grads (I know because I did an ACA at a public sector organisation).

Given the circumstances you describe and both being fairly junior, I would go for the public sector offer. May be easier to getting yourself back into work and the pension is usually worth several times the private sector one unless there is a massive pay discrepancy.

Good luck

Three hours a day commuting, probably more if the trains aren't cooperative, with virtually no wfh option? I'd run away screaming.

Yep!

Tough one

i guess it comes down to your mental space on either

whichever you feel you can do best

You say these are fairly junior - are you not fully qualified yet?

I'd think about how much your children benefit over their life by having a higher household income - wealthier children have better educational, job and health outcomes. You will be able to fund and support them in various ways - education, deposits on homes etc which make a massive difference to their lives and how easy it will be for them to have kids, get a career they enjoy, have the confidence to get the life they want.

They have a dad taking care of them and doing school pickups so they will be fine.

If you are the one who can provide the higher income, they probably benefit more from that than having you making packed lunches, doing laundry and watching swimming lessons etc.

You ought to factor into your decision that what is a 1.5 hour commute according to the timetable will often be considerably more.

When my DP was commuting to London, there was never a week when at least one day's travel wasn't irrevocably fucked by some event or other. Sometimes it was every damn day.

Nearly 30 years in public sector. (I admit I am institutionalised.) but I still think it is a fabulous place to work for parents. I had 3 kids, worked full time but extremely flexibly from the moment I returned from Mat leave with the first. Over the years that's included full time / term time only / Full time compressed hours.

The main difference between private and public sector is between being in an environment focussed on profits (high pressure) and one focusing on service to the public. (pressure of a different type)

There is no lack of progression opportunities within the public sector.