Taking a job without telling Employer I plan to FIRE

One last thought. IF the job turns out really well, and you stay there the whole four years and everybody loves you, come back here and ask us about how much notice you should give before actually retiring :) There is a lot of experience here about that, too.

iPhone reminder set for November 1, 2024..........:)
 
I don't think you need to say a word about that. I question them saying they want a lifer...4 years is a long time by today's standards.
 
Hi All,

...During the interview process, the employer and her team said they are looking for a "lifer" someone who they hope will "stick around" because her last admin assistant lasted 15 years...

I'm assuming your employment history shows that you tend to stay at a job for a long time otherwise it would be a really odd question to ask someone if their employment history shows they switch jobs every couple of years. It sounds to me like they are looking for some conformation that you aren't using this position as a short term stepping stone to a better job. It's a valid concern if they perceive this as a "lower" position compared to your current position and since people are expected to continually move up the corporate ladder and not down they are rightfully concerned that you are just using them. I would respond by explaining why you would be perfectly happy in this position.
 
Last edited:
I'm assuming your employment history shows that you tend to stay at a job for a long time otherwise it would be a really odd question to ask someone if their employment history shows they switch jobs every couple of years. It sounds to me like they are looking for some conformation that you aren't using this position as a short term stepping stone to a better job. It's a valid concern if they perceive this as a "lower" position compared to your current position and since people are expected to continually move up the corporate ladder and not down they are rightfully concerned that you are just using them. I would respond by explaining why you would be perfectly happy in this position.

FIREd, You are 100% on the money. During my last interview, the manager even used the word "stepping stone". I clarified my intentions. I am fine with having less "prestige" and much less money in exchange for less stress and greater work life balance because I have achieved financial security after working hard for 25 years. Is that really so difficult for a hiring manager to understand?
 
Last edited:
... is being OK with less money in exchange for less stress after you have achieved financial security really that hard for a hiring manager to understand?

Yes, for many people, even hiring managers, it is like being blind from birth and asked to understand the color red. Financial security is an alien concept, closely akin to the stories described in the current "Paranormal Experiences?" thread.
 
... I remember doing this “sales job” from hiring days. When I
really wanted someone/someones, I might arrange for my boss to wander in
to do a little selling, just to show we’re all family here
etc.
When I was working, my instructions to my guys were that
(unless the candidate was an obvious loser) I wanted candidates to leave
every interview being completely sold on wanting to work for us. Then,
when we made the hiring decision we had a better chance of getting an
acceptance.

… is being OK with less money in exchange for
less stress after you have achieved financial security really that hard
for a hiring manager to understand?
Well, that is very close to
the notion that it is a bad idea to hire someone who is overqualified.
Many hiring managers have this (IMO dumb) attitude. My response was
always “What are you looking for then? Underqualified ?!!!?) My view was that it is the company’s responsibility to make
talented people happy both in the jobs they are in and in any possible
promotion opportunities. So, yes, it is entirely logical to me that
financial security might create the same concern as being supposedly
overqualified frequently does.
 
My snarky response would be to stay - I’ll stay for 15 years if you give me a guaranteed employment contract with yearly COL raises - and severance equal to half the time left on the contract if you terminate me.
 
I would just answer honestly, that is very good to hear because I am looking to have a job I can retire from.
 
One more thing. In you next interview, if it comes up again, I would acknowledge that this is a lesser position than what you currently hold and is exactly what you are looking for at this time in your career. If the question about "lifer' comes up again, I would say that ideally you would like this to be your last job before retirement and by definition this means you want to be a "lifer".
 
I am fine with having less "prestige" and much less money in exchange for less stress and greater work life balance because I have achieved financial security after working hard for 25 years. Is that really so difficult for a hiring manager to understand?

Oh they understand, but that is a red flag. What they hear is: "listen I don't need a promotion, so I'm not gonna perform like I want one either" and that spells mediocre employee. No one wants to hear you want work-life balance.

Similarly, overly ambitious candidates who are transparently aiming to leapfrog up 6 months after they take a role are often non-starters. I've conducted interviews where someone was clearly looking for my job, not the one I was hiring for.

Striking that balance is always a trick.
 
I would ask them for a 15 year guaranteed contract. That should end the question
 
I was asked a similar question when I applied for a government job at 48. I said Their is an old yiddish proverb, “We plan, God laughs,” Recognizing that I had been pretty impulsive all my life, my father told my wife “don’t you let him quit this job! You know how he is!”. And I had my own doubts about me. But I retried two years ago after 20 years.

The boss told me just before I retired that they never thought I would make the drive I did for even six months. It was 30 miles each way in beautiful Big Sky country with zero traffic. But they didn’t think I could handle it.

“We plan, God laughs.”
 
FWIW, the average person stays in a job 4.6 years. I looked this up when I was in a similar situation (planning to take a job for a few years, they didn't say anything about looking for someone to stay long term). I took a job mid 2017 with the intent to retire 2020 - 2021. Now I've moved to part time and between the extra time off and Covid I decided to work through this year and at least next.
 
As already touched on, will the person or company still be there in 15 years..here’s my true story....

I did exactly what you were looking at when I was 55. This was supposed to be a less stressful the job, 25% pay cut, closer to home, etc. etc. When I took the job, they gave me a very generous sign-on bonus, and told me I had to stay three years or I would have to pay it back. ( Yes, that would be a “stay” bonus actually) but I didn’t think much about it at the time and took the job.

I planned on retiring in 3 to 5 years. Then 2 months in, my DH got bad medical news.... as a result we decided to move up our plans, but no specific date set yet.

The job ended up to be not so stressless, however I was there about 9 months when our company was bought by a competitor. Departments were starting to be re-organized, and it looked like they wanted to phase me out as I was 20 years older than anyone else in my department. I decided to bide my time, and we started building our retirement home meanwhile.

A year and half into the job, the buyout transaction finally occurred, and on that date, it invalidated the original bonus requirement stay clause. So I didn’t have to pay back that bonus. :dance:

Coincidentally, later in the same month my annual bonus and another smaller stay bonus from the new employer were given out. I gave notice the day after they cleared in my bank account. :dance::dance: The total of those 3 bonuses was equal to six months pay for me.

So, you can say whatever you’re comfortable with, no one knows what will come...And imho, I think that was a ridiculous question to ask. I interviewed dozens of people and would never expect anyone to give an honest answer to such a leading question.....
 
Hard one, speaking as one who was usually on the hiring side.

Since the question was asked, I think you are ethically obligated to answer. Had it not been asked, then there's nothing wrong with keeping quiet.

If I were the hiring supervisor and you answered honestly, that would be a big gold star in your favor. If you were my top candidate before you answered, that gold star might be enough to keep you there. I value integrity very highly. Will she see it that way? I have no idea.

It appears from the OP that they never asked the question, they just made a statement about wanting a lifer.

Things can change in four years. If the job is offered and you decide to take it IMO you can accept it guilt free.
 
I think you can find a way to respond honestly. You may be planning on 54, but you never know. Maybe something like “I intend to work as long as I’m able.” It may be that at 54 you’re no longer able, but you really can’t be certain.

More to the point, I'd say "I intend to work here until I retire."

When you expect that you'll have enough money to retire is none of your employer's business. And, as many responders have pointed out, plans change.

Maybe you desire extra financial safety and/or love your co-workers, so you decide to stay longer. Conversely, maybe you find out that it's a toxic culture and you want to get the heck out right away.
 
Finally, I approve of your handle, Ncc1701. Personally, I'd probably put an "E" on the end :)
 
Back
Top Bottom