Dueling Job Offers

[judecorp]

I have a major dilemma and also feel like a supreme a-hole.

Late last week, I accepted a job at another EI agency. We hadn't finalized salary but I had accepted the range of salary and figured we would iron it out. The director called me late Friday evening (6pm) to talk salary, but I missed the call. She told me I could call her on the weekend, and I called on Saturday. I never got a call back. I e-mailed yesterday, but didn't get an e-mail back. So I figured we would just talk today when I went to fill in my new hire paperwork.

This morning I was driving along to the new place with everything I needed for my new hire paperwork (SS card, SW license, stuff like that) and I got a phone call. It was from the local Children's Hospital about the job I had been REALLY jazzed about but left the interview thinking I didn't have a chance in heck. I interviewed there several weeks ago and never heard anything, which is why I went forward with the other place. So today the recruiter called me and offered me that job! WHILE I WAS DRIVING TO FILL OUT MY NEW HIRE PAPERWORK.

I told the recruiter that I would need a few hours to get back to him. Then I went to my new hire appointment and told her the situation and that I would need a day or two to decide. She was obviously upset and clearly has clients all ready for me to take and I can't even imagine her situation. She bumped up her offer but couldn't match the hospital salary.

Now I need to decide what to do. The hospital job is also contingent on a background check and a check of my previous employers, including my most recent boss who could choose to ruin me. I am nervous.

Job #1:
+very flexible and casual
+in EI, so I am already very comfortable
+really nice people, very positive work environment
+I already know some of the staff
+good benefits
+I already accepted with them
+raised the salary to try to keep me
-Long commute (45 minutes)
-Involves driving from house to house
-Need to finish certification even though current boss won't give me my work samples

Job #2:
+good career move
+clinical work with child victims of abuse and other traumas
+closer commute (25 or so minutes)
+office-based, not community-based
+good benefits plus gym for staff
+$3k/more per year for 36 hours/week rather than 40
+no need to finish EI certification
-would involve some evening hours
-would need to shift gears totally and get a lot of training
-would make me feel like an a-hole to job #1

Sigh. Decisions.

Comments

[violane.livejournal.com]

Ugh, what a decision! Honestly, they both sound good so it doesn't seem like you could really go wrong. I hope one of them emerges as a clear favorite soon so it's not so excruciating for you!

[violane.livejournal.com]

I see others are saying what I wanted to but wasn't sure if you would want advice. I think the fact that you wrote you would be REALLY jazzed about job #2 sort of answers the question. Probably the woman at #1 would make the same decision for herself if it were hers to make.

[marlatiara.livejournal.com]

OK for whatever my insane opinion is worth...

I'm leaning toward #2 - business is business and I know you'll feel bad on a personal level (I would too) but it's all about you not them. ;) The money + the shorter commute + the benefits + the fewer hours/week + the good good career move all sound very good to me.

However, when it all comes down, I'd go with whatever job will make YOU the HAPPIEST. You just came out of such a shitty situation, you deserve to want to go to work every day with a smile (or at least not wanting to puke...).

[rexlezard.livejournal.com]

You know you want #2.

# 1 will understand.

[whuffle.livejournal.com]

Much as it is going to stink to back out on an existing offer, I'd say go with the one that will offer you room to grow and stretch into more challenging work. Just have integrity and be honest with the first one while you're doing this and they really won't fault you. If you do go for a job with them years from now they'll see in your file that you got a better offer and know that you mean business.

[tracy-n-mia.livejournal.com]

As someone who hires people I say go with #2 if you're excited about it.

We lose people we want to hire because they get a better offer and that's just the way it goes. You're not being a jerk at all if you take a better offer and it's ok for them to show disappointment, but to look upset is unprofessional.

[skreeky]

I definitely agree w everyone so far... and if it helps, think about the runner-up candidate that undoubtedly really wants job #1. Sure, it's a hassle for Job #1 to go through the offer phase again, but I'm sure you weren't the ONLY person that would work for them. Candidate B has to put food on the table too and will be thrilled.

Do what's right for you.

[lanewaychatter.livejournal.com]

OMG #2. Seriously, because of the commute. I'm serious. You would be saving 20 or 40 minutes per day (that is, depending on whether you meant it is 20 more minutes *each way* for job 1, or 20 minutes more per day).

That's 160 or 80 more HOURS per year you'd be spending in an unpaid work capacity. At a 48 week year, that's 4.4 WEEKS (or 2.2 weeks, hope you are following me here) of UNPAID TIME you'd be putting in if you took job 1.

In addition to the 4 extra hours you'd need to work at job 1 per week. Over a 48-week year of 36-hour weeks, that's 196 extra hours - or 5.33 WEEKS. So you'd be essentially volunteering up to ALMOST 10 WEEKS of time if you took job no. 1.

PLUS you'd be getting paid less at job 1, too!

Obvs just my opinion. But I was very struck by this. I think you are very very very straightforwardly moral and honest person to be troubled by this dilemma - and to even relate to it as a dilemma in the first place.

I actually think the training is a benefit, too. You'd get to stretch yourself and invest in your own human capital.

[colleenod.livejournal.com]

As much as #1 might be disappointed, you need to make the choice that is best for you. I accepted and worked at a job and during my probationary period, got a better offer for significantly more money that was in the field I wanted to be in (the original job was in publishing, but the 2nd job was in educational publishing). I gave my notice and left. People weren't happy with me, but whatever. It was the right decision.

If you're more excited about #2, go for it.

[spleazeball.livejournal.com]

#2 because you'll always wonder. Don't do what I always do and go with what seems safe and comfortable, then end up wishing you had taken it a step further. If you have the chance to do something cool and open up your career, I say go for it. Also, you have a family now and more money/time and less commute are big factors. I think so anyway.

Also, you already told #1 you needed to think about it, upsetting the manager and making yourself feel bad. You can't undo that, even if you do take the job. There's a risk that even if you take it you still might feel like an a-hole, the manager might still feel upset, and that might lead to starting off on the wrong foot anyway. You know?

[jadefu.livejournal.com]

If both jobs were exactly the same commute, exactly the same money, which one would you take?
If it's the second, then just be professional and courteous to #1 and you're not being an a-hole. You haven't taken the job until you signed the papers and confirmed everything.

[mightywombat.livejournal.com]

It may make you feel like an a-hole briefly, but I think that if you lay out your reasons for preferring to take the hospital job to your... Job #1 lady... it will make both of you feel better about your decision. Most remorse and animosity stems from not knowing, and wondering, why.

Take the hospital job. More money AND good career move.

[quezz.livejournal.com]

I think if you are more excited about the hospital job, you should take it. It sounds like it's what you want, and that it's better for you in the end. It's possible your old boss could screw you, and you might want to tell the new job about the situation if there is any problem with her recommendation.

[kjames.livejournal.com]

i do think, that if you turn down the first agency graciously in a professional manner, they should respect you still. it's business, after all.

[redwink.livejournal.com]

I'm leaning towards job number 2. Not only is it better for your family (shorter commute, more money, shorter hours), but I believe you would be a great fit in that type of position. I am SO grateful for those who have helped us through the horrors of my daughter's abuse. They are heroes.

[livinginfits.livejournal.com]

job 2. no decision. you don't get do-overs and it's best to cut your losses on something and deal with a little guilt than live with years of regret.

[vorpalbla.livejournal.com]

"including my most recent boss who could choose to ruin me."

FWIW, everywhere I've worked directs reference checks to the HR department, which don't provide any gory details, just when you worked there and what your position was. It's legal CYA.

[sassywoman.livejournal.com]

I don't envy the place you're at because honestly they both sound like they would be good jobs for you. My only hesitation with job #2 is that you a hole ex-boss could sabotage it for you and I'd hate to see you lost job #1.
Keep us posted on what you decide.