Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 07-08-2011, 12:01 PM   #21
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 102
Thanks everyone for the feedback. I guess one thing is clear. There is no certainty in defined benefit plan, which for me is #1 reason for option #1. Also, based on my personality and my job history, I tend to get bored after 1 yr of working somewhere if I'm not challenged. Don't want to work at #1 where I'm not growing and have that golden handcuff. Wow, that'll be like prison.
__________________

__________________
HatePayingTaxes is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 07-08-2011, 12:25 PM   #22
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
freebird5825's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Nowhere, 43N Latitude, NY
Posts: 9,017
Door number 1, no hesitation.

I w*rked private sector for 8 years, then switched over to a fed civilian j*b. The poor j*b market where I live had a lot to do with the decision.

Sometimes it is possible to "change j*bs" within the same organization or company. There are always special projects that pop up and need to be filled quickly. I actively sought these opportunities as they happened. I believe the buzzword was "career broadening".
Taking on new assignments kept me challenged mentally and for many years, greatly w*rked in my favor.
__________________

__________________
"All our dreams can come true, if we have the courage to pursue them." - Walt Disney
freebird5825 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 12:28 PM   #23
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
DFW_M5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 4,980
For me, I chose #1 for 26 years, and as I progressed with mega corp, the compensation was outstanding and most likely would not have been exceeded on the other path.
__________________
DFW_M5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 01:06 PM   #24
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 123
I would take # 1. While you are still young you are offered jobs like #1 generally. Do not underestimate stability & predictability.

IF later in life something goes wrong with #1, you can always try for #2.

Good Luck
__________________
rkser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 03:25 PM   #25
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
martyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bossier City
Posts: 2,182
Quote:
Originally Posted by W2R View Post
Either one would be a reasonable path towards retirement, as long as you realize that with no pension you need to save more in #2 than #1. My preference is path #1, and as a federal employee that is what I ended up following.

Same here...
__________________
“Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.”
-John F. Kennedy

“Hard work never killed anybody, but why take a chance?” - Edgar Bergen
martyb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 03:53 PM   #26
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 13,258
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatePayingTaxes View Post
Based on your career experience, which of the two paths would you take?

1. Stable company, pension/good benefits, good hours. Most likely stay in one company until retirement.

2. Change jobs every 2-5 yrs. More interesting than #1. No pension. Uncertain hours. Salary 30% higher than #1.

#1 is the traditional stay in blue chip company until you retire and #2 is more of a silicon valley programmer types who change jobs often but gets to do different things. Which route would you take if you can start over again and why?

I have read other posts... but will throw in my 2 cents...

Why do you think that #1 does not have more interesting opportunities... is it a small company?

I worked at a big company for 5 years that failed... got hired on with the company that bought it... and worked another 15... then got laid off...

But, I got promotions during the first 5 years that had me do different things...

Then had a completely different job for 1 year... transferred to another completely different job for 5 more... then after the management screwed things up moved to another different job for another 2 years.... this lead me to be sent to London for a 'short time' that turned into about 14 months (the company picking up the cost of my place)... which lead me to be in NY where I worked for 3 years with the company also paying for my apartment... and finally back to Texas for the remainder of the time... Now, all my jobs were accounting or finance related, but they were all over the board on what I did... and many were very interesting....

Now, I am at a small company with lower pay but it is stable and good hours and a decent commute.... it is boring, but I do not mind that much... I just want a paycheck with good working conditions... I got it...
__________________
Texas Proud is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 07:35 PM   #27
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
obgyn65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: midwestern city
Posts: 4,061
Point well taken.
Quote:
Originally Posted by M Paquette View Post
Caution: It's only 'safer' if the company actually fully funds that pension with reasonable, conservative assumptions.
__________________
Very conservative with investments. Not ER'd yet, 48 years old. Please do not take anything I write or imply as legal, financial or medical advice directed to you. Contact your own financial advisor, healthcare provider, or attorney for financial, medical and legal advice.
obgyn65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-08-2011, 11:13 PM   #28
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
youbet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 9,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by donheff View Post
Take what seems like the most personally rewarding job (compensation and benefits, opportunities are all part of that equation).
Gee Don, you didn't include doing something you enjoy in your examples of "rewarding."

I think the biggest lesson I've learned from posters on this board is that the most pathetic thing you can do is sacrifice your current life in order to enhance FIRE possibilities. Spending 2 or 3 decades in a career that you don't find rewarding is a waste of the most important asset you have: your one and only life.

If you're fortunate enough to be smart, healthy and energetic and therefore able to call most shots on your career, do something you like! You can always make money but you can't turn the hour glass over for another run at life.........
__________________
"I wasn't born blue blood. I was born blue-collar." John Wort Hannam
youbet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2011, 12:08 AM   #29
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: North of Montana
Posts: 2,753
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatePayingTaxes View Post
Based on your career experience, which of the two paths would you take?

1. Stable company, pension/good benefits, good hours. Most likely stay in one company until retirement.

2. Change jobs every 2-5 yrs. More interesting than #1. No pension. Uncertain hours. Salary 30% higher than #1.

#1 is the traditional stay in blue chip company until you retire and #2 is more of a silicon valley programmer types who change jobs often but gets to do different things. Which route would you take if you can start over again and why?
Why isn't there a third or forth option?

I spent my last 20 years with a mega-corp sorta like

#1 but:
  • no DB pension, DC
  • good hours, yes, good for them
  • higher pay (salary & bonus) than anything else within a few hundred miles, don't forget the stock options on a publicly traded company (not one that might have an IPO if all goes well)
  • spent most of my career in IT, finished in audit, and had other opportunities, that I did not pursue, along the way
so how will #2 work?
  • change jobs every 2-5 years, does that mean different employers, same job?
  • what different things do you do? coding is coding
  • why more interesting, not planning promotion in #1
Based on my experience, neither option exists. #1 might be a government, #2 is an illusion. You are planning to change jobs every 2-5 years and get a 30% premium. Might work today, but why do you think you'll even be employable 5 years hence (since you're talking silicon valley, why won't you become a COBOL obsolete guy)?

I'd be looking for options 3 through 7. One of them is probably better.
__________________
There are two kinds of people in the world: those who can extrapolate conclusions from insufficient data and ..
kumquat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2011, 01:56 PM   #30
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 71
Everyone has to answer this question for themselves based on their individual goals and desires. Some people thrive on the excitement of the unknown and some are healthier and happier with security.

That said, I've got a great job/career that I've been at for about 15 years with a large, very stable company and regularly yearn to be "out there" doing something more fulfilling..I'll cut the cord at some point, you can never get yesterday back, so do what your heart tells you to..
__________________
cb7010 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 09:43 AM   #31
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
calmloki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Independence
Posts: 5,459
There are other choices which can result in having adequate funds to retire.
__________________
calmloki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 10:10 AM   #32
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Midpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 11,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatePayingTaxes View Post
1. Stable company, pension/good benefits, good hours. Most likely stay in one company until retirement.

2. Change jobs every 2-5 yrs. More interesting than #1. No pension. Uncertain hours. Salary 30% higher than #1.
Like others have said, I don't think you can count on #1 long term.

I started in 1977 working for a Fortune 500 company with good pensions and retiree health care. After I worked there for 17 years, they sold the division I was in and our pensions were frozen (at low levels and we could not withdraw the money before retirement age) and retiree health care was taken away (not phased out, just flat taken away, all legal). New company had no pensions or retiree health care. So I had to re-evaluate my plans and fend for myself. I developed a plan (didn't have one before that), saved and invested aggressively and fortunately, 18 years later I was able to retire early! I'm convinced that losing my old school pension/health care was a lucky break in the end, but I was still young enough to save and invest to put myself in control. It woke me up, thankfully.

Short answer, I think you should be financially prepared for reduced Soc Sec, no pension and no retiree health care and choose a job based on the job's merits and current benefits (not retirement). Retiree benefits are a factor, but a secondary consideration at best. If later in life you find you have a pension and/or retiree health care, you can retire earlier or richer. Essentially all upside risk, YMMV.
__________________
No one agrees with other people's opinions; they merely agree with their own opinions -- expressed by somebody else. Sydney Tremayne
Retired Jun 2011 at age 57

Target AA: 60% equity funds / 35% bond funds / 5% cash
Target WR: Approx 2.5% Approx 20% SI (secure income, SS only)
Midpack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 12:48 PM   #33
Full time employment: Posting here.
Redbugdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Columbia, SC
Posts: 959
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
Gee Don, you didn't include doing something you enjoy in your examples of "rewarding."

I think the biggest lesson I've learned from posters on this board is that the most pathetic thing you can do is sacrifice your current life in order to enhance FIRE possibilities. Spending 2 or 3 decades in a career that you don't find rewarding is a waste of the most important asset you have: your one and only life.

If you're fortunate enough to be smart, healthy and energetic and therefore able to call most shots on your career, do something you like! You can always make money but you can't turn the hour glass over for another run at life.........
I think what DonHeff and YouBet said is the way I feel about the subject. I think if you are in a job that is secure with good benefits but do not enjoy what you do...then you are just a bug in a jar. If you enjoy what you do, then the promotions, money, and offers will come naturally. I think I would trade being secure for a more enjoyable, (but less secure), job. The older I get the more aware I am of how important time really is. You don't want to waste your time doing things you don't enjoy...even at work...since it is YOUR life.

Otherwise...all things being equal...if you love what you do...then you are probably better off in a secure job than a higher paid non-secure job. Money is important...but up to a point.

I know this is a little off the subject, and I hope my ramblings make a little sense...
__________________
"I either want less corruption, or more chance to participate in it." Ashleigh Brilliant
Redbugdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 02:01 PM   #34
Recycles dryer sheets
EllisWyatt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 233
Going to chime in with my two cents worth (and may be overcharging at that....)

I took the #1 route with a Fortune 500 megacorp. I thought. Signed on with the megacorp that bragged that they had never had a layoff since 1958 ("Danger Will Robinson!!") Probably should have set off alarms. When the downturn in the industry came 1 year later, they had a 20% staff reduction. Then another. Then 10%... ad nauseum. Then they did away with the defined benefit system and went to a matching 401K. After twenty years and 18 rounds of layoff, they were acquired by a bigger fortune 500 company, and the retirement health benefits vesting moved from age 50 to age 55 (with significantly increased cost and decreased coverage).

At which point I went to option #2. More $$, essentially the same stress. Still no pension or retirement health coverage, but have been able to "top off" the nest egg.

I was actually fortunate, however. Because the downsizing/lack of security began so early in my career, I was able to realize that I could only depend on myself for my own retirement, and began saving aggressively at a young age.

I was also fortunate that, by working for a megacorp, I got excellent training and was able to work on some awesome projects that smaller companies could not.

So, my experience was to go for #1, save like I decided on #2, LBYM, and enjoy myself as much as possible along the way.
__________________
EllisWyatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 02:18 PM   #35
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Rustic23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Lake Livingston, Tx
Posts: 3,624
First, I agree that both are ways to retirement. I disagree with those that say #1 no longer exist. I may not be as prevalent as it once was, but I think it does exist in many industries, sales, office jobs and such. I think it is often up to the employee to continue to reinvent themselves and to stay current in their skills.

The thing you did not say about #1 was 'and the job is the pits' or 'it is boring' or 'you will have to take up heavy drinking to get through 30 years'. As for #2 you assumed that you will be able to get a new job every 2-5 years. A close friend of ours went with #2 (sales) while his wife went with #1 (school teacher). Just about every cent extra he saved was spent at one time or the other during times of unemployment. IMHO, it boils down to there are no guarantees! Your retirement is what you make it.
__________________
If it is after 5:00 when I post I reserve the right to disavow anything I posted.
Rustic23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2011, 02:23 PM   #36
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
donheff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 8,638
Quote:
Originally Posted by donheff
Take what seems like the most personally rewarding job (compensation and benefits, opportunities are all part of that equation).
Quote:
Originally Posted by youbet View Post
Gee Don, you didn't include doing something you enjoy in your examples of "rewarding."
I had actually initially written "take the job that sounds like the most fun" with no qualifiers. Then I decided that, in the OPs situation, I would consider all those other things as well so I switched to "personally rewarding." The parenthetical list was meant to affirm that those things should probably go into the equation. I would trade a job I enjoyed for a better paying job I didn't in a heart beat. You spend a lot of decades at work.
__________________
Every man is, or hopes to be, an Idler. -- Samuel Johnson
donheff is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 12:13 PM   #37
Dryer sheet aficionado
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 37
I am option #1, but not gotten the benefits. I've starting my 30th year, but 10 years ago they converted the traditional pension to a cash based approach, which they've since just moved to a 2% 401K contribution + match to 6%. What a change. With the old approach, I could retire now with 80% of my income. With the new plan, ummm... not exactly. In fact, their "pension" plan wouldn't even produce enough to pay my medical. Medical used to be fully paid by them too, and now its nearly all paid by the employees (in fact, I think they are making a profit on it). So I probably got the worst of all worlds by staying put, and not getting the traditional benefits.
__________________
convergent is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 12:22 PM   #38
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 102
Is it legal to change the DB like this? How can they promise something at the time of hire and eventually change it? Isn't there some kind of law against that?
__________________
HatePayingTaxes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 12:57 PM   #39
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Midpack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Chicagoland
Posts: 11,965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rustic23 View Post
First, I agree that both are ways to retirement. I disagree with those that say #1 no longer exist. I may not be as prevalent as it once was, but I think it does exist in many industries, sales, office jobs and such.
I for one never said #1 no longer exists. You would agree that #1 has become rarer and rarer for decades and that counting on it might end in disappointment (to put it mildly)?
Attached Images
File Type: gif figure-2-retirement.gif (38.4 KB, 8 views)
__________________
No one agrees with other people's opinions; they merely agree with their own opinions -- expressed by somebody else. Sydney Tremayne
Retired Jun 2011 at age 57

Target AA: 60% equity funds / 35% bond funds / 5% cash
Target WR: Approx 2.5% Approx 20% SI (secure income, SS only)
Midpack is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2011, 01:12 PM   #40
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Mulligan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 7,369
Interest chart Midpack. I had read that workers with pensions had declined from 75% or so in early 80's to around 17% or so today, but that included government workers. I wonder if any of the 7% today with private sector pensions are actually working under frozen pension plans.
__________________

__________________
Mulligan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:25 AM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.