what to do ????????????

[ER_Hopeful]

started a new thread from http://www.early-retirement.org/foru...ose-55218.html

just came back from my final interview with #2, met every one from CTO to CEO, I LOVE their company, small , entrepreneurial, I can be my own boss. Da@n, I shouldn't have gone in the first place. my heart tells me #2, but my brain is telling me #1. what do you guys say ? hell with the $30k difference? I haven't sign anything so it's not too late ...

[growing_older]

No way I would go with the burn-out firm. If you were a hard charging, advancement at all cost guy, you could consider it, but you're a potential ER. Why would you consider a firm that overworks folks, can't manage an interview schedule, and leaves everyone frazzled. I know some companies like that in my industry. Folks who survive and go elsewhere have camaraderie and a network to talk to. Folks who never worked there avoid them and are reluctant to hire them because of all the bad habits they develop there. YMMV, but you need to decide what you value more. If it were me, I would go for happy work, as long as the money is still enough for your lifestyle.

[LauAnn]

IMO, this is one of those decisions that there is no right or wrong answer. I know that doesn't help. Have you considered just flipping a coin?

[Rambler]

If it pays the bills, do what you love. That's much easier than hating your better paying job, because you can do it for much longer. If you were only 1-2 years from ER it might be different but sounds like you have a while to go. Also keep your goals and their timing in mind. Do you know what your career and life goals are (many people don't and it's worth taking some time to consider them...makes decision making much easier).

Good luck.

R

[akck]

Looking back at the other thread, with them starting you out as a contractor, will you be getting a 1099 or a W-2? If a 1099, you need to subtract the employer portion of SS when comparing offers. Also, what benefits are associated with each company? Both of the above could be your deciding factor.

[ER_Hopeful]

Quote:

Originally Posted by akck Looking back at the other thread, with them starting you out as a contractor, will you be getting a 1099 or a W-2? If a 1099, you need to subtract the employer portion of SS when comparing offers. Also, what benefits are associated with each company? Both of the above could be your deciding factor.

w2, agency picks up 1/2 of my payroll tax

[JohnDoe]

I would vote #2.

Think about getting up in the morning.

Would you look forward to going to #1? I doubt it.

Would you look forward to going to #2? Probably.

Life will pass you by with your head spinning in #1.

JD

[jayc]

Did you meet the CEO at the other company? Was he as nice.
Sounds like you might be a little bigger cog in #2.

This is a good problem to have. Good luck. Keep slamming code and remember, testing is for sissies.

[growing_older]

Quote:

testing is for sissies

I don't understand this humor, but it does seem deliberately offensive. What's up with that?

[kumquat]

In any interview, you are trying to look at least your best and maybe better. The interviewing company is also doing that. Don't believe everything anything they tell you. Do your your own DD (where have I heard that before?).

[pimpmyretirement]

I thought you were already stuck with #1.

That contract to hire thing is a bad sign. You don't get the extra 30 for nothing.

Given that you like #2 better and don't need the money, I'd take it.

I say that as someone who stepped out of a high stress position to work from home though.

[rescueme]

Presented with the same options, I would take #2. However, it's your life - your family.

I assume you asked the question on a public forum to come up with ideas pro/con from others, that you have not thought of on your own to help you make a decision.

Since you have come back with another post on the subject, I'll venture to say that you did not have an "ah ha" moment from any comments made, thus far.

Therefore, regardless of the opinions of others on this thread (including mine), it really comes up to the question of what is best for you. Listen to your heart - nobody else matters, IMHO.

[jayc]

Quote:

Originally Posted by growing_older I don't understand this humor, but it does seem deliberately offensive. What's up with that?

Not at all. The standard question in IT before you implement a change is, Did you test it? In most shops/meetings, someone usually quips this.

Are you in IT?

[ER_Hopeful]

Quote:

Originally Posted by growing_older I don't understand this humor, but it does seem deliberately offensive. What's up with that?

that was just a tongue in cheek from jayc

[ER_Hopeful]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pimpmyretirement I thought you were already stuck with #1. That contract to hire thing is a bad sign. You don't get the extra 30 for nothing.

I made the mistake of agreeing(in a email response) to take the position because #1 kept rushing me to make a decision the next day(Thur) even though I told them I'd get back to them on Fri(note to self, stand your ground). When I received the formal offer in PDF(Fri.), again the agency want it signed and faxed back asap. I stopped taking her calls the rest of the day and went to final interview #2. Now I have two formal offers on hand.

There's just too many warning signs with #1. after all said and done, I can simply summarize as follow:
at #1, I felt like a machine.
at #2, I felt like a human

[Amethyst]

"testing is for sissies" to developers is like "break a leg" to someone about to go on stage. It's a backhand "good luck."

Amethyst

Quote:

Originally Posted by jayc Not at all. The standard question in IT before you implement a change is, Did you test it? In most shops/meetings, someone usually quips this. Are you in IT?

[growing_older]

Quote:

Not at all. The standard question in IT before you implement a change is, Did you test it? In most shops/meetings, someone usually quips this. Are you in IT?

Network Operations. I understand the macho BS attitudes you sometimes see from development, but it's still offensive and disrespectful to the rest of the team. It's also a raw nerve since we are the guys who spend all night or weekend mopping up the mess from an arrogant decision not to test. The *best* developers test.

So, maybe another reason for me to be so eager to ER. Sorry for derailing the thread. I still vote for #2. Life is too short to put up with unnecessary hassle in the frazzled consultant company. They sound like they believe in rushing everything and maybe not testing. lol.

[rescueme]

Quote:

Originally Posted by growing_older The *best* developers test.

Not all IT shops have a QA group, who has a disinterested task from the development team.

If you develop/test in the same group, you are only testing what you know (and coded for). An outside QA group can really stress test a new/revised application, along with performing regression testing (e.g. making sure that any old code still works) if need be.

If these two groups (along with the customer, who defines the need) do their job, support calls due to problems should be minimal - only to cover those items that were not foreseen by either group.

I bet you can tell what field I wo*ked in for over four decades ...

[pimpmyretirement]

Hate those darn testers, always finding problems and making projects late.

[rescueme]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pimpmyretirement Hate those darn testers, always finding problems and making projects late.

A poor project which dosen't meet the customer's original request/contract, delivered on time is still bad ...

It's better for the QA section to find the problems before the customer gets/pays for the product rather than the customer doing "testing" after they paid for it. Hey, how many folks on this board have done beta testing for Microsoft, as customers, after a major release? At least you can keep the problems "in the family" until the application is tested/stressed rather than not meeting the customer's original specs, and IT takes the well deserved criticism from the customer. I understand your comment (I heard it for many years). But really, that's the fault of the project manager who doesn’t add proper testing (cost/time) to the project plan since most IT developers think "written/delivered", rather than "written/tested/customer accepted/delivered". And most of that is due to the front end "sales force" that wants to get projects booked and is willing to cut the overall delivery price to a customer to make a "sale". Of course, the project estimation of cost/time that the sales person uses often time is coming from a project person, since the sales person may not have the technical background to estimate project requirements, and the project person doesn’t understand the sales organization's goal (which also includes customer satisfaction).

Sales/development/testing (and technical & delivery) have always been part of the IT organization. Unfortunately, the three primary areas are like family members that don't get along...