Worth it to double my salary?

[Heatherbell1978]

I'm in a professional role earning £70k. Mid 40s, DH, 2 DC. Only ever worked for 2 large organisations (finance). My current role is great - lots of autonomy, nice team, nice manager and I can wfh most days. Work compressed hours so I have one day a week off. Good at what I do and the job is flexible around family needs.
An ex colleague has asked me if I'm interested in applying for a role in a different organisation. They're looking for more females to address the balance apparently. It's working in a field I used to do years ago and enjoyed but moved away from when DC entered the picture - quite stressful and travel involved.

Here's the thing. It would be double my current salary (including guaranteed bonus) but...based in a city a 3 hr train journey away.

I could negotiate 1 or 2 days a week in the office apparently although I'd need to fund travel myself. Officially they ask for 3 days in the office.
DH also has a relatively big job but can wfh a lot. DC 7 and 10.
It feels like the travel would wear me down after a while. Or not? Is it worth it? WWYD?

although I'd need to fund travel myself.

That’s unusual for a big company isn’t it? Do you mean you’d be paying for flights and hotels when you went away with/for work!?

If you mean you’d have to fund your commute to and from the office, that’s obviously completely usual.

If the new role is niche, will that narrow your job options in the future? That would concern me. Also the travel will wear you down and has potential to eat up a chunk of the extra money. Plus you lose your free day every week.
I think you'd be mad to take it, and generally speaking I'm quite career (and money) focused! I'd possibly take an inconvenient job like that as a development opportunity that might open up better options in future, but not if it was just a well paid dead end.

I'd say no, for all the reasons outlined previously by others. The travel, the time, children still young. Plus you weren't head hunted, as such, you were asked because you're female. Someone else said it better than me but what kind of dickheads suddenly realised they needed women in the workplace? Raises serious questions about the culture there.
No thanks.

The travel will eat up the extra money quite fast!

It’s a hefty commute and I’d avoid the likely stress of staying away regularly etc given double salary far from doubles your take home pay.

I'd stay where you are, I can't see what the appeal is really.

You have a job you like, that's secure, that works with your family life, that pays enough for you to live comfortably. Why change that?

I wouldn’t entertain it. The additional money may initially appear attractive but the commuting and overnight stays will grind you down in the end.

I used to have to do a fair amount of International travel in my role and quite enjoyed it for a while but it soon became routine and something I ended up resenting. I managed to convert my contract to a full WFH arrangement and the change in lifestyle was immense. I now earn 200k without ever having to leave my spare bedroom if I choose not to. No amount of money would convince me to sign up for any significant commute or requirement to be office based.

Also worth noting that your take home pay won’t increase anything like x2 as some of the additional pay will be taxed at 60%+NI. You can of course offset some of this burden by making bigger pension contributions however Labour are suggesting they’re going to reduce the tax efficiency of that making it less appealing.

That stood out to me. I work in a traditionally male dominated industry and any company hiring people just to balance the figures would raise a red flag for me.

At the moment, with youngish kids, it will be pretty exhausting unless your DH really steps up and takes over a significant amount of the organizing.

It does sound like this role could help you build assets and a pension pot that could let you retire early or on a much better standard of living than you currently have. Or it could give your kids a huge boost at uni or a house deposit. Is that something worth the hit to your day-to-day life now?

If you could do it as two consecutive days and stayed over, how much would the train and hotel take out of the salary bump (bearing in mind any tax increase)? What about any extra help you'd need to buy in at home?

At the moment you're on a good salary, so maximising isn't essential, you are in a sound position. And what a PP said about their sudden desire for women and what that says about their work culture is worth thinking about. But it also sounds like you're taking the majority of the salary sacrifice to make family life more manageable. Do you want to be doing this? Your DH said he'd jump at it - and I bet he wouldn't consider that it would mean even more wifework and potentially salary sacrifice for you. Are you going to end up resenting that down the line? Especially if you grow apart in later years?

wouldn't it out you in a higher tax bracket? is it worth it?

Fascinating thread.

I bet the same posters who say they wouldn't do it are very keen on "taxing the rich" and complain about not enough support for strugglers.

This is exactly how high earners earn their high income. In my place of work a lot of people on high packages (150-200+) commute 2h each way daily and still work long hours.

I work full time and work away for a number of weeks a year with similar age children. But I wouldn't take this job. Sounds stressful and not worth it honestly.

Fair enough if they think it's worth it for £200k. I wouldn't. It might be worth it for a stupidly high salary, high enough that you could do it for a couple of years then retire to live modestly, but freely. It's not worth it for £200k, especially when so much of it would go in tax.

I don't see the correlation between not wanting a six hour daily commute and being keen on the principle of 'taxing the rich'.

Absolutely not. Twice the salary but way more than twice more of your life. With DC it would be hell.

If they let you wfh then yes. Or even one day a week in the office. Any more than that and it won't be worth it

You do realise that people who don't want extra pressure to earn more are very keen on taxing those who do?

Someone who's very happy to work part time low stress low wage job will be the first one to shout that 200k earner should be taxed up to eyeballs, no matter what effort it takes?

Some cognitive dissonance here - proverbial MN 100k+, half of posters don't believe women can earn that much, but when asked no one's interested in making effort

Sorry OP, appreciate it's irrelevant to your question, I won't be posting here, please forgive me

I wouldn't. The journey is too long and I'd hate staying away.

I think you're generalising enormously here. And there's a huge gulf between a part-time, low-stress job, and a job in the OP's present salary bracket of £70k-ish, unlikely to be part-time, low-stress but which has a sensible commute.

It isn't the case that to earn £100k+ you need to take on a six hour commute. I don't know anyone, male or female, in that salary bracket in my organisation who has anything like that length of commute. Most of the higher earners have a similar hybrid working arrangement to the OP. They're well-paid because they're hard workers, good at what they do, and have relevant technical skills and expertise - not because they're willing to spend six hours a day on a train or in a traffic jam.

So you've been approached so they can tick a box?

You've got a role that works for you now and it sounds as if you enjoy it. Would i swop that for a 3 hour commute and nights away from home when I have two young DC ? Not when already financially comfortable.

I wouldnt

The problem is that the official role is 3 days a week. You are being told it could be negotiated to 2. Don’t trust that as the contract would say the 3.

My BIL had a one to two day agreement per month agreed at senior level but not written into contract. The senior bods in the bank have now insisted everyone, whatever level, are three days per week. No ifs or buts. His commute is now tortuous.

Op, can you postpone this decision until 30th October?

Right now if you earn 140k and let's say 20k bonus you can keep 128.5k (60k pension + 68.5k cash), assuming no employer pension contribution.
It's not impossible to leave at 6am, be there by 9am, leave 5pm and be home 8pm one day a week. You're mid 40s, you could build pension pot to retire comfortably by mid 50s and help your kids with uni fees, house deposit etc.

But - this all is very likely to change with the new budget and your extra income is likely to disappear in taxes. I'd apply and see how it goes but wouldn't sign any papers until budget announcement.

I’ve done this, to a lesser degree (a couple of times a month). It completely depends on how confident you are in your DH’s ability to manage. Genuinely, the worst bit of the whole thing for me was the worry about him not coping (as sometimes the knowing he wasn’t). If he’s a calm and on top of stuff, you’re not a strong empath, and the worst that will happen is someone forgets their PR kit, then go for it. But if he’s an unorganised flapper and liable to keep calling you or downloading his stress on the school run onto you, then absolutely not.

Ask for 3 days working from home.

Between your office days … maybe stay in a hotel. Then you don’t have to done one 6 hour community. That is if your husband is ok with the that?!

Nope!

Agree with this. Success requires sacrifice.
And I think you're missing a point here - I'd flip it the other way. They are specifically trying to recruit women. That means you're job is safer than others and they're more likely to be accommodating for you, so push for flex in the final interview,
I did a 2hr drive for 5 days a week for 2yrs to advance and I'm well into the 130k bracket in my early 40s now.
It can be hard, but as you suggest, max out your pension to secure your retirement whilst giving you R&R once a week - sounds worth it to me.