I’m literally begging you - help

[Hellllppppmmeeee]

wise Mnetters I’m literally begging you to help me decide my life.

would you take a job that paid 50k decent benefits but in the office 3 days a week. More senior position

or

one that paid 45k one day in the office, more jnr position, so a bit of a career back step.

after tax there is £150 a month in it (not factoring commuting costs)

I’ve had a bad experience with work lately and honestly I’m frozen decision wise

Lol, what about car sweets!! 90 minutes worth of jelly babies....

WFH not all it's cracked up to be. Many jobs benefit from the ability to network, to share ideas etc. Also, getting dressed and out of the house gives your life more structure whereas WFH turns your home into your workplace rather than your refuge. WFH incurs costs too - heating electricity. being constantly at home sometimes gives others free rein to impose other tasks on you/phone you/ call in ...

I vote for this too

I was in this position tbh and took the drop and financial hit. I don't regret it, a friend took the senior role and the stress she's under is immense while I have an easier time 🤷‍♀️

More senior role.

Yes 3 days a week in the office, meeting people, listening to ideas, people who work from home seem to be forgotten about which isn’t great for promotion.

@Hellllppppmmeeee its a fairly simple decision. If you want career progression then you take the more senior role as then you keep stepping up the ladder.

If you just want a 'job' then you take the more junior one and know that it will be a minimum 18 months before you start to progress anywhere and even then you may still be at a lower level than the one you are currently being offered.

£5k is not enough difference for me to justify 2 whole extra days away from home. I would miss my dogs, miss working in the garden in summer, miss chipping away at daily tasks around the house, miss easy school runs, etc.
Cost-wise I’d have to pay 3 times as much fuel, 3 times the commute, 3 times the wraparound care, 3 times the dog walking costs.
Quality of life impacts would be rushing dinner, less planned/healthy dinners, dealing with more idiots (that might not apply to you).

I don’t know what the figure is to justify the extra 2 days onsite for me personally, but £5k ain’t it.

Watched a very good video that said you should just pick one and make it work. Either will be fine.
The point is you don't actually know if the other choice would be any better even if the first choice turns out worse than you think. Even if you think it might of been better to pick the other, anything could happen in life from a car accident or death to a lottery win.
There's no way of knowing what will happen in life so make the decision you can live with and live with it.

@HRHElizabeth I would miss my dogs, miss working in the garden in summer, miss chipping away at daily tasks around the house

People like you are the problem with the WFH culture. You're meant to be 'working', the clue is in the name. Yes you'll have a lunch break but there's no way you're doing all that in your own time. I'm hybrid but on my WFH days my dog is in daycare, because I can't work and look after her, and I'm always suspicious of people who claim to do both effectively. I'm also unclear why working in an office means you can't meal plan.

I would go with the 50k job. It pays more, is more senior and much much smaller commute. 3 days is very doable and with time might even go down to 2 days which is a breeze and much better than wfh 4 days a week.

In my last job I was in office 1 day pw with a 90 min commute. Current job I'm in office 2.5 days pw with a 50min commute. I'd choose my current job any day over the older one.

Depends on what your goals are. Salary wise there is not much difference. But with a more senior role there is more career progression, and it would translate to higher earnings in the future. Travel to office is another factor.

I have young kids now. So if I were to chose between the 2 today, I would go for the junior role, because wfh is really important to me. If I have to travel to office 3 days a week, it will make work life balance a lot harder and create a lot of stress.

If I were to choose between these 2 jobs 3 years down the future, I would definitely choose the senior role.

Can you make a pros and cons list to help you decide?

I’d probably go for the lower stress mainly WFH role as I’ve got young kids and WFH is more flexible/less exhausting. Please ensure tho that it’s in your contract that you go to the office just once a week - i’d confirm this before accepting and try and get it on an email before being written into your contract. Every week in mumsnet I see posts from people who took jobs with the assurance they just needed to be in the office once a week and now their employers are requesting a return to full office working and they can’t do it.

I'm pleased you're going for the £50k role. I'm sure you won't regret it.

Incidentally, what is the AL for the higher paid role? Is it different to the more junior position?

So both have a 3 hour commute a week....if you don't have kids take the 50k, if you do have kids take the 45k. The flexibility of being home 4 days a week would make up for the pay difference, specially for you would have to pay after school club if you take the 50k.

I'd definitely have gone for the £50k nearer home job.

Either role is going to be less stress than you had before in the old job. You sound very much like you want the motivation of a senior role and would soon resent the more junior position. If you do have to go into the office more for a couple of weeks or so, then you and DH just need to find a work around like you do when he works away.

Given your updates on age, previous experience, I think you sound like you want the more senior role.
And that’s key - what you want. Not what a bunch of people on the internet might say.
honestly though, I can relate to your feeling of panic. Can you take a few breaths, do something calming for 10,20 mins this evening. Then ask yourself honestly what do you want ?

Sorry your last job sucked. You can do this!

Factor in the additional electricity costs of staying home, the loss to your pension and the higher paid job will hopefully come with pay rises as well - for 3 days in office definitely take it.

50K one with more senior position

Another one backing the decision to take the more senior position! (I say this as someone who has consistently taken jobs I'm overqualified and underpaid for.)

Some other posters have given you an unfairly hard time.

It's very clear from your writing that you've just left a job that broke you. You don't have to give the details - I suspect it would be hard rehashing it all in your head let alone writing it down. I'm really sorry you had that experience.

You'll have felt an immediate relief at quitting, along with the sudden irrational fear 'but maybe I'll never work again as I'm stupid and unemployable.' All kinds of doubts will keep creeping in. It's normal. It takes a while to build up your confidence again.

I'd go for the higher-paid more senior job. Three days of in-person interaction with nice people - not horrid, toxic colleagues - will actually be quite healing. And you need to prioritise your recovery. Taking a less senior role where you can hide away from people by working from home is not going to remind you how awesome you are.

I've been in your shoes, and I think the higher-paid job is the right choice for you; you just don't have the confidence in yourself to fully believe it.

Moving on from a toxic job is a lot like moving on from a toxic ex. When you're emotionally stable enough, it can be useful to reflect on how things turned out, but the important thing is to leave the fears and worries in the past and not judge a current partner for behaviour they haven't exhibited. Don't assume your new employer will be out to get you. They're different.

The new job is a fresh start. You deserve the fresh start. You will be brilliant, @Hellllppppmmeeee.

Take the office based job. Sooner or later the world will wake up to the fact that WFH is not productive and leads to poorer outcomes for both employer and employee
Going to an office and interacting with colleagues is how we develop skills, learning from others and making progress in your role.

Being at home does not mean OP will be available for childcare, as she will be working! She would have to pay after-school clubs anyway.

@ScierraDoll I quite agree

I’d take higher pay with 3 day WFH

Higher Pay, More Senior Position, 3 Days in Office:

Pros:
Higher pay and benefits.
More senior position, which could mean greater opportunities for growth and development.

Cons:
Requires being in the office three days a week, which might impact work-life balance and flexibility.

Lower Pay, Junior Position, 1 Day in Office:

Pros:
More flexibility with only one day in the office.
Potentially less stress with a junior position.

Cons:
Lower pay and benefits.
A step back in your career, which might affect long-term growth.

@innerdesign you can't look after a dog while you work? Seriously???
Don't know about anyone else but my dog gets a good walk before and after work (sometimes a quick walk around the block midday) then spends the day barking at the wind from the window and sleeping. My husband plays with him too (he also works from home)
For what it's worth I went into the office today and got barely a thing done due to the sheer noise and constant interruptions.
My productivity was awful. Can't wait to work from home tomorrow and smash through my to do list. Oh and look after my dog. So be suspicious of me working effectively all you like!