Spouse A recently got a new job, really started a new career in a field related to what Spouse A has been doing in the past. Spouse A is well-liked and well-regarded at the new job, but there is a desire for Spouse A to move to the company office where the rest of the group works. (Spouse A is the only member of the team working in the company HQ, instead of the remote office.) Spouse A's job pays well, even though it is about 20% less than what Spouse A used to make.
It isn't clear if Spouse A's job is at risk if Spouse A resists such a move.
Spouse B has been in the same job for over ten years. Spouse B's job is pretty safe - Spouse B will likely only lose the job if the entire division goes away, which is a possibility, but a small one. Spouse B's position might be sufficient critical that Spouse B's employer would feel compelled to approve Spouse B working remotely. At the very least, there is an assumption (hopefully a good one) that there is little risk (to Spouse B's job) associated with asking about that possibility, given the assurance that if the answer is no then nothing would change. However, there is a recognition that such a question will incite some measure of fear into Spouse B's management, so the risk (to Spouse B's job) isn't zero.
Spouse B's salary is roughly 35% higher than Spouse A's (and so is therefore 35% more critical to the success of the FIRE plan).
It is possible that Spouse A's employer would be interested in hiring Spouse B, in another division of the company, also working out of that remote office, either in a job similar to what Spouse B does not, or perhaps even permitting Spouse B to make the same career move that Spouse A recently did (something which Spouse B has expressed interest in). Presumably, though, there would be some reduction in pay, but also presumably, in light of the context of the situation, it would likely be a minimal cut.
The couple agree that in the absence of a tacit ratification of the move by Spouse B's employer or a preemptive offer of employment to Spouse B by Spouse A's employer, the idea of the move would not be entertained.
The couple now lives 3-4 hours from Spouse B's brothers' families, with whom Spouse A is actually reasonable close with, as far as in-laws go. The aforementioned remote office is roughly 5-6 hours from a number of Spouse A's cousins (i.e., not someone that Spouse A grew up with), and is 14-15 hours from Spouse B's family. Spouse B is not close to the in-laws. So the move effectively is a conceptually a move "away" from family. Previously, there was talk about moving toward (Spouse B's) family, ten years from now. (It still might make sense to make that move, but of course it would be a second big move, and I suspect we can assume it won't happen.)
Several important friendships would likely be substantially lost in the move, but no friendships older than five years old. The move would specifically be aimed to locate the couple in close proximity a church of their faith, so while the general area is not necessary in synch with the couple's general perspective on things, there is a community of like-minded folks there.
The couple currently lives in a suburb of a major American city. The remote office is in a suburb of another major American city. The move would be from a colder climate to a warmer one, which is a good trade in winter, not so good in summer. Call it a draw. Expenses comparison: Utilities 37% less; Groceries 14% less; Housing 44% less; Transportation 4% less; Health Care 17% less.
Having read this hypothetical situation, what are you thoughts about how you'd think about the situation if you were one of the spouses? What other considerations would you think about? What criteria would you think about apply for the aspects mentioned above, and the additional considerations that you and others suggest should be thought-about?
It isn't clear if Spouse A's job is at risk if Spouse A resists such a move.
Spouse B has been in the same job for over ten years. Spouse B's job is pretty safe - Spouse B will likely only lose the job if the entire division goes away, which is a possibility, but a small one. Spouse B's position might be sufficient critical that Spouse B's employer would feel compelled to approve Spouse B working remotely. At the very least, there is an assumption (hopefully a good one) that there is little risk (to Spouse B's job) associated with asking about that possibility, given the assurance that if the answer is no then nothing would change. However, there is a recognition that such a question will incite some measure of fear into Spouse B's management, so the risk (to Spouse B's job) isn't zero.
Spouse B's salary is roughly 35% higher than Spouse A's (and so is therefore 35% more critical to the success of the FIRE plan).
It is possible that Spouse A's employer would be interested in hiring Spouse B, in another division of the company, also working out of that remote office, either in a job similar to what Spouse B does not, or perhaps even permitting Spouse B to make the same career move that Spouse A recently did (something which Spouse B has expressed interest in). Presumably, though, there would be some reduction in pay, but also presumably, in light of the context of the situation, it would likely be a minimal cut.
The couple agree that in the absence of a tacit ratification of the move by Spouse B's employer or a preemptive offer of employment to Spouse B by Spouse A's employer, the idea of the move would not be entertained.
The couple now lives 3-4 hours from Spouse B's brothers' families, with whom Spouse A is actually reasonable close with, as far as in-laws go. The aforementioned remote office is roughly 5-6 hours from a number of Spouse A's cousins (i.e., not someone that Spouse A grew up with), and is 14-15 hours from Spouse B's family. Spouse B is not close to the in-laws. So the move effectively is a conceptually a move "away" from family. Previously, there was talk about moving toward (Spouse B's) family, ten years from now. (It still might make sense to make that move, but of course it would be a second big move, and I suspect we can assume it won't happen.)
Several important friendships would likely be substantially lost in the move, but no friendships older than five years old. The move would specifically be aimed to locate the couple in close proximity a church of their faith, so while the general area is not necessary in synch with the couple's general perspective on things, there is a community of like-minded folks there.
The couple currently lives in a suburb of a major American city. The remote office is in a suburb of another major American city. The move would be from a colder climate to a warmer one, which is a good trade in winter, not so good in summer. Call it a draw. Expenses comparison: Utilities 37% less; Groceries 14% less; Housing 44% less; Transportation 4% less; Health Care 17% less.
Having read this hypothetical situation, what are you thoughts about how you'd think about the situation if you were one of the spouses? What other considerations would you think about? What criteria would you think about apply for the aspects mentioned above, and the additional considerations that you and others suggest should be thought-about?
