I have a dilemma!

maso10

Take the local job. the extra cash offered by the other job may seem tempting at the moment, but just think how you will feel 3 months down the line, if you were still doing it you would be so miserable with all that commuting.

Work/Life balance, do you want to work to live, or live to work?

poker_face

maso10 wrote: »

Take the local job. the extra cash offered by the other job may seem tempting at the moment, but just think how you will feel 3 months down the line, if you were still doing it you would be so miserable with all that commuting.

Work/Life balance, do you want to work to live, or live to work?

I agree. Id personally go with which ever you will enjoy the most.

msflowerfairy

Thanks everyone, i will let you know what happens.

Woby_Tide

think long term, without knowing your situation but if something like having children is on the horizon in the next few years then one of those jobs is much the better option. If it isn't on the horizon then quality of life is pretty much your only concern and you should choose which one would give you the most happiness I guess

lonestar1

msflowerfairy wrote: »

.....The first one is very local, i get days off in the week as it is shifts, and i will be worse off by £500 per month,
....
The second job is 7K more than i earn now,

Most folk whove replied seem to think taking the second job only offers 7k more than the first but if you read the post the first job offers £500 a month less than what they are currently on, thats a drop of 6K.


So the actual difference bewteen the jobs is £13K

Does that change things maybe ?

msflowerfairy

That is also my dilemma, the difference in money Grrr!

mymatebob

lonestar1 wrote: »

Most folk whove replied seem to think taking the second job only offers 7k more than the first but if you read the post the first job offers £500 a month less than what they are currently on, thats a drop of 6K.


So the actual difference bewteen the jobs is £13K

Does that change things maybe ?

Depends on other factors but I was aware of that when I said I would take the local job. And I still would, 40 hours travelling a week would ruin my quality of life.
and even £13k wouldn't compensate me for it.

teabelly

Take the local job and spend the time you would have wasted on commuting creating another income stream for yourself to make up the loss. 8 hours travel will kill your family life stone dead. Once you add the 40 hour commute into the 40 hour working week does 13k for another 40 hours sound worth it?! That's an 80 hour week, week in , week out. Also you can't rely on public transport to stay around. You could start this job and the !!!!!!s could take away your bus route or change the timetable and either make it impossible for you to get to work at all or make it even longer and more expensive.

Zeldazog

lonestar1 wrote: »

Most folk whove replied seem to think taking the second job only offers 7k more than the first but if you read the post the first job offers £500 a month less than what they are currently on, thats a drop of 6K.


So the actual difference bewteen the jobs is £13K

That is true, but my comment was that the extra 7k that the distant job offers will all be swallowed up in travel costs alone - so over the job that Msflower has just been made redundant from, the distant job offers no more salary whatsoever.

And yes, the difference between the two jobs is £13k -but take £7k per annum off for travelling costs, and the diffence is back down to 6k
.
You could take a second job for much much less than the 40 hours a week travelling time to make up this difference in income if you needed to.

20 hours a week at minimum wage would give you £6k a year.

I personally could not last long if I were to leave at 5am and not get back home til 9pm every night, it might not be working all of those hours, but it would still be tiring,

But Msflower, you know what you're capable of, I know I couldn't cope with that kind of travelling, or that amount of hours out the house.

Good luck!