Ask Slashdot: When Is a Better Career Opportunity Worth a Pay Cut?

An anonymous reader writes "I am currently working for a software company that rakes in a lot of money and has an EBIT that puts other companies to shame. The company is great: good benefits, lots of vacation time, very good salary. However the problem is that their architecture is already established, change is often slow moving, and most of the decisions are made by architects as oppose to developers. I find my job somewhat mundane and I am losing interest. I recently was offered another job, with a small company that doesn't have the capital/revenue stream to provide all the perks that my current employer has. Needless to say, this small company wants someone to take their system into the modern age, which means re-design/new architecture, implementation, maintenance, team lead, etc.... thus, more experience to add to my resume. These are things that I won't be able to do easily in my current job. My concern is that it appears this company has really high expectations, and since I had to take a small pay cut to get this position it leaves a but of uneasiness in my stomach for future promotions/advancements. However I believe in their product, their vision/goals, the people and the future of the company. I feel excited but also scared as its a bit of a gamble. Has anyone else experienced the same thing?"

Comments

Almost always yes, with a but

[i kan reed]

Be sure you can trust that you're not being screwed. Some(many?) employers are sociopaths and will take you for a ride on future promises.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[mysidia]

Be sure you can trust that you're not being screwed. Some(many?) employers are sociopaths and will take you for a ride on future promises.

You should assume this by default. Before you take a huge risk, you should ensure that you will be adequately compensated for the risk.

If they can't compensate you today: get a guarantee of future compensation if they are successful.

In other words: the pay difference should translate into tangible future benefit.

Businesses have a way of recording investments.... it's in the form of either issuing you equity shares, or signing a promissory note, for the difference in pay. If you're an owner, you are less likely to be screwed.

Require something legally enshrined on the books, for your troubles.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[Jhon]

The "but" should include "how old are you"?

Are you in your late 40's or early 50's? The answer is almost always "hell no". Even mid at mid 30's you should think hard.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[HycoWhit]

That was my first thought as well! How old are you and do you have a family? :)

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[garyisabusyguy]

Get them to commit something to you at 3 month intervals based on performance
i.e. 90 review with a set rate of compensation based on your performance, 180 review with assignment of position based on work being performed, even simple things like tools to be used, work environment, etc... should be well defined and you should start looking for another job if it looks like they are failing to deliver

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[garyisabusyguy]

Any job change in the 40 to 50 year range should be limited to pricey consulting jobs where you can gain a years salary in six months (with the intention of working a full year) or else you are risking losing everything

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[lgw]

I disagree strongly.

There are four good reasons to take a pay cut to switch jobs within a development/IT career when you're older:

1) Small companies trade pay for responsibility. You make less, but you're in charge of more. Short term, that's lose-lose, but in long term it can be vital to moving up the career ladder. For example, the path: "lead" at big company -> manager at small company -> manager at big company is often the fastest path. Same thing to move from a "some coding" job to a full-time coding job, or becoming an architect, or whatever.

2) Specific technical skills lose value over time. If you get too far behind what the market wants, accept that you will take a hit to modernize your skills.

3) You shouldn't expect to make more money just because you get older! For the first 10 years or so, your skills improve noticeably every year, so your pay should go up more than inflation. For the next 10 years: maybe. Improving your ability to contribute isn't just technical any more, and it can be hard to change the things about yourself that you need to, to have more technical influence and reach. But after that? 99% of us top out. Once you grow to your limits, you'll give up any raises (over inflation) whenever you change jobs, because your ability to contribute has plateaued and that's normal.

4) If you've been working as an engineer for 30 years and you still need the money, you're doing it wrong. At some point you'll be seeking interesting, challenging problems, and 20% pay more or less will be less important than that. Eventually you can afford to "follow your heart". Especially once the kids are gone.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[Jane Q. Public]

"You should assume this by default. Before you take a huge risk, you should ensure that you will be adequately compensated for the risk."

This is what I was going to say. If you are taking a big risk on their future, you should ask for and get (!) a share of the rewards.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[bill_mcgonigle]

Some(many?) employers are sociopaths and will take you for a ride on future promises.

And they have legal systems for doing so - how many times have we heard of developers promised 2% of the company, only to find out that their shares were in a dilutable class and wound up with next to nothing?

I once had a friend who was offered a relatively large chunk (~5%) of shares in a company with an interesting premise but very little pay. I suggested he ask for a portion (1/5th) of those promised shares as undilutable since he'd be one of the first 10 employees.

The managers hung up the phone on him immediately and never called him back. Bullet dodged.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[Immerman]

5) You're doing okay financially, but are getting sick of your current job and the new one promises to be more satisfying.

6) If you *aren't* doing okay financially, consider reorganizing your life to spend less so that 5 is always an option.

Not everything is about money. Job satisfaction will do far more for your quality of life than a few extra bucks come payday.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[Anonymous Coward]

Key word - LEGALLY. I know someone who was told "in writing" about how much better things would be. They weren't and the "in writing" is worth the paper it was written on. 9 times out of 10 promises are just so much bullshit and you will get screwed. If they cannot make a commitment in a legally binding way then you've just figured out they were going to screw you or aren't really serious. Sometimes "boring work" that's not killing you is better than exciting stuff that does.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[Tablizer]

Be sure you can trust that you're not being screwed. Some(many?) employers are sociopaths and...

On the upside, working for/with sociopaths is great experience because you will always encounter them in life. True, you may end up with an a empty wallet, but be far wiser for it.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[curunir]

4) If you've been working as an engineer for 30 years and you still need the money, you're doing it wrong.

Moreover, I've felt for quite some time that I need to have at least a year's salary saved up so that I can do my job effectively. And by doing my job effectively, I need to feel comfortable saying, among other things:

    * That's illegal/immoral, I'm not going to do it.
    * That's a dumb idea, we shouldn't do it.
    * That's an impossible deadline, I'm not going to agree to meet it.

If I'm not entirely comfortable with them calling my bluff and losing my job over the issue, I won't feel comfortable saying those things. And, as an engineering leader, I need to be able to say those things if they need to be said.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[Jhon]

"I disagree strongly.

There are four good reasons to take a pay cut to switch jobs within a development/IT career when you're older"

Thats fine. Yes there are reasons. But are a list of very specific exceptions to the general "almost always yes, with a but" to which I responded. You just provided a list of "buts"

I'm sorry, but job stability and good benefits look pretty damn good the closer you your 40s-50s.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[Penguinisto]

7) Company culture. If you can't stand working at CompanyX, or it looks like CompanyX will make your life miserable, then it won't be worth any of the other potentials.

If you try to push through it anyway, thinking "oh, I'll only be here a year or two then I can move on", you still may wind up damaging your career/health/sanity/marriage/etc far more than you would gain by trying to gut through a couple of years in a toxic (to you) corporate culture. Not fitting in means you could get fired, demoted, passed-over by some new hire that would otherwise ostensibly report to you (and you wind up reporting to him/her), etc. Or, you could literally find that you just woke up in a hospital cardiac unit, still thinking that a couple of minutes ago you were in some heated argument during a scrum meeting. Or, you could end up internalizing all that resentment and anger, take it home with you, and do it often enough to find divorce papers waiting for you on the kitchen table.

Mind you, 15 years ago I wouldn't have thought a whit about corporate culture, but honestly, looking back I find that it makes a HUGE difference as to how hard I want to work, how I felt when I got home at night, and overall satisfaction.

You're stuck with spending at least 1/3 of your prime adult years at work - you may as well actually like being there. Shit - I'd rather drop a level or two and be a happy mid-level sysadmin than to jump up a level and become some miserable-as-fuck Director or CIO.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[mysidia]

What you suggest might work, but if it's not enshrined in a contract, they might decide to come up with some bullshit excuse for firing you or laying you off.

You may never realize the upside from your risk, even though THEY realize the upside from the risk you are taking.

You can and should get both that AND some kind of legally enshrined promise.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[Darinbob]

But ALWAYS get a salary. The vast majority of startups will FAIL. Yes it is nice when one succeeds and someone there early on gets a payback for the hard work. But most of the time there's only small payback. It may mean sticking around in the company for a loooong time before there's payback too (5 to 10 years). Sometimes the lump sum payback from equity looks nice, until dividing by the number of years it took before it became cash. I see some people who keep going to a string of different startups that eventually fail, all the while accepting a salary well below industry standard.

So again, get that salary up front. Maybe it won't be as big as a current job one should never live like a pauper in the hopes of a future payout. That is, reduce the risk as much as possible, gamble with what you can afford to lose. One would not put half their salary into a betting scheme in Las Vegas, so it makes no sense to do the same thing with a job. Treat the equity as a pure bonus, something that is nice to have but never necessary and never depended upon, and never worth becoming a workaholic over.

It may depend on age too. Becoming bankrupt at 30 is not so bad really, but going bankrupt at 50 or later will be a major disaster that is unlikely to be recovered from.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[tbuskey]

If you're not happy/satisfied at the current job, you have a reason to change. If you dread going in on a regular basis, you need to change something.

I recently left a place where the work was ok, I liked my coworkers, but I dreaded going in. I'd procrastinate because management would change my tasks behind the scenes or create situations that created more work to little benefit. I had little say in decisions and was discouraged from trying. My new job puts me on truly cutting edge, I get great feedback from management with lots of input and I'm working much harder.

I also find I'm eating better and feel healthier. And as a result of my 2 month job search, I know how much my skills are in demand. If this job doesn't last, I'm not worried about getting another. My skills will be much higher. They were stagnating in mundane tech before.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[cthulhu11]

If you've been working as an engineer for 30 years and you still need the money, you're doing it wrong.

Or, perhaps, you live in a community property state that allowed your ex-wife to bleed you dry, and you have a mortgage a family with medical needs. Maybe you're set for life, but many of us aren't.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[lgw]

Well, we all face the results of our life choices, to be sure, and sometimes life kicks you in the fork. And it's unlikely one is set for life in his 40s as an engineer. But I don't care about small changes in pay, or the risk that my job will vanish and I'll have to find a new one. If you're seriously living paycheck-to-paycheck in middle age as a salaried professional, man, you screwed up, and you need serious changes in the way you live.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[cthulhu11]

Oh yes it entirely my fault that my ex-wife went violently insane, that the housing bubble happened, and that my son would be born autistic. Those were deliberate on my part.

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[lgw]

Was it a shotgun wedding? (I grew up in the Appalachians, so that's not a rhetorical question.) If not, yeah, choose your life partners carefully. And like the second half of that sentence said "sometimes life kicks you in the fork". (The housing bubble was quite predictable, BTW, though sadly many of the consequences couldn't be avoided even if you did see it coming.)

Re:Almost always yes, with a but

[Bauermlb]

Totally agree. I have left several jobs for less pay but more interesting work, and more upside potential. Sometimes it has paid off (issues of having spent the last 20 years in a number of start-up companies). If you can afford the risk, take it. Life will be more interesting, and your return to society will be better as well.

I just went through this...

[RocketScientist]

You'll find about a dozen people in this thread that are gonna say "follow your heart".

Those people are wrong. That's the last thing you should do.

I went through this, and it's got upsides and downsides. You need to weigh those against your work-life balance and make a well thought out decision about your priorities.

The company I left 2 years ago had a rich culture, a workout room, showers (nice to go with the workout room), weekly social things, great work-life balance with a 45 hour or so work week and alternating Friday early out, a great career ladder, and great coffee. The job was mildly interesting, not very challenging, but I had a lot of fun and free time, so I could do contract side work to fill out those needs. Work life balance was awesome, I worked about 40-45 hours a week, and got a lot of time at work to do career development (teach myself new stuff) and learned on the job. Manager was a bit of a git, but hey, nothing's perfect.

The company I'm at now has no amenities to speak of (ok, coffee, that's it though). No gym, no weekly social things, nothing really. I took a pay cut to come here, but since them I'm making about 35% more, because I'm a good performer and fixed a lot of key infrastructure problems and took a management position. I'm working with more up-to-date technology and doing some cutting-edge things because there wasn't a massive technical legacy to support that prevented it. However, I also work a huge number of insane hours, I'm basically always on call, and I'm getting a lot of great physical job stress effects, which is just great.

So there's the question. Can you do the stress and the extra work to re-earn the extra (and probably more) money? How important is work-life balance to you? Do you have a family? Do you want to learn a lot of really neat things and do work you can look back on and think "that was really awesome, I can't believe I pulled that off"? Is there a likelihood that the new place will grow to the point where you'll come out ahead in 5 years?

Those are the questions you need to ask yourself, and you need to be brutally honest about.

Re:I just went through this...

[Anonymous Coward]

45 hours per week for a 40 hours per week job is considered good work life balance where exactly?

Re:I just went through this...

[Anonymous Coward]

Pretty much anywhere that you don't get a paid lunch hour.

Re:I just went through this...

[angel'o'sphere]

and great coffee

In my observation, that is no kidding, the quallitiy of the software development department is correlated to the quallity of the coffee. Regardless whether the coffee is free or not (it is even more ashaming if you have to pay for the coffee and it is bad).

I only had one exception the previous 30 years where a developer shop had bad coffe but good developers and also a good software / software architecture / development process.

So my suggestion: check the coffee at the new shop :D

Re:I just went through this...

[kqc7011]

S-O, kids? Plus many other things that have to be considered. Tough choices. Me, several years ago I found a niche and stayed while giving up chasing the brass ring. All up to you as to what you want.

Re:I just went through this...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sure you're "at work" for 45 hours. I am too, sometimes less if I eat fast. But it's still a 40 hour work week then. Or do you count the commute too? In that case many people probably "work" 60 hour weeks while only actually doing anything for 40 hours. And we all know that 20 of those is hanging out on slashdot :P

Re:I just went through this...

[Anonymous Coward]

I totally agree... it's not just your job that you need to consider, but your life as a whole.

Re:I just went through this...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm saying that I wouldn't consider that to be a good work life balance and that there is no reason that it should be unless you're a workoholic or don't have a family or don't like to see your family or whatever. I have 24 hours in a day. I sleep 8 hours of that. I work 8 hours of that and then I drive to and from work and eat at work for another 3 hours. That leaves me 5 hours to do all the other stuff that is important in life.

Re:I just went through this...

[rwa2]

Good story. I essentially did this too about 2 years ago, under similar conditions.

Grew up in the DC area most of my life, and had some good jobs there working for various "Beltway Bandit" engineering firms, with the security clearance, unlimited overtime, occasional 2 week travel... it felt like a scam. Despite all of the perks, I was certain I didn't want to live that way the rest of my life. Plus, vitamin D deficiency from working in SCIFs all day was starting to eat my bones. But I saved up enough money to move the family out to the west coast to finally live a little.

It was a pretty substantial pay cut, but the cost of living out here West ended up being lower too. We now rent a house 3x the size of our old 2br condo. We're on a strict budget now that the wife stays home to tend to the kids, but everyone is a lot less stressed and doing better in school, and we eat better now than when we hit restaurants half the time. People out here are workaholics in comparison to DC ("Southern Efficiency; Northern Charm"). But they play much harder too. First week at the new job and my boss hands me a beer from his mini-fridge, which would never happen back East. And we have a whole bevy of new places to explore on weekends after having exhausted most of our old haunts.

So yeah, "follow your heart", but be sure to think it through... you don't want to be changing jobs every year, but you don't want to stagnate at one place for more than 5-10 years without growth either. See the good parts of whatever you end up doing, be prepared to make the sacrifices you're willing to take to make the changes you want in your life, and consider what is your "path of least regret".

Re:I just went through this...

[Willuz]

He's probably talking about a nine nines schedule where you work nine hour days and take off every second Friday.

Re:I just went through this...

[houghi]

... and you need to be brutally honest about.

This. Also be honest what you really want. What do you understand is a 'carrer' and why do you want it. Is it because you like to lead (manage) people that you wnat to get hgher up, or that you want the money? Or is it knowledge?Do you plan to have or already have kids? Do you want to be a part of their life, or will you be downgrading when that happens?

What are the downsides for you? e.g. when you are at the bottom, everybody might be your friend, when you get higher up, that will change. Don't expect to be invited by the guys for a beer. And if you invite yourself, you will always be an outsider. You will be always 'the boss', so they will not let themselves go and if they do, what will you do? Fire them or do as if nothing happend?

Do you have the skills to go in the direction you want to go? Not the technical ones, but the social ones. Ask people what kind of a manager you will be and if you will be good at it.

And remember that the grass is always greener at the other side. Also look at the positive parts of where you are now.

Re:I just went through this...

[ohnocitizen]

This. Be brutally honest with yourself. Especially if a new company is trying to get you for less than you are worth. This raises important questions:

1. Why can't they afford you? Lack of revenue, or is it a decision to try and muscle in people at lower rates? Both come with their own set of problems.
2. If they can't afford to pay you what you are worth - what will the rest of the team look like? How will that impact the success of the company (and your own success in the job?)
3. High expectations in combination with a pay cut suggests a mindset geared towards exploitation and manipulation. That's a giant red flag - others are a company that touts a culture that has high demands of it's employees. Some companies use stress and challenge as a way to keep employees (and their salaries) in check. Avoid like the plague.
4. Check working hours. Some smaller companies (especially those that either can't afford to pay or choose not to) tend to attract more junior/less competent people. Chances are they are planning on you working more than 40 hours a week (which reduces your effective wages even more).

Re:I just went through this...

[technomom]

I think what also matters is what stage of life you're at. If you're closer to the end of your career than the beginning, I think it matters alot. At this point, I have one in college, and the second one about to enter college. Our finances are such that neither kid should have to take out a loan to complete 4 years, assuming I work at something that can pull in at least 60% of what I'm making, so I figure that within 3 years, I'm going to downsize my career, start doing something I want to do rather than something I have to do. What's nice is that my company actually encourages bridging out to a new career, offering a kind of part-time work arrangement while you find your niche.

Re:I just went through this...

[Ex-MislTech]

In fascist America you learn to like working for free a little, or
you do your own business, or leave the country.

Apparently we are setting records for ppl renouncing their citizenship,
though most are rich ppl trying to protect their savings.

Re:I just went through this...

[AK Marc]

You'll find about a dozen people in this thread that are gonna say "follow your heart".
Those people are wrong.

Nope, you are wrong. Your mental health is more important than a little money. When you are happier, you family will be happier. If you don't like where you are, then you don't like it. Often, when it becomes such a chore, it will harm your personal life in other ways.

Re:I just went through this...

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like you didn't follow your heart. Either that or your heart is made of stone. Lower pay, but you had time for side projects and a life? Why in the world would you ever leave such a job for something as trivial as money?

Re:I just went through this...

[sandytaru]

Anyone who wants to be healthy is getting between 7-8 hours of sleep a night, both weekends and weekdays. I usually hit at 7.5 right on the nose. Lack of sleep hygiene is associated with a whole host of diseases, ranging from metabolic syndrome to Alzheimer's. If you require less sleep to be at 100% efficiency, you are the exception and not the rule.

Re:I just went through this...

[RocketScientist]

Yeh, if you do the math on my post above, you'll see I'm making about 25% more and working 50% more. My income is up, income/hour is down and my free time is way down. Is that really an income increase? Nope.

Was this a bad move? Not really. I've learned a lot and filled out a huge blank spot in my resume. I've now managed a very large database, managed a very busy database, managed replication and mirroring, done a data center move, done 2 hardware refreshes and a DBMS version upgrade. Long term it's going to pay off. Short term it's kinda hell.

Re: I just went through this...

[HornWumpus]

Never live 5 minutes from work or your phone will always be the one that rings.

Learned the hard way.

Re:I just went through this...

[oomlout]

That was a developer position and yes I consider *that* to be normal.

It may be normal for Germany, but it's not at all normal in the U.S. Especially that "commission for >40 hours" part.

How much of a pay cut?

[CQDX]

Can you still pay your bills and have enough leftover for long term savings? If the answer is yes I'd take the new job.

"lets make some bad decisions"

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm... lets trade a high pay, low stress job for a low pay, high stress job. Yup, sounds like a winning decision.

Go for it -- but keep your eyes open

[talexb]

This sounds like a great opportunity that comes at a small cost.

Keep in mind that joining a startup is something that will be rewarding on a couple of levels. You can help guide the technical vision, get to know a good group of people working together on something great.

You also have to keep your feet on the ground. Don't let common sense be overwhelmed by your local Reality Distortion Field. Don't let your mind wander off about what colour of Lamborghini you're going to buy with your stock options.

And I hope you left your previous company on good terms -- you never know when you'll meet up with that organization or those people again. The world is a surprisingly small place.

Kind of...

[aardwolf64]

I kind of did that. I used to work a nice boring job at a University with excellent benefits (but without high pay or potential for promotion).

I took a pay cut to work for a statewide bank, and it turned out turned out that job #2 was almost as bad as job #1 as far as upwards mobility.

I left job #2 for a 50% pay raise at FedEx. High stress, long hours, great potential promotions, great pay. Laid off as part of the cut-back in 2009.

Here I am working for another University (different large one, but still in the same state). I've got the good benefits and low stress, but my experience outside of the University systems actually got me pretty decent pay when I came back. I still don't really have any promotion opportunities, but I'm in an end-of-career job (as a 35 year old).

Re:Kind of...

[phorm]

Ditto here.
I took a fairly crappy, high-stress job where I managed to do good things (improved infrastructure and learned a lot in the process). The job was a killer, but if I hadn't worked there I probably wouldn't have had the additional experience and lines on my resume that got me my current (better) job.

Re:Kind of...

[Fwipp]

I just accepted a job for a 50% pay raise, from one University to another (across the US). Plus, there's still promotion opportunities ahead, with corresponding pay raises.

Maybe the lesson is not to switch to lower-paying jobs, but simply to switch jobs.

Re:Kind of...

[Ex-MislTech]

When the seas are very rough don't jump ship.

When there is a tech boom going and it looks like its not a bubble then
jumping ship becomes a more viable option.

A second boom is coming, likely in bio tech, nano tech, robotics, and 3d printing.

Good Luck to everyone in the wild changes that are coming.

it depends on your age

[kkonrad]

when a was younger it would have mattered, but not now (I'm 40). I mean if they want quality they must pay it. that is my opinion

Re:it depends on your age

[davecb]

Conversely, when you're older than 40, you may want the more challenging job if the old one is stultifying.

I'm over 60, and have gone from management to volunteer because my company's then major customer was exceedingly political and more than a little broken. So I took three months off and worked pro bono for a group that was a lot like a start-up: no money, tons of pressure, borrowed office space and the only thing free was the coffee. Totally fun!

That gave me the energy to go back refreshed, to a senior individual-contributor job at a young company.

Re:it depends on your age

[Anonymous Coward]

this is the primary factor. age sort of implies where you are with your life.

wife? kids? mortgage? sick/disabled parent(s)?

in general, young people can throw the dice.

older people have responsibilities, and throw the dice less. but also have been around the block a few times, so can get what they want without having to.

Interesting

[rtfarrell5]

I find it interesting your concern is that the architects, not developers, make the decisions. I can't recall working for a company, that was successful, that listened to the developers over the architects. I haven't met a developer yet that was both a visionary and a forward thinker. On the other side, if you are young, can pay your bills, and don't mind that the new company could very well be consumed, or shut out, because of your previous employer, I say have fun with it. If you answered no to any of these, think carefully, but remember that those who think long, often think wrong. Good luck.

Re:Interesting

[bondsbw]

My experience is quite different. I know a lot of people who do both, including myself. And most architects worth their salt at least did programming in some former life.

Re:Interesting

[Anonymous Coward]

...remember that those who think long, often think wrong.

That is trite bullshit.

Re:Interesting

[ACNeal]

That's the point. If a company has both Architects and Developers there is an EXPLICIT role definition of decision maker and decision executor. Sure the Architect WAS a developer at one point, but isn't any longer.

If you have BOTH, then of course you only listen to the architect for design/process changes, and the developer for execution level changes.

If you have both, and listen to both equally, you simply shouldn't have both. You aren't getting your money's worth from the architect, and there is no chain of responsibility, a lot of chaos.

Re:Interesting

[ADRA]

Define the difference between visionary and forward thinker exactly? Ah, thats a minor quibble. Architects are supposed to be developers with more wisdom, and hopefully though not always more bredth of knowledge. I'm still technically a developer but I worked in IT between development jobs years ago, and I have significantly more broad knowledge than most of the Arch's that typcially come from strictly Dev/Ops/DBA backgrounds. That doesn't mean they're bad at their jobs, but everyone on the team has something to bring to the table, and if you assume the hierarical development roles as the pinacle of perfection, then you certainly will end up being doomed from one mistake or another down the road.

Even the most junior straight out of university kid can have great ideas, and its up to development leads and managers to decide the merits of such thrrough their years of development experience. Maybe they're wrong, maybe they're not. Its not the junior guy's fault if a major screw up in design jeopardizes the project / company (assuming it wasn't done without permission).

Re:Interesting

[AK Marc]

I'm glad I'm not the only one that noticed. An Architect is there to guide the whole, while the developers are there to make their pieces work.

Car Analogy: Bigger tires are cooler (cars going to 20" rims in some cases, from 13" being "normal" 20 years ago). So if you are a tire developer, do you try to make the best darned tire/rim decisions you can? What happens when there are other concerns? The developer should be in on all the decisions on brakes? The developer should be in all the meetings on body? The developer should be in all the discussions on suspension?

No, they just focus on their part, and if an architect says "minimum 15in rim, maximum diameter 26in, offset of +2in" then you take it and work with those "decisions" made. It doesn't matter if the minimum is picked because of the brake size, and max from fender/aerodynamics, and offset from suspension decisions. Yes, the architect should allow the designer to pick 4 or 5 lugs, but many decisions will be handed/inherited.

Re:Interesting

[AK Marc]

That's the point. If a company has both Architects and Developers there is an EXPLICIT role definition of decision maker and decision executor. Sure the Architect WAS a developer at one point, but isn't any longer.

Yes, but no. The architect should make guiding decisions, and developers should be able to decide how to implement the guiding decision. A developer who wants to make decisions should work up to being a Jr Architect/developer. Or just be happy that he gets to select which sort to use, and not focus on the "architectural guideline" that all inputs must be checked for the following input errors...

Simple answer

[dale.furno]

It's worth a pay cut when the amount of happiness you get is greater than the amount of happiness you get from the money.

Re:Simple answer

[Immerman]

Well said. I feel sorry for whoever modded you down.

If its a real opportunity, then yes...

[Karmashock]

if its bullcrap then obviously not.

Will they pay you?

[aussersterne]

I've had it with small companies. During the '00s I twice started with small companies only to hear "pay will be late" at the end of an early pay period, then "pay is just around the corner" by the end of the next pay period. In one case, the CEO simply never paid; I left before the third no-pay period was over, demanding that I be paid for my hours, to which he basically replied "so sue us!" I did—but only managed to recoup some of what I was owed. In the other case, they eventually paid but then promptly fired me for the noises I'd made about leaving due to two periods with no pay; that CEO had the gall to act infuriated and hurt at my lack of loyalty to the company.

So be sure that a small company with a low capital/revenue stream doesn't mean "You promise to do it for the love of the company if they can't afford to pay you."

Re:Will they pay you?

[Half-pint HAL]

I think it funny that Mr. "Stop America Now" is Mr. "Pay Me Now". Not a truer American sentiment was ever spoken, and exactly why we are where we are at in every respect.

Completely agree -- the confederation was was right, and good ol' Dixie's been on a downhill since the gosh-darned cotton-pickin' abolitionists got their way.

</sarcasm>

Wait and find a better opportunity

[tempestdata]

Most decent programmers will find themselves in your position at some point in their careers. I did too. I know nothing of your financial situation and commitments (mortgage/family/etc.) but don't take a pay cut if you can at all help it. The fact that you feel any uneasiness would seal the deal.

I would readily agree to a pay cut in only the following situations :

1) Need a job desperately and gotta make rent. Hopefully this situation never arises
2) Major promotion or opportunity in a company I strongly strong believe in. The idea being that I will work my ass off for peanuts, but believe in my heart that I will come away with a huge sum of money at the end, or the ability to make a huge sum of money.
3) I am going to work for or with someone who is absolutely exceptional and is going to be teaching me something I couldn't already learn on my own.

It does not sound like you are getting any of those three. If you are bored, keep looking for a better or different job. In the meantime, If you want to scratch your intellectual itch, do it on the weekends.

You have my 2 cents worth.

Long Term Benefits

[shadowknot]

I took a pay cut to move in to the digital forensics field in 2007 mainly because of the large volume of included training that was offered and the prospect of increased salaries in the future. I feel that it paid off, I got to learn a great deal about a field I was unsure of using software I could never have afforded to purchase on my own. Self study is how I've learned most things in my career but there really is something to be said for having access to experienced real-world professionals.

Do you work for work, or work for a living?

[Keruo]

Going after a startup for innovative work might me interesting and rewarding but it might not neccessarily pay your mortgage.
There are many benefits in working with well established platform and performing maintenance coding.

Personally, I would never accept pay cut for "I'm bored with my current job".
You can always find more rewarding job with higher salary if you really want to.
Just remember you don't have to rush out, and don't let the door hit you in the ass when you leave.
World is actually annoyingly small place and you will end up bumping into your old colleagues and it's much better if you are in good terms with them.

I actually did this kind of move just recently.
I left my old job for a position in a much smaller company with old, almost ancient infrastructure.
One of the main reasons for leaving was the salary, the small company does not have capital/revenue of even /10 of the old company but they pay proper salary nevertheless.
I didn't double my salary by switching but taking into account the layoffs which were foreseeable in the old position, I'd might aswell say I did double up.

So, should one leave MS

[fermion]

There is a lot to be said about having cash in hand, and benefits. Is part of the idea that the small firm may get big and you will be rewarded greatly? That usually does not happen, so it is a gamble.

If they desperately need someone to do all this great stuff, I wonder why you have to take a pay cut. Sure, you may be overpaid at you current job because of stress and what not, but i wonder if this new firm is just looking to find someone who will fix the problems cheap and then go away when they do not get a raise.

Life is certainly more about money. but that is mostly said by people who have it.

Some thoughts:

[Anonymous Coward]

A blank slate can be daunting. Improvising on established architecture can be rewarding. Pay is not everything. It sounds like you will be doing more for less pay. Will they make it up in equity or options. Do they have the resources to pull it off? Do you like these people? Do you have a family. Would you like to have a family soon. Can you live on less? Have an exit strategy.

An old man perspective

[grasshoppa]

If you have a family to support, stay put. You have a good, stable job. Your "boredom" is immaterial to providing for your family. In short, get over yourself. You are working for more than just yourself now.

If you don't have a family to support: Take it. Now's the time to make your mistakes. The worst thing that happens is that the company goes bust, you have some peanut butter and ramen days as you find another job. If it's just you, then it's no big deal, right?

Re:An old man perspective

[DoofusOfDeath]

I think you're oversimplifying a little. He doesn't necessarily need to stay put. What he really needs is to not incur much additional risk to his income or to his time with his family, if he has one. That might be possible while changing jobs. Especially if he's marketable enough that, if laid off, he could almost certainly find another job soon after.

Re:An old man perspective

[grasshoppa]

I have always felt that "Ask Slashdot" is the haven for the "simplified answers".

I'm not going to try to break down the variety of scenarios where he should or shouldn't make the leap. Rather, my focus is on the "big picture"; if he has a family, it's not about his selfish needs anymore. If he doesn't, he can be as selfish as he wants.

Re:An old man perspective

[DoofusOfDeath]

No argument. I just think in this case, you over-simplified.

Re:An old man perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

An alternative old man perspective is to reverse that:

early career: live within your means, add to your 401K, save/invest above and beyond to build up 6 months or more of living income. Work hard within established companies to build your CV and identify people to mentor you.

mid or later career: leave a stable but unsatisfying job to go to a startup or out on your own. You know you are employable because you are pinged by friends and strangers regularly with opportunities. You know the unemployment rate for developers with your skillset is 1%. You've been smart with your earnings and saved enough to last 6 months or more. Know that the big corporate world will still be there if you need to come back to it (having seen that the grass was not greener).

Re:An old man perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

If you are miserable at your work, you will start to become a miserable person and everyone will be affected, especially your family.

Re:An old man perspective

[ranton]

If you have a family to support, stay put. You have a good, stable job. Your "boredom" is immaterial to providing for your family. In short, get over yourself. You are working for more than just yourself now.

If you don't have a family to support: Take it. Now's the time to make your mistakes. The worst thing that happens is that the company goes bust, you have some peanut butter and ramen days as you find another job. If it's just you, then it's no big deal, right?

I'm only in my early thirties, with my first child on the way, but I sure hope I never think like this. Parents don't suddenly become unimportant as soon as the kids arrive. I never let money be a primary factor in my career decisions before, and I don't plan on changing that once there are kids involved. You only have one life to live, and your career is a huge portion of that life. Unfulfilled parents can be far more damaging to children than lower middle class parents.

As long as this guy is able to meet the basic needs of his family, then he has every right to pursue a career that fulfills him. He isn't failing his family if he can only buy a $200k house instead of a $400k one because he listened to his passions instead of his bank account. And based on the types of jobs he is talking about, he is probably making very decent money at either job.

Now if the guy is living from paycheck to paycheck, with very little savings to speak of, and has a family, then I would agree he hasn't yet earned the right to pursue his dreams. But as long as he is managing his money well I see no reason why he can't make a decision based on his own desires instead of just the wants of his family.

Re:An old man perspective

[Immerman]

Unless you're close to the poverty line then providing for your family is not an issue, more money just buys additional luxuries. As long as you have nutritious food in your belly and a roof over your head, having a parent/spouse come home in a good mood and with the time and energy to spend on you is going to be worth a lot more than having them come home late/tired/stressed and spend the evening just watching TV to unwind, no matter how much extra money they earn.

Do you really want to teach your kids that they should grow up to work a soul-crushing job just to buy their own kids more video games and designer clothes? What sort of sick culture decrees that only children and retirees should be enjoying life?

Re:An old man perspective

[Grishnakh]

As long as you have nutritious food in your belly and a roof over your head, having a parent/spouse come home in a good mood and with the time and energy to spend on you

It sounds like the OP's new job opportunity entails more hours than his current, "boring" 9-5 job. If the new job is risky and involves long hours, that's going to take away from the time he has to spend with his family, and also puts them in greater risk for financial strain if the small company goes belly-up.

is going to be worth a lot more than having them come home late/tired/stressed and spend the evening just watching TV to unwind

His current job is a 9-5; he isn't coming home late. That's one of the big advantages of his current "boring" job; the new job is going to have him coming home late. If it isn't stimulating enough, he can pick up a hobby on the side to satisfy that.

What sort of sick culture decrees that only children and retirees should be enjoying life?

What sort of sick culture advises people to abandon well-paying but boring jobs with reasonable hours, and switch to poorly-paying jobs (sometimes paying only in company shares!) with insane working hours so they can pursue "career building"?

Mutually Exclusive Question

[nurb432]

Careers are all about money. It cant be better if you are losing income in the process. It can be different, but not *better*.

Re:Mutually Exclusive Question

[Kojiro Ganryu Sasaki]

Not if he cannot be promoted at his current position and if wage increases are unlikely.

Then it's an issue of staying at some place and knowing you can't get more, and possibly lose some of what you get now to start working at a position where NOT being promoted isn't a certainty.

Re:Mutually Exclusive Question

[DaveV1.0]

Careers are all about money.

Maybe, but life isn't all about one's career.

It cant be better if you are losing income in the process.

Depends on where one's priorities are. Is getting paid an extra $10,000.00 a year if one has to work consistent 60+ hour weeks, get called on the weekend and on vacation, and is generally treated like a slave?

If one is making more money, but is also destroying one's life and health, one may never get to enjoy the extra income. Money is not everything and won't necessarily buy one happiness.

Re:Mutually Exclusive Question

[nurb432]

Maybe, but life isn't all about one's career.

It is now.

No one can answer this for you

[asmkm22]

It's worth it when you think it's worth it. There's no checklist or mathematical breaking point to tell you when to switch. This sounds more like you lack a solid structure of friends, so you're coming here in search of a support group.

use your judgement ...

[cheap.computer]

Opinions are like aholes everyone has one and everyone's stinks. A wise man told me long back that ""as a programmer your peak earning potential is between the age of 35 - 45, you can engage in adventures before or after this peak period. If you are a super duper programmer chasing a job that offers opportunities to solve interesting technical problems is great when you are 45, you should look for opportunities where you should be able to leverage your experience. For the 10yrs you have in between consider opportunities that have the best financial rewards."" But having said that... You just have to go with *your* gut feeling, you don't want to miss that opportunity to work for that next google or facebook either...

Re:Run.

[Rob the Bold]

"Career opportunities" don't come with pay cuts. They come with pay raises. Run.

True. What they pay you tell you how much they value you. Sounds backwards at first, but if they pay you more it makes them find you more valuable. Think about your own experiences: when you pay more for one choice than another, it reinforces your belief that it was worth more.

Re:Run.

[Karlt1]

"Career opportunities" don't come with pay cuts. They come with pay raises. Run

Not true, for example if you're making good money as a "Senior COBOL developer" and all you do is maintenance work, it may make sense to take a slight pay cut to move into a newer technology and get architecture experience.

Where?

[gabereiser]

Where do you work that you get such a laxed environment where Architects are actually doing their jobs and no developer is just cowboy coding architecture into the mix? I want to work there. I think you really need to evaluate where you are and how good you have it. If you want to make architectural decisions, maybe work your way into an architectural role. If you just want to implement XYZ because you think it's cool. You deserve the paycut. I don't want you to take it the wrong way, but a lot of jobs I've worked at has been developers making the architectural decisions and the architecture ends up shit. Be glad you have a committee that cares enough about it to prevent people from implementing anything they feel like. I'd love a job like that.

Make your own decision

[cyberspittle]

Stop looking for answers on the internet. Rely on your instinct.

Re:Make your own decision

[Norwell Bob]

Wisdom.

No.

[Pope]

Increase your outside hobbies to fulfill the "boredom" you feel, and maybe that'll cure your blues.

The answer also REALLY depends on age, relationship, family, etc. More so than can really be addressed here on Slashdot. The fact that you ARE asking is a good sign, though :)

Do you want to become an architect at some point, so you are able to make the big decisions and decide direction? That may be an option if you want to keep some of the perks of your current job. Do some night classes or w/e and make the move!

a good motto when looking for a new job

[phishen]

Never run away from a job, always run to a job

Re:a good motto when looking for a new job

[HornWumpus]

WTF? Worst advice on the tread.

The time to run away is before you take the offer. Do your due diligence.

Re:a good motto when looking for a new job

[phishen]

The time to run away is before you take the offer. Do your due diligence.

The post wasn't about running away from a job offer. It is about not running away from your current job, but running to a job you want. If you are looking for a job because you want to run away from your current job, then you will most likely not find what you are looking for and will take anything. This will not end well. If you decide that you want a new job and you have an idea or a goal in mind, then you will most likely look for the right job, or perhaps a dream job of sorts. This will be the job you actually want and not just any job but the one you have.

Re:a good motto when looking for a new job

[HornWumpus]

Fair enough. I took it as some sort of rah rah, fix the broken job with attitude and hard work type nonsense.

There's more to it than meets the eye

[gwstuff]

There's a reason that "if it ain't broken don't fix it" continues to be the holy grail of engineering. It's because any value function you come up with to evaluate a new opportunity and compare it to an existing, good arrangement is bound to be incomplete. So Value = f(salary, benefits, exciting work) is one part of the story. What about the potential of a Dilbert-like management culture, processes that you don't know yet that you would find out after a year of working at the new place - at which point it would be too late to turn back.

A good job, like a system that works just fine, reflects on a good balance of a large number of variables, many of which one doesn't understand and takes for granted, until one moves out and breaks the balance.

Having said that, I have broken the rule a number of times, because discomfort is not necessarily a bad thing. Necessity is the mother of invention, so if you're healthy, robust, and not too much in debt (or have an ARM mortgage that's going to explode around the corner...) then it couldn't hurt to challenge yourself by leaving your comfort zone, every now and then :-)

Never.

[Maxwell]

You have it very good. Don't blow it. Use the 'extra' money you now make and the free time you now have to volunteer somewhere (or spend time with your kids, or pursue a hobby, or travel). There are non-profits begging to get work done end-to-end. You can do exactly the same thing, and feel good about it, while keeping your boring job.

If you are serious, have your payroll deposited into two accounts. One is the lower salary of the exciting job. The other is the 'bonus' money of your current job. You'll find the bonus money piles up and allows you freedom to pursue other interests outside of work.

Is it really a Better Career Opportunity?

[Usefull Idiot]

You have to evaluate what that means for you -
1. How long will you be at the lower pay level? What is their evaluation process?
2. Do you believe in the companies product?
3. Will they require more time from you, and are you willing to put in that time, for less pay? Think about it as less time for everything else in your life.
4. Will this experience truly be better for you in X years?
5. What happens if the Company with the "Better Career Opportunity" runs into financial difficulties? I assume they are less stable, how do you handle situations without a sure footing?

I did it.

[DaveV1.0]

My answer is simple: when taking the job will improve your life more than having the extra money. I get more respect, have more time off, am happier, and am still able to pay my bills and put money away.

2 pay cuts in 2 years

[yorgo]

In the past 2 years, I've been at 5 companies and taken 2 pay cuts. All voluntary.

My “compensation pie” is made up of many pieces. Only one of them is salary. The piece of the pie that was sorely missing was "satisfaction" ("happiness", "contentment").

After 2 years, I finally found a company that *wants* me (my skills and what I have to offer), and actually allows me to contribute. This helps fill my "satisfaction" piece of my "compensation pie”.

You need to figure out your own pie pieces, and the size/importance of each.

Meanwhile, I'm confident enough in my abilities that I'm not too worried about future salaries.

Re:2 pay cuts in 2 years

[yorgo]

FWIW, aside from "satisfaction", the other pieces of my "compensation pie" are "salary" (+raise/bonus), "benefits", "time-off", and "investment options".

Almost never.

[cfulton]

Unless, it is from something you don't like to something you do (for instance from "IT Guy" to "Developer" or vice versa depending on your likes). Even then lowering your pay is simply the one of the options open to you. With a little more looking you might find that you can change and increase you pay. You have to be VERY careful because an employer is looking to minimize his expense and maximize your productivity. So, always bargain hard and start high. You can always move your price down, but you can't really move it up.

Remember the six P's

[LoRdTAW]

When Is a Better Career Opportunity Worth a Pay Cut?

When you can comfortably think it through and say to yourself:
"This new job looks like it will be way more fulfilling than what I am doing now"
*OR*
"This new job looks like it won't have me looking to jump off a bridge every day like my current job"

*AND*

When you are financially stable enough to do so. E.g. you can live comfortably enough with your new salary while being able to satisfy debts (loans, mortgages etc.).

Then you can make your choice. If the new job doesn't pan out, the you keep looking. My current job is challenging yet fun, I do a range of things from custom software and electronics to industrial automation. Right now I am integrating a new IPG solid state laser (4kW, its a bad ass machine but they do go to 50kW!) with an existing workstation and moving the old pulsed laser to a dedicated workstation for a high volume job coming in. The awesome part is they leave me alone to design and build the systems while ALMOST handing me a blank check. I have really sharpened my skills and have worked with some very talented senior people. So far I really like working here. Is the pay good? Nope, its terrible for what I am doing but I am not anywhere near struggling to live. Plus I do work on the side which brings in extra cash when I need it. I am mainly happy in life. And that is the most important thing.

this is simple

[slashmydots]

I worked an awful job for more money and now I work a great job for slightly less money. I prefer the job I have now. So I'd say the additional money and benefits aren't worth working at a worse job unless of course you were an idiot and got a mortgage for 54.9999% of your annual income.

Hold the phone...

[bobbied]

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

So, this company wants you to work for them and take LESS, but they are promising you a better opportunity? I suppose it *might* be true, but I'd be worried about going backwards unless you are changing careers or work locations.

If you are worried enough about this to consult the sages of SlashDot and actually TAKE some stranger's advice, I suggest you ask the prospective employer for more money (say exactly what you make now) and failing that, keep looking. If they really want you, they will pay, if they won't pay, they don't really want you that bad.

NEVER go backwards without a reason that is tangible if you can help it. It hardly ever pays you back.

I can also weigh in from experience

[fair_n_hite_451]

About 10 years ago I left a fairly established consulting gig with a company that was winding down operations / being acquired.

Had to make a decision to move to the new company & stay in the same becoming-boring job or strike out again and search out the small internet startup / potentially rich-making / more exciting and hugely more risky gigs.

I chose the latter.

End up getting screwed on the IPO on both of them (one went private instead of public and screwed everyone but the founder), one reneged on the handshake deal I had with the president (since he left before the IPO happened - he'd been outsted by the founder). With my kids getting a bit older, I then went and hid out at a big company where the money was stable for 6 years to trade on benefits instead of income potential. However, I wouldn't trade the experience of working for those small, nimble outfits for anything because I've carried the "of course we can change that - what's to stop us?" attitude that you build up in that environment everywhere I've been since.

It's made me a better consultant, no doubt.

Someone above questioned where you are in life and that to me is a huge factor. Are you married? Do you have children? Are you the sole breadwinner in your family? What financial obligations are going to be there whether you are working or not (like a mortgage or retirement savings)?

The choice between a small company where you can make a difference every day and decisions are made in the president's office in an afternoon (but "the money" can vanish overnight) and a large company where it feels like you are trying to steer the Titanic (but the money will be there all day every day) is somewhat about what makes you tick. Are you an adreneline junky? Are you risk averse? How about the other people who are counting on you? (if there are any)

Don't do it...

[AudioEfex]

You have the typical recurring "job blues".

I've had it before - but as you said yourself - you currently have "good benefits, lots of vacation time, very good salary" - not many folks can say that, particularly the last part.

If you were totally miserable, that would be one thing, but since you are clearly not and are just irritated with the way most companies end up working (that small start-up, if successful, will very likely turn into the same thing eventually), the best idea for personal fulfillment is to find a hobby, find some volunteer work where you think you can make a difference, find other things in life that fulfill you - which is good advice anyway, too many people look for their life meaning in how they generate income when the point of generating income is to be able to enjoy your life.

Since you aren't miserable, just frustrated, you don't want to take the chance that in a year your start-up goes belly up, when you've worked 52 weeks straight, had to scrimp and save money because your 'very good' salary is gone, and you look back and realize just how good you have it right now.

Normally I wouldn't be so blunt, but you did ask for advice - LOL - and that's the best I think anyone can give you who isn't living in the clouds or just blowing idealistic smoke up your ass because they don't know you as you are some random guy on the Internet they will never hear about again either way.

Always pick quality of life/happiness

[DigitalSorceress]

I took a $10,000 a year paycut when I left my previous employer to come to work for my current company... because I felt that I'd be much happier/have a better quality of work-life (old job was starting to destroy my soul / passion for programming)

they wanted to hire me at my previous salary, but it was just not possible under their budgets/etc.

I took the job anyway because I felt their culture and my work quality of life would jsut be a great match.

Now, a couple years later, I've more than made up the difference in pay (proved my worth and the $$$ got found) and am just stupidly happy with this job.

It's actually true that the worst days at my current job are still better than most of the best days for the last 3 years of my previous one.

Basically, I've tried to always value happiness more than pure financial gain, and I've reaped the rewards of "love what you do for a living and you'll never ~work~ another day in your life".

Good Luck

Translation.

[Lumpy]

We dont want to afford you, will you come work for us for chump change?

They can afford you, they just hope you will be stupid and be blinded by the "opportunity".

Architects = complexity

[mveloso]

A company with architects implies that it's infrastructure is somewhat complicated.

Developers hardly ever use the programs they write, much less understand the environment in which their program runs. What are the business requirements? Regulatory requirements? Technology limitations? Why are those present? Who set them and why?

These are things architects worry about.

You, as a developer, usually have no visibility into them in a large company unless you ask. And even if you ask you may not understand them, because it's far, far away from your personal experience.

if you don't understand why architects are needed, you should be hyper-aware that you're clueless when you go to your next job that requires you to design an architecture. And you will probably fail.

That's fine for you, because you'll learn. It'll be bad for the company you work for, because they'll have spend money and time on a solution that doesn't work, or at least doesn't work well.

Re:Architects = complexity

[mveloso]

I was responding to the other posters and to the OP in general. Architects are necessary once you have to move to something more than (1) a single desktop or (2) away from stock LAMP.

Take a spiritual inventory and make a game plan

[sdinfoserv]

I’m 51 and been through many variations– upsized, downsized, self-employment, public, private, smalls, large, leveraged buyouts you name it.
. I’ve left for money, I’ve left bad bosses, I’ve left for security, and I’ve left for geography. Also know that I’ve never had any difficulty getting a new job at any age. I just jumped companies last year at age 50. Once I decided on a change, it took 3 months to find a new job across the county while keeping the old gig. (Middle age crazy, wanted a climate change). If you’re competent and can communicate, there is a need.. Granted I’m in management now (10+ years) rather than programming and we have to maximize the skill set we have as well as always keep growing.

Outside of Government work, if your name isn’t over the door, you (IT) are a disposable commodity. You are the first to get cut in lean times and the last to get hired in good ones. Also, know that nobody is ever indispensable. Leverage and balance those facts to your advantage. Nobody will watch out for your ass but you.

To answer your question: Know what makes you happy. Form an ultimate game plan of what you want and where you want to end up. Every opportunity must past a simple litmus test: Does it lead you closer to end game? Only you can answer that. Good Luck.

Make a decision

[zwarte piet]

..... and don't look back.

developers vs. architects

[TsuruchiBrian]

most of the decisions are made by architects as oppose to developers.

This is probably a good thing. Ideally all software developers would be good software architects as well, and we could always trust them to make good high level design choices. In practice this is just not the case. My suggestion to anyone the position of wanting to make higher level design choices is to do whatever you can to get that sort of a promotion or to do what the OP is contemplating and move to a smaller company where the head (maybe only) developer (i.e. you) *is* the architect.

Lots of people are perfectly content implementing other people's designs or hunting down bugs, etc. We don't want everybody to have input into high level design. Some aren't going to be good at it. And even if everybody was good at it, having every developer writing code with their own design methodology is going to result in a big mess. Too many cooks spoil the broth. Consistency of vision is good (assuming the vision is good, if it's not you're fucked anyway).

What do you want from life?

[MoonlessNights]

This is a big factor to keep in mind and I strongly agree.

What do you want from life? If you want money and perks, then stay where it is cushy. If you want to push yourself and do interesting and challenging things, then take the plunge.

Personally, I find that most software development jobs pay far more than you need to survive but most just treat you like a cog in a machine and have few opportunities to do interesting things. A good pay check is nice but it is merely existing whereas an exciting job is truly living.

Re:What do you want from life?

[happyslayer]

Agree with both CheezburgerBrown and MoonlessNights.

I was at a good paying job (for the area), but the work was ossifying into maintenance mode for internal-only apps; in 3-5 years, they wouldn't need anyone who could do put together new or better systems. Being a government contract project (federal level), I figured that 3-5 was about how long before I was on the chopping block or eyeing water towers as a sniper.

(Add to this the fact that the old IT team from 30 years ago was still around working on another part of the facility--it was like getting drug along by the Ghost of IT Departments Future, and I didn't want to become a caricature of myself or them...)

So I started looking around, willing to take a small short-term cut for long term growth and happiness. What I ended up with was more pay, working from home, and an entire industry that was ripe for upgrade and improvement.

You've got a job, so take your time. If the one you're thinking about will make you happy, and has the upward mobility you want, then you'll just have to make the call. If it doesn't pan out (like about 1/2 dozen of my potential jobs did), just keep looking.

Re:Will it make you happier?

[tsqr]

If it makes you happier and isn't going to lead to retiring in poverty, then go for it, obviously. This is hardly a question worth asking, but I guess too many people still delusionally believe that money creates fulfillment.

The OP didn't say how big a pay cut or characterize the difference in benefits (although what he did say indicated that the difference in benes was significant). A 10% pay cut and higher expenses (due to, for example, a less generous medical insurance plan) can, over time, add up to a substantial reduction in what you can put aside for retirement. And while money does not create fulfilment, the difference between retiring in "not poverty" and retiring in comfort is huge and irreparable. Without a firm commitment for improved salary and benefits (or equity in the company) tied to performance, it's almost always a mistake to take a cut. The stress, unhappiness, and feeling of lost opportunity that come along with barely getting by is not a delusion.

Been There, Done That

[DudeFromMars]

You are under-estimating the odds of the new company failing, or the job just not working out.
Seriously, your resume should show you moving UP to better positions at bigger companies.
The kind of lateral move you are considering is just not good for your resume or career.

Take some side projects you can do with the latest and greatest technologies on evenings and weekends.
You will polish the skills on your resume, have a little fun, and make a little extra money.

Do they really want that?

[EvilSS]

Needless to say, this small company wants someone to take their system into the modern age, which means re-design/new architecture, implementation, maintenance, team lead, etc

Be vary wary of this line. I've had friends do this exact same jump and it is usually followed by heart-break and another job search. Many small companies say that this is what they want, but what usually happens is that the established culture just will not change and you end up as "that guy" who steps on everyone's egos and ends up not "being the right fit after all".

don't take a pay cut...

[schlachter]

Don't take a pay cut to go to the smaller company. If they really value you, they'll at least match your salary or compensate you with equity accordingly. If they can't do that, be concerned.

OTOH, I could recommend taking a pay cut to go from a small unstable fast paced company to a larger more stable better work-life balance company. Kind of the opposite situation of what you're asking.

In a word: Yes [I can relate]

[larwe]

I worked for about eight years for a Fortune 500 (actually its ranking was two digits... and it wasn't #99). Benefits were great, pay was very good since they let me relocate from NYC (cripplingly high taxes) to FL (no state or city taxes) and keep my NYC salary and bonus. Flipside, I'd already had to change career paths entirely within the organization (from engineering to product management) in order to get a promotion, because the peristalsis was just too slow. And on every side, beset by "you can't get there from here" processes and conflicting goals. The analogy I used was that the company was trying to use a standard process built around the nuclear weapons industry in order to make toy dolls, and wondering why it could never get a project finished in time to be relevant. The only turnover to speak of was people who came in, tried to get things done, and were either torpedoed by vested interests, or gave up the struggle and moved on to other pastures where they could satisfy their thirst for meaningful achievement. About a year ago, I happened across a job posting for a small software company close to my new home in FL. Much smaller, but *DOING THINGS* and generally accelerating upwards. I negotiated the same salary, but no bonus, no 401k match, and generally smaller benefits all round. So I took a "pay" cut of perhaps $20-25k, all things considered, but I do not regret the move for one microsecond; I've already had one promotion, of a sort, and I enjoy what I do (when I'm not cursing at it - hey, this is software, after all! :)). Other people in my position might have felt differently - especially those closer to retirement and looking to stick with a dead-end railroad job to harvest benefits. I'm not young, but I'm also not anywhere near an age where retirement will be possible. And a considerable amount of my personal happiness is tied up in the question "what useful thing did I get done today?" TL;DR: this is a personal decision and you have to decide how much risk you're willing to stomach. And yes there is the possibility you'll be screwed, either maliciously or simply because your employer had expectations beyond what any one person can achieve. All of us on the other side of the internets can't make the judgement call for you as to whether this is a possible malice situation - you've spoken to this new employer, we haven't - and as for the expectations-too-high part, the way to manage this is with explicit goals, preferably chopped up into slices no bigger than three months. Check in frequently to make sure management knows how you're progressing and what things are slowing you down.

Promotion

[ACNiel]

Why aren't you simply trying to get a promotion to "Architect" at your company? Why aren't you making decisions there? Is there a reason, or are they simply asshats that don't like you? Since they are successful, I doubt it is the latter.

If you join a startup that fails as a regular employee it is less money and no good times. It is neutral to negative on your resume.

If you join a startup that fails as a decision maker, it is less money, no good times, and you are the failure, costing good people money and career advancement.

If you join a startup that is successful it is for less money, hard work, and a swell of money and good feelings when it crests that hump. Then it rapidly becomes mundane and slow changing.

Re:Promotion

[Grishnakh]

Why aren't you simply trying to get a promotion to "Architect" at your company?

That's easier said than done. A lot of times, from what I've seen, it's really hard to get substantial raises and promotions at the same company. It's not unheard of for someone to leave a company because they weren't getting any substantial raises, go work at a different company for a while (with a bump in pay), then come back to the first company at a much higher salary. People who stay at the same company generally don't do as well as those who jump around from time to time. (Those jumps have to be well-planned however.)

If you join a startup that fails as a regular employee it is less money and no good times. It is neutral to negative on your resume.

No it's not. If the work experience there is really good, that can help him a lot in the future. It's just like the scenario I described above. Employers like to see good work experience on your resume; no one puts their salary on there. If he gets really good work experience he wouldn't have gotten at his present job, that can open doors to even better jobs (and better-paying jobs) at other companies after the startup crashes and burns.

If you join a startup that fails as a decision maker, it is less money, no good times, and you are the failure

I'm not involved with management jobs and have no experience in that sector, but this sounds pretty good to me. I wouldn't bet my reputation there either.

If you join a startup that is successful it is for less money, hard work, and a swell of money and good feelings when it crests that hump. Then it rapidly becomes mundane and slow changing.

Then you cash in and move on after that point. However, to me this seems like a giant gamble (it's not just money, startups usually require insane hours), and I would probably never take a risk like this myself. Most startups fail, and there's too many horror stories of good people getting totally screwed over by the startup's founders/executives.

Personally, I'd probably stay far away from a startup because I'm risk-averse and don't feel like working 120-hour weeks. But it might work out for some people.

In Other News

[boojumbadger]

Slashdot poses scenarios to further profile their users to generate more data sales.

Re:Pay cuts are permanent

[jeffb (2.718)]

I don't think so. Sure, it's better if you can avoid pay cuts, but:

1. Stay at current employer, getting an average 2%/yr increase.

2. Go to a start-up for 30% less with a good chance of 15%/yr increases and/or hefty bonuses.

3. Go contract, where the true relation between contract pay and pay-plus-benefits is obscured. You earn more per hour or year, but don't get subsidized for healthcare, matched for retirement, or paid for time off.

4. Take a pay cut without a guarantee of better raises, but a guarantee of learning more relevant and in-demand skills. Think of it as grad school with a really great stipend.

I would argue that there's no clear one-size-fits-all rule for choosing among these alternatives. You have to evaluate your own priorities and do your own risk assessment.

And there's always choice 5:

5. Take less money for a job that makes you happier, or doesn't age you as quickly.

maybe for people who are all about money...

[schlachter]

I'd never hire someone with your attitude. Someone who puts money above all else is not the kind of person I want to be around or to employee. Even if your asking salary was well within my budget.

Re:maybe for people who are all about money...

[Grishnakh]

You sound like someone who demands employees to be "loyal" to the company, to work insane hours, and accept pathetically-low pay, and says that anyone who isn't happy to sign up for this arrangement has a "bad attitude". I wouldn't work for you either.

Re:maybe for people who are all about money...

[nurb432]

Not a problem, you sound like you want your employees to work themselves to death and not be compensated properly: "remember folks its not about the money"

BS, as an employee it IS about the money.

If you are independently wealthy and running your own company, perhaps it isn't all about the money ( but it is often still a HUGE factor ), but as a person who needs to work for a living, you are damned right its about the money.

Re:maybe for people who are all about money...

[HornWumpus]

It's about the money. But it's not always about the money in the next six months.

That said promises from the likes of the GP are worth fuckall. Stock options are loaded with things to watch for, but at least they are contracts. What you want is ongoing grants of founders shares to round out your salary to your market value (Valuing the company is tough, they should reveal, in writing, at what price they sold shares to investors and when. Be a shareholder, not an option holder. The company has legal obligations to shareholders that it doesn't have to employees.) Assuming it's a closely held private company. Options are great, but the devil is in the strike price. Out of the money options aren't worth much. Watch for dilution scams. Watch for options in non-profit generating operating units scams. If they mention options without giving you an understand of corporate structure in writing, they are almost certainly trying to run a scam. They are offering to make you a Jr partner. That requires a ton of information for you to evaluate.

If they won't give you equity to make your salary, run away. If they won't give you time for your lawyer to read the offer, run away.

Re:maybe for people who are all about money...

[__aagmrb7289]

I'd never hire someone with your attitude. Someone who puts money above all else is not the kind of person I want to be around or to employee. Even if your asking salary was well within my budget.

And none of us will work for you. For several reasons, starting with reading comprehension. The poster didn't say it was all about the money. They said that money mattered. And of course it matters. Everyone needs to have their basic needs met, and in this world, that requires money. And most people would like a little on top of that - because a well rounded person isn't only about one skill set. And if there are things you want to enjoy besides your job, you often need to make more money than absolutely required to survive. And that's why you're post is moronic - because somehow you missed all of this. No one wants to work for an incompetent, right?

Re:Xero!

[Sadsfae]

Hey All,
Since I am a big fan of the company that I work for, check this out! http://www.xero.com/us/about/c...
We are hiring, and we offer awesome bennies/salary and we have a very vibe culture. Looking for devs, engineers, etc.

"Bennies" is only 1 letter short of "benefits", why abbreviate this? What's a "vibe" culture? It's cutesy reasons like this (and the fact you're spamming as AC) that you probably aren't going to get much interest, I certainly wouldn't take a second look at this organization after reading this.

opportunity?

[jbmartin6]

wants someone to take their system into the modern age, which means re-design/new architecture, implementation, maintenance, team lead, etc

Do you mean you got a chance to work on /. Beta?

Small paycut?

[houghi]

If it is a small paycut, then you can perhaps get more. I have experienced this same several times. Each situation is different. Sometimes you need to follow your feeling, sometimes you need to be rational.

What can help is to make a personal vission and mission statement. Write it down and let others read it and ask them if that is something they recognize you in. Don't leave out your non-work related goals.

If anything, t will help you understand what you actually want and where your priorities are. Then compare that with what you have and what is offerd and it will be easier to decide.

Have no regrets

[loufoque]

The important part is having no regrets.
If you don't do it now, you'll always regret not having taken this opportunity. Do it and put all of your self behind it.
Even if the small company fails to grow as expected, you'll have gained valuable experience. Being involved with a start-up is a great experience not just on technical aspects, but on human and economic ones as well.

Pay cuts are hard to make up

[Zontar_Thing_From_Ve]

If you agree to a pay cut, then you do so with the complete and full understanding that it will be very difficult to make that up down the road. You will almost certainly have to leave the new company to go to yet another job to make up for the salary you are giving up. And note that there are no guarantees that you will be able to find another job that will pay you more, especially if you don't live in a large metro area. If you really think that you must take the other job, hold out for the same money. Refuse to take a pay cut and stick to it. If you are good then they will pay it. I can tell you from personal experience that salary offers are a game to HR and they like to lie about what they can pay because HR people are either sociopaths or they get their own pay based on how much they can screw you out of by talking you down to a lower offer. The odds are pretty high that this new company can match your current pay, but they always like to play the "We're a poor, young start up who can't compete on salary" card because guys like you fall for it.

I work for a company that was a successful start up that got bought out by a Fortune 500 company. I have no problems working for The Man. But a lot of my co-workers just could not take working for a big company and they left. One of the problems I have seen with them is that they tend to romanticize everything about their start up days and their egos are gigantic as a result of being part of a successful start up, so I have seen them leave for various other start ups that - wait for it - failed. Stun. Shock. Disbelief. Are you really comfortable that this new company is going to be around in a year? I saw a handful of co-workers all leave to go to the same start up within a short period of time and they all got laid off within at most 2 months of leaving us. I agree with what another poster says in warning you that you are likely to be on call all the time in this new job and have your stress level go up. Yeah, sure, it sounds great, but think about what could go wrong because I promise you the odds are higher that this new company will fail than it will succeed. Small companies are notorious for their pie in the sky promises that don't come true. On a different job some years ago, I had a couple of co-workers who left before the big Internet stock bubble hit and they passed up maybe $30,000 in stock options that they never got because they left. Their new job promised them shares in the company and they did really get them, but when the company got sold they got somewhere between $2000 and $5000. Everybody thought that they were going to get a lot more than that who got the shares, but that's what happened. I never had the heart to tell them how much they passed up by leaving.

Re:Pay cuts are hard to make up

[sandytaru]

I think a lot of it also depends on the financial health of the person in question. Right now, leaving my stable and boring and well paying job is out of the question because I still have a giant stinking hole of student loans I am frantically trying to fill. After that, I will need to get a new vehicle. Once I've gotten a new car (ideally paid for in cash up front) and I've lost the albatross of student loans, then I can consider jumping ship to a start-up or moving along to contract work. Until then, stable and boring and well-paying is the way to go.

100%

[FlopEJoe]

100% you should absolutely take the new job. Run, don't walk.

Side note... where do you work now? Like... specifically what's the address to send resumes?

Are you...

[GoCrazy]

Young? Childless? Full of piss and vinegar? If yes to any or all, take a chance.

Know what they expect of you

[FrozenToothbrush]

I've been through this: -Mind the work life balance, small companies could easily get you on the hook for late nights and consistent weekend work. -Get your job title and expectations in writing. If you're an architect, you're taking on a mentor and even a managerial role to an extent. This needs to be in writing. -Who do you answer too? If the company is really small their structure might not be firmly established, which will cause issues. -What is the atmosphere like? You may be coming from a peaceful work place to one where co-workers badger each other, are stressed out, over worked and have an unwritten 'pecking order'. -Consider getting an ownership stake in writing for after you've been there for a 6 months - year, increasing thereafter. -Who are their customers and what is their revenue? If they loose their biggest customer what happens? Finally - -Most small companies fail however they all have big dreams. Be careful.

Been through it a couple of times.

[unimacs]

There are lots of things to consider beyond just pay. How stable is the new company? What are the long term prospects of both companies and your positions? What is best for your career? Health Benefits? Even something as seemingly unimportant as whether or it significantly lengthens or shortens your commute can matter.

I left in both cases and went to jobs that ultimately didn't work out but they both opened doors to other opportunities I wouldn't have otherwise had.

One thing I do recommend is that if you do leave, give your current company ample notice and offer your future time (for a fee) to help them through any transition. By not burning bridges you may allow yourself the opportunity to come back if the new job isn't what you had hoped.

Another option would be to talk to your current supervisor (or theirs) to see if there is something that could be done to get you on a more rewarding path in your current job.

classic large company / small company dynamic

[Spazmania]

In a large company, you are a specialist. You will have the opportunity to become a specialist in another area of the work if you want, but nobody gets to be a soup to nuts guy. The grass may look greener on the designers' side of the fence but it isn't. They're just as constrained as you are.

On the other hand, it's stable. They'll pay you reliably and well.

In a small startup, you are a generalist. You won't just have the opportunity to do everything, you'll have to. And you have to get good enough at it to be effective. Like everyone else in the company, you're responsible for the bottom line. Your work is complementary or else you pound pavement.

Risky. But you won't be pigeonholed.

At the end of the day it's not about the salary. You'll spend more than 2,000 hours at work this year. That's a heck of a lot of time. Will working as a specialist make that time more enjoyable? Will working as a generalist?

Re:classic large company / small company dynamic

[Spazmania]

Assuming a 30 minute daily commute and a normal full-time schedule, 42.5 hours per week * 47 weeks per year (10 holidays and 3 weeks combined vacation and sick leave) works out to a hair under 2000 hours.

wage laws exist for a reason

[SuperBanana]

I've had it with small companies. During the '00s I twice started with small companies only to hear "pay will be late" at the end of an early pay period, then "pay is just around the corner" by the end of the next pay period. In one case, the CEO simply never paid; I left before the third no-pay period was over, demanding that I be paid for my hours, to which he basically replied "so sue us!" I didâ"but only managed to recoup some of what I was owed.

This is nothing new, nor is it specific to small companies; I think you meant "startups." Textile companies used to do the same BS, not paying workers, during the industrial revolution. It's why, for example, in MA it is a CRIMINAL matter upon the officers of the company if employees are not paid within a certain amount of time for work done. Furthermore, the law is written such that BOTH the state and you individually can pursue action against them concurrently/independently.

It's also why, if terminated or laid off, you must walk out the door with any and all money owed to you. It's not a defense that the guy who signs the checks is only in on Tuesdays, or they need to figure out how much to take out of your paycheck for purchases from the company canteen, etc. Why? Because they're choosing to end your employment, and they can choose to do so at any time. So they should terminate employment on Tuesday, after they've done the necessary calculations.

If you are reading this, live in MA (and probably a bunch of other states), and have a pay period that is not at least semi-monthly (biweekly if you're paid hourly) unless you're salaried and agreed to be paid monthly...or you have not been paid within one pay period for your work...stop reading, step outside, and call your State AG immediately, or at least read something like http://www.lexology.com/librar...

Re:wage laws exist for a reason

[mr_mischief]

Indeed. Also in some states (for example Illinois) your vacation/PTO is part of your earned income by law. Withholding that pay when you leave may be as illegal as withholding wages.

Can work

[micahraleigh]

At 29 I left my big government contractor company to go to a small company. My motivations were (1) An affordable place to raise a family (Raleigh, NC) and (2) C++ being on the decline.

The switch was a MAJOR hurdle since I had to take a pay cut (about 25%, but about the same considering the locale cost of living differences). After 3 years I'm at a company that pays me what I was making earlier except it is totally private sector and no beaurocracy nonsense and I feel like I'm contributing something real in the world. The demand for .NET programmers is outrageous, and all over the place so that helped.

Anyway, I'm sure your factors weigh differently in some of these things (age, location, technology you are leaving, technology you are moving toward).

Job Function

[ADRA]

Putting all the finances, benefits aside for a moment (since they've been covered to death earlier), you have to realize that modernizing an existing established piece of software is a huge mine field. Trust this from soneone who's had to deal with several large projects varying from small refactoring of existing architectures to complete software rewrites. There aren't many happy problems, as you'll often face problems with integration, performance, ops support, stakeholder buy-in's, resistence from users (for every even trivially minor change to the existing platform), etc..

So much of this problem is out of your hands that you'll always need to keep a lengthy detachment from the process or go insane frustrated that nothing works the way you like, and in the end its a system that you'd wish was never born. It could take years of maintenance and bug fixes before the software gets to the point where you'd consider it 'good enough'.

Be very sure you want to load yourself up with this responsibility, because I assure you, that there's no easy solution for this problem domain, which is why large software consultencies charge obcene amounts of money at companies wishing to update/rewrite their legacy systems.

What's an architect?

[AK Marc]

most of the decisions are made by architects as oppose to developers

Sounds like you either want to be an architect, but are unqualified, or you don't know what an architect does (or is supposed to do).

Skill up and move to architecture, that sounds like what you want to do. But you should probably stop hating on them before you become one of them. If you were a better developer, you'd have more respect for them. So maybe you should work on your skills for what you do now, first.

Re:What's an architect?

[viperidaenz]

Except when the 'architects' dictate which 'software platform' (aka: expensive IBM frameworks) must be used for all future development, regardless of it being fit for purpose or not.

Re:What's an architect?

[AK Marc]

In most cases, that was dictated to them by golf deals mady by the CIO/CFO.

I would go for stability

[TheGratefulNet]

over anything else.

I've been thru so many downsizings (mostly due to outsourcing or the company outright failing and having to cut expensive employees such as myself) that I'll take a stable company over an 'exciting' one.

a cut in salary is nasty, too! I would not prefer to do that and the longer you hold your current higher paying job, the more 'area under the curve' you accumulate. the cost of living is NOT going down and so taking a pay cut is a double cut, effectively. its going backwards.

I would only do that if I had no other choice.

boring is FINE. if you have a safe job there, don't fuck with it. this is not the 90's or the 00's where things were more in employees' favor. its still an employer's market and there are no signs of it going back to being an employees' market any time soon.

ALMOST NEVER, that's when

[gelfling]

Maybe one out of a thousand. If it's a better career they should pay you more. Otherwise it's an Avocation not a Vocation.

Doubtful

[morgauxo]

I doubt they are that old. Maybe 30s, probably 20s.

Generally, older generations understood that we work to live. We can't live without food and shelter is pretty important too.

Once you get beyond that... all those fun, fulfilling ways to spend the limited time you are alive, few if any get you paid and most cost money. So.. you work for it. Then you take the money and do something that actually has meaning to you. If your job is paying you well and it isn't killing you then you are half way there! Now use your nights, weekends and vacation time to go out and LIVE!!!

The current generation seems to have it backwards. They live to work. So... they NEED a job that fulfills them. The problem is jobs don't do that. Working sucks. That's why someone is willing to pay you to do it!

If you have good pay AND good benefit time then you have something worth holding on to. Keep earning that money. Put some away for retirement. Take the rest out with you during that benefit time and enjoy it!

Re:Doubtful

[ranton]

Generally, older generations understood that we work to live.

The current generation seems to have it backwards. They live to work. So... they NEED a job that fulfills them. The problem is jobs don't do that. Working sucks. That's why someone is willing to pay you to do it!

The current generation doesn't have it backwards. It is called progress. It goes something like this:

1. Work to survive
2. Work to have a good life
3. Work for personal fulfillment

#3 is absolutely the most ideal situation, and it is hard to attain. But I cannot imagine a better way to spend your life.

Re:Doubtful

[Kjella]

Generally, older generations understood that we work to live.

Well, my parents are from the WWII/early post-war generation and they're more frugal than anything. Everything downpaid, money in the bank but they keep on skimping and saving. I think they're mentally incapable of splurging and buying something friviously and out of plain luxury, I think it'd make them feel wasteful. So no, I'm not sure they know how to live much. I do know some in my generation whose expenses increase to match any income, but I'm not sure they know how to work to live either, they're mostly just financially reckless and don't have any nest egg or ability to plan for major purchases.

If you have good pay AND good benefit time then you have something worth holding on to. Keep earning that money. Put some away for retirement. Take the rest out with you during that benefit time and enjoy it!

Unless you're making so ridiculously much that you can retire very early, you'll be working for many years. I think getting "bored out" is almost as bad as getting burned out, if you just lose the spark and will to go to work in the morning then five out of seven days of the week will be rather miserable. Had a half year project like that once, just zapped the strength out of you and every evening I was in a glum and sour mood. Weekends weren't leisure time, they were battery recharge time to get past another week. Even after the project was over I realized it had snuffed out the spirit in what I was doing, so I found myself another job.

Yeah you're right I'm defintively working for the pay check. Still, if you're a reasonably attractive employee it doesn't have to be your current pay check. It's not that you live to work, it's that if I come home from a day that's been creative, challenging, learning, productive and rewarding I'm in an entirely different mood to enjoy my leisure time than one that's been stressful, pointless, boring and unappriciated. Yes, make sure you earn enough to live outside work but remember you'll spend something like 2000 hours/year there as well.

Re:Doubtful

[Darinbob]

Even in the fulfilling jobs, it is still 5% interesting and 95% dull routine. This is true just about everywhere. Even the rock and roll stars have to spend a lot of time sitting on that tour bus

"You want the risk ? You can't handle the risk."

[vanye]

Not everyone is suitable for a small company, some think they are but have no small company skills.

* Do you go home at 5pm everyday?
* Do you take lots of vacations ?
* Have you ever thought "that's not my job?" ?
* Do you have other financial responsibilities (family)?
* Do you prefer to keep your head below the parapet ?

If you go into a job thinking how do I protect myself from stock dilution, how can I make up for pay cuts I took ? You should stay where you are. You don't seem to have the right risk profile for a small company.

No reasonable small company would give you anything but a negligible share of the stock pool - and if they do I would treat that as a red flag. Theya re paying you a salary - if you want significant ownership you need to be there before that pay salary (i.e. founder).

I've taken multiple pay cuts and I know I make less that I could elsewhere - but I would argue that each position I took helped me get to where I am now (second start-up founder), but I could' have know that when I started trading pay cuts for different jobs 20years ago.

Would you have taken a 20% pay cut to leave the company I'd only ever wanted to work for my entire life (I was third generation at the company)

Would you have taken a 20% pay cut to team up with your ex-boss when he got a new job in a small company ?

Would you have given up that job to then start your own thing ?

When that company was acquired, would you have left the acquirer and thrown away a $750k retention package to try it again ?

All were risky adventures - but they were adventures. Not everyone is an adventurer, you won't be happy until you work out what you want....

Salary is how others value you, how do you value yourself ?

richard.

stupid question

[prefec2]

No one can honestly answer that as it depends in a lot oft personal factors. Ecample: Stability oft the company. Beside the point that we do not know how financial stabile the company is, we also do not know if you are that mich afraid og such incident. How important is this for you? And there are hundrets of other similar questions.

Make an educated guess. Or become an architect yourself.

Architects and developers ..

[DTentilhao]

I assume this entire piece is a work of fiction, but I would never work for a software house that had its IT department divided into architects and developers.

Have you got a family? Responsibilities?

[msobkow]

If you've got a family and responsibilities like a mortgage, it's time to grow up, buckled down, and stick with the job that is going to be a career, not a contract.

If you have financial freedom and no responsibilities, you have to ask yourself whether you're more concerned about saving and building for the future than having fun at work.

Last but not least, you may well get to make decisions at the "new job", but that also means you're responsible for the systems and you can kiss your personal life good bye as you deal with 24x7 on-call support.

Personally I never want to work for a small company except as a contractor again. As a contractor, your pay is laid out, you have no benefits, and everyone knows what's expected right from the get-go. As an employee, you're expected to vaguely "contribute" above and beyond the coding aspects of the job, and I can pretty much guarantee you'll be expected to "contribute" far more than you ever thought you'd have to (without overtime, no less.)

Personally I'd stick with the stable job for a career, and start up an open source project to work on from home for the evenings and weekends to provide the "challenging" part of programming that keeps me entertained. Never confuse a job with a life -- a job will never give you a life unless you let it suck you dry. And it's not much of a life worth living if you let it do that.

Listen to yourself

[curunir]

I've been through this a few times and, strangely enough, I've found wisdom in a small speech from a mediocre movie that's helped with my last few.

To paraphrase:

There's no such thing as a tough decision. We make hundreds of decisions each day and, over the course of a year, the number of decisions we make runs into tens or even hundreds of thousands. We only think decisions are hard when we don't like the answer that we've come up with.

The movie was otherwise forgettable, but that quote has stuck with me and I've used it on quite a few occasions to try to listen to whatever voice inside me has already decided and drown out the conscious thoughts that are trying to undermine that decision with logical arguments. It looks weird to type, but I've found that whether it's decisions in a relationship, career or even what to eat for dinner, starting from the position that I've already made the decision and then trying to figure out what my decision was makes the decision making process easier.

Listening to your description, I can guess at the decision you've made. But I encourage you to read your own words aloud as if they aren't yours and try to figure it out for yourself. Chances are you're trying to talk yourself into either staying or going. There's no guarantee that this will help you arrive a the correct decision. But it will at least help you determine which outcome you actually want.

Stay where you're at...

[dnebin]

The fact that you think "most of the decisions are made by architects as oppose to developers" is not a good thing demonstrates that you have not matured enough to understand why.

Stay where you're at and once you learn why "most of the decisions are made by architects as oppose to developers", then look elsewhere.

I'm not saying this to bust on you really, but architects really do serve a valuable role.

My story...

[erp_consultant]

is similar to yours. I had a relatively cushy job working for the local government. It was a great training ground and I had advanced as far as I could go. The pay was OK but not great and raises were hard to come by. I got an opportunity to take a job with a very small company (less than 10 employees) doing what looked like really interesting work.

The pay was less than what I was making and I had to move to a more expensive city. But the opportunity excited me and I was young so I took it. Best move I ever made. The small company never went public or anything like that but I learned a great deal and it positioned me to take on increasingly responsible (and lucrative) roles in the future.

I'm convinced that if I had stayed in my cushy government job I would still be making peanuts and wishing I'd done something else with my life.

It taught me that the worst move you'll ever make is the move you never make. Sometimes you have to take a step sideways, or even backwards, in order to get ahead.

another question to ask them....

[nblender]

Most of us have learned this back in the 90's or 00's... When your new employer says "We're a young startup, we can't afford to pay you the going rate but we're going to give you stock options." You are immediately to ask: "1 ply or 2 ply?"

Benefits vs disadvantages vs risk

[CptJeanLuc]

You will need to prioritize, and noone can do it for you.

On the benefits side, improved work life quality. Think about it; mon-fri people spend more than 50% of the time they are awake, working. And the life quality of remaining time, is influenced by work satisfaction. Work satisfaction is not an unimportant thing! Sure, we can do the noble "I sacrifice myself for the rest of my family and keep a job I don't like just so everyone else can be happy" thing. But there _is_ an I in family, and it is ok to think about oneself as part of the equation. From what OP is writing, there may also be opportunities to work on new types of assignments, leading to an improved CV, leading to possible later economic benefits?

Disadvantages. A pay cut is something tangible which can easily be related to. "Other benefits" would depend, e.g. health insurance and those types of things are not to be taken too lightly. But ... these are very tangible benefits that are possible to prioritize.

Risk. This is the tough one. What is the probability that you end up with a good scenario. And the probability that Murphy's Law kicks in, and you end up without a job, not able to get the old job back, and suddenly things look grim. I would like to think of this similar to gambling and financial investments. If the scenario that you lose is unacceptable, and the risk of that happening is not miniscule, then the risk is probably too high. Problem is it is hard to assess what is the real risk; whether the job is as good as the sales pitch.

Maybe it is possible to do some negotiations, if you are leaning towards not taking the job, then trying to get a better deal would not hurt. Letting them understand that you need them to provide some safety net before you are willing to jump ship.

I am guessing you work in the US. In my opinion, the impact of losing one's job is one of the worst "features" of the US work economy, and it is sad to see US colleagues holding onto their jobs for dear life. The free economy thinking has taken it one step too far, hindering work mobility - which hurts the economy. When the risk associated with taking a new job involves a potential "I may end up with no health coverage" scenario, and no financial safety net, I can see why people stick around with a job they find less than exciting, and put up with all sorts of crap from management to work extra hours etc. to keep the job. Plus always appearing super excited about everything related to work, keeping up good appearances. And just as bad for the work place ... employees who deliberately sabotage work processes to make themselves indespensable, the "noone else knows how this setup which I never documented works, so they can't fire me" type of mentality - and falling into "group think" mentality, afraid to criticize poor management or processes. I am seriously glad I don't have to work in the US.

Anyways, good luck with the decision!

Bankers hours rule

[Eravnrekaree]

Id rather have the job where i am in at 9 and out by 5, 5 days a week, with a massive amount of vacation time. I dont care how nice another job would be, no job is a good job that keeps you there more than 40 hours a week. Life is short, and you need time to enjoy it, not sitting in some awful office. A huge plus would be the ability to work from home or these days with wireless, wherever i want.

Are you sure you need to leave to get a change?

[n7ytd]

Is there a possibility that a change is possible within your current company? It sounds like you're not unhappy with your employer, just your position. If they are a great company to work for, maybe you should bring up your concerns with them about making a move within the company to stretch your wings a little.

The best way to make that happen might be with the new job offer in hand. Ask for a meeting with your manager, and stress that you're not unhappy with the company, but that this opportunity came your way and it gave you a chance to reflect on what you want out of your career. Lay out what you would like to see change in clear, concise language. If you can't put it into words, that tells you that you need to think it through some more to make it clear to yourself exactly what you are after.

If they can't meet your needs where you're at, then it's time to give notice and take the offer. If they get all offended and fire you, then it probably was time to go anyway and you can let the new company know that you want to get started immediately.

Just remember: the grass on the other side of the fence might really be greener, but it could just be because of the extra fertilizer.

Follow your heart

[odoketa]

(Sorry - the subject is a joke brought on by people warning you not to read posts that tell you to do this)

Maybe the money is really bad. Maybe they're ripping you off. Maybe you have a family to feed. Maybe you have a car payment. Or a house payment. Maybe for some other reason you just really need the money. In that case stay exactly where you are.

Otherwise you should move - money is a pointless thing to hold out for. The average family of four makes 50k in the US today. I expect this pays fine compared to that. Be realistic, be cautious, but go where it's interesting. Wasting your life in a boring job is silly.

Step Sideways to Step Back

[mgooderum]

I've worked for a variety of companies large and small and sometimes had to take a step sideways or backwards.

Rule #1 - The only real job security you have is your skills, network and ability to find work.

Example 1: I just switched jobs 3 months ago. I worked for a stable mid-market company in a 2nd tier job West Coast market with solid profitability, above average comp for the market for the top performers, good work/life balance, and a fairly flat revenue/market cap. Everybody there acted like they were lifers - the organization got 1/2 as much done as it could have, but everybody thought it was safe and stable because they made money hand over fist on their subscription based product and did just well enough to stay in the best of breed band in their market. But the reality is every stable, profitable company has someone willing to take it and squeeze it for more. That was nine months ago, 8 months ago they announced they were being taken private, 6 months ago the deal closed, and now it's official the company HQ is moving to a mid-America 3rd tier market and it's pretty clear that the timeline for the rest of the location is end of the year at best. And since the comp is above average in an above average market with new owners that have a financial model squarely centered on keeping labor costs (well) under 50th percentile they figure nobody will take the move and the paycut so pretty much no non-executives are being even offered a relocation. Everybody who was any good and had been there less than five years have already left - the rest are left wandering the beach aimlessly waiting for the tsunami to come to shore.

So...sometimes you have to move and take a "cut" in some ways. Just remember:

Rule #2 - Nothing not in writing maters. And even that is iffy.

Got bit by that once - and if they are are small or sleazy enough even if it's in writing it doesn't matter. No point in suing when 0 chance of recovering damages and they know it.

Example 2: Took a job to "build an embedded team" (in a Java shop) with a huge pay cut. Offer letter promised stock, six and twelve month salary adjustments, and at least 3 new hires within the first six months. Company was cool, team was great, office was great. We were downtown on the river, had a pub 40 feet down the hall. But there was no money. The next "round" never closed, the stock pool was exhausted at the time the letter was written, worked a year as a team of one and left. Would have bailed sooner except the job/team/office was very cool...loved coming to work every day...but was starving figuratively and somewhat literally.

So...weigh your options but long term it pays to shift and reinvent yourself once and a while. Myself and most of my peers recognize peoples ability to reinvent themselves on a resume...as long as it's not every year :-).

Reasons to make major changes in comp and/or size:

1. Move up in title. Many (most) people who make a senior management title or exec role do it in part by taking a shift down in size or salary to move up in title and then scale up from there.

2. Validate a title or role. Maybe you want to be a manager/director/architect. Maybe every company you have had a major role at is out of business or so small nobody has heard of them. Maybe you've lead a few teams here and there but didn't have that key word in the job title. You might go into a less interesting role to validate your resume at that level and title by taking the role at a larger or more recognizable company even if work is less interesting.

3. Make more money. Maybe you've done #1 and/or #2 and now you're finally being offered that director salary and role at a big company that throws money around. You're going into your peak earning years, your 401k has been ravaged by the past decade, go for it.

4. Have fun. Maybe you've done #3, or you were lucky with your investments or you picked the right startup. You've got retirement secured, your bored, go have fun.

When you change careers there's little choice

[dbIII]

For instance when engineering jobs in manufacturing dried up I had the choices of rare consulting gigs, academic jobs at a pay cut and zero job security or moving into IT with a huge pay cut but stable employment.

Here's my advice

[mikein08]

Stay right where you are: max out your pension fund contributions, enjoy the perks your current employer provides, and take some contract work on the side to satisfy your need for challenge. Figure out how much money you need to retire comfortably and work toward accumulating that money as fast as you can. Then retire. You'll be much happier. Trust me, not having to respond to an alarm clock 5 or more days a week is very nice.

your conclusion only reveals your own unhappiness

[schlachter]

I would never treat employees that way.

If a career was just about money, at least half the jobs out there would never get filled. Artists wouldn't create. Teachers wouldn't teach. Open source developers would all get jobs at Accenture. No one would work for the government or a non-profit. And everyone would work for the highest bidding company.

Some other things that matter: life balance, interesting work, good management, respect for your company/product, coworkers, city, flex time, vacation time, work environment, travel, stability, ethics, fairness, impact...

The second company was in NY in my case—

[aussersterne]

that is, until the state got involved thanks to myself and one other person. Then, one day, the building was locked, the board was gone to Europe, and all dozen or so employees were standing outside the door baffled and unpaid, from what I understand. I got out sooner, by about two pay periods, and got mine back before it *all* went down.

I think you'll find that in most industrialized or

[aussersterne]

post-industrialized nations, it's a pretty common thing to find that the failure to pay owed wages is considered a serious problem.

Re:your conclusion only reveals your own unhappine

[Grishnakh]

A lot of what you say here is total BS.

Artists do work, usually, because of a passion for their art. Teachers, OTOH, frequently get into it because it's a solid job and pays decently in many places (not all; some are downright lousy, but others are not). I've met several teachers who fell into it rather than seeking it as a career; basically they didn't have anything better to do and it looked good (one was recruited to it). Open source developers are not all volunteers; many of them are well-paid at corporate jobs. Ask all the developers at Red Hat. This is another big myth. Government jobs pay well, are extremely stable, and have fantastic benefits. Some pay fantastically well too. In the state where I live, every little municipality (about 550) has a separate school district, and the district's superintendants all make $250k. You think they do these jobs for passion and not money? Non-profit executive frequently make huge salaries; being a non-profit doesn't mean the pay is crap, it just means there isn't any profit left over for shareholders.

Yes, there's definitely a balance; money isn't everything, and other factors are important too: time off, location (and cost-of-living), quality of the work, work environment, etc. However I've noticed that (in my industry at least) typically the companies that pay peanuts usually are very deficient on most of these other things too. The big companies that pay well usually do much better all around, except maybe quality of work (being big equals lots of bureacracy and slowness usually). The small companies may give you really interesting assignments, and a lot more responsibility (less overhead and employees, you get more power to make your contribution to the project), but everything else about them totally sucks. It's quite a conundrum really.

Complex

[Andtalath]

1: Could you get more interesting stuff to do currently?
2: How long will this creative phase last in the new job?
3: Will it be a long-term thing? Basically this can only be guaranteed by partnership in the firm.
4: Is money currently a major influence on what you can do with your life?
5: If this company fails after your redesign, how will that look on your CV?
6: Do you know if they will actually listen to your experience or will they hamper you severely by restricting your choices?

Basically, you can't know.

However, try to have a beer with your new collegues first.
Usually you can get them to tell you about what type of place it is to work.

decisions, decisions, decisions...

[Tom]

So basically, you are asking strangers on the Internet to make a decision for you. One that is very personal and depends on so many individual factors that it is hard even for you to make?

I think what you really want is some help on decision making. Yes, it is probably a tough decision. Nobody is more qualified to make it then you are.

Re:I would say yes, but.....

[donscarletti]

If you think this is a problem, you probably don't understand why having architecture experts who make these decisions is a good thing, rather than letting developers do what they like.

Depends on who your architecture experts are and who your developers are. If the people who actually would make the best decisions are in the architecture roles and are making the decisions, this is probably the best for the company. This is not a given, it's possible that those architect roles are for ex-developers who have made great contributions in the past but have been outclassed by younger developers to semi-retire without surrendering control of the decision making process, regardless of their current merits, or it could be that management's assessment of people's relative strengths is simply not perfect. You tend to find people who have been at the company for a long time as architects, they tend to keep making the same types of decisions, which tends to lead to stagnation and possible loss of competitiveness over the years, whereas if developers come and go more frequently, the ideas they bring and decisions they make tends to have more variety and one sees more ideas come and go and the bad ideas being replaces (and hopefully the good ones remain).

The second issue is that if the blood sweat and tears is coming from the developers, management could probably get more blood sweat and tears out of them if they were allowed to do things their way. Of course, if someone wants to do something in an extremely stupid way, they will only waste their own time and others, but 90% of decisions aren't important enough that choosing the "right" way isn't going to achieve more than some extra passion and effort.

Thirdly, whatever is best for the project/company, it is almost always better for a developer him/herself to try it their way than be told what the right way is. Whoever the architects are, if they are good, they certainly got their position and skillset from making their own decisions, rather than implementing things according to others' plans. So as a rational, self-interested actor, the environment where one can make one's own decisions, right or wrong is better.

Almost always...

[Adam Jorgensen]

Better career opportunities > rotting in your current job, watching you skills degenerate and your life become an unhappy trudge from sun-up to sun-down.

Re:Easy.

[Adam Jorgensen]

What terrible advice:

Personally I've found that when I'm not enjoying my job:
1: I work less and WAB more...
2: This results in me having to work harder in spurts to get shit done...
3: ...and even then it's often late and of poor quality
4: This in turn leads to poor relations with my employers and co-workers...
5: ...and LOTs of added stress which...
6: ...makes enjoying my off-work time harder

I've moved jobs a couple of times and my most recent move was specifically because I felt my role was not beneficial to me. Although it was a stable, permanent position it had also gotten very boring and I was simply no longer interesested in the job. The knock-on effect was that I ended up stressed and unhappy.

I've since moved to a new, smaller company and I'm happier overall on every level. The work is more challenging and I get the chance to learn and apply new skills and technologies far more often.

Get a hobby.

[VIPERsssss]

If you need a challenge, learn to play a new musical instrument. Or buy a old British sports car.

you're doing it wrong

[rve]

If you've been working as an engineer for 30 years and you still need the money, you're doing it wrong

You're assuming USA, where a 6 figure salary is something you expect either straight out of college or after a few years at most.

In the rest of the world, this isn't necessarily the case.

Want better career, only if

[lsatenstein]

I would approach the potential company with a proposition, For the reduced salary, can they make up the difference in purchase options? How can they top up your salary difference.
I would also look at the salary range for the job you are teasing yourself to take. Are you going in at the bottom of the range (or below?)

You will have expenses, some unexpected. Don't go from the good job (frying pan) to the fire.