Help!

davezheng

Guys, I do need help with a big decision between the two offers.


Option1 
One is from Lloyds, a management trainee who needs to go for different rotations. Even though it is said that most of the graduates will get a permanent role, it is no guarantee there. The program will be two years and cover different aspects of risk, but I will probably need to relocate to other cities. 

Lloyds seems to be a very attractive company because of its scale and other training structure.

The major concern is that as it has no guarantee to have a permanent role there and also, it might need me to travel to different places. I am currently living with my partner, and I do not know how to make it if I need to relocate. 


Option2
The second offer is from Santander, which is a senior credit analyst. The role will be implementing and testing the different credit policies to validate the new policies. 

The major concern is that I do not know if the job is really something I like to do, even though I asked some persons and they say it is not too hard to transfer to other teams in Santander.

The good point about this offer is that it is not in London which will save me a lot of money and compared with Lloyds, it is a permanent role and no need to relocate.

The salary and benefits packages for both are pretty similar.  It would be great if anyone could offer any advice and help.

MovingForwards

Do a proper pros and cons list for both roles and then compare the results. No one here can say which is better.

You could always decline both and find the right one you're after.

General_Grant

davezheng said:

Guys, I do need help with a big decision between the two offers.


Option1 
One is from Lloyds, a management trainee who needs to go for different rotations. Even though it is said that most of the graduates will get a permanent role, it is no guarantee there. The program will be two years and cover different aspects of risk, but I will probably need to relocate to other cities. 

Lloyds seems to be a very attractive company because of its scale and other training structure.

The major concern is that as it has no guarantee to have a permanent role there and also, it might need me to travel to different places. I am currently living with my partner, and I do not know how to make it if I need to relocate. 


Option2
The second offer is from Santander, which is a senior credit analyst. The role will be implementing and testing the different credit policies to validate the new policies. 

The major concern is that I do not know if the job is really something I like to do, even though I asked some persons and they say it is not too hard to transfer to other teams in Santander.

The good point about this offer is that it is not in London which will save me a lot of money and compared with Lloyds, it is a permanent role and no need to relocate.

The salary and benefits packages for both are pretty similar.  It would be great if anyone could offer any advice and help.

 
Two years is longer than some "permanent" roles turn out to be.

"Permanent" contracts can be ended with relatively little notice - contractually perhaps a month for the role you mention and unlikely to be more than 3 months from their side.

Sandtree

The financial services firms that I'd seen the graduate schemes for were similar in that its 4 rotations over two years with a statement that most get a perm job out the back of it. The Lloyds Bank one looks at least a little better as you can choose what discipline the scheme is in whereas the ones I've known (and applied for one of them) rotations were across the whole business and had to include at least one stint in Operations (ie call centre). Most did end up with jobs but a fair proportion were as call centre team managers and its a fairly good bet if you'd left school and gone to work in the call centre you'd have gotten to that grade quicker than going to uni and then doing the grad scheme.


If you are going in as a "senior" credit analyst that would suggest you have already done the junior role first? So you'll presumably know f you like the role in general or not already. Most large corporations you can move around inside (though salary doesnt tend to keep up) but its clearly easier to enter at a point close to your goal than apply for a receptionist job hoping you'll make it to Chief Actuary 

Marcon

davezheng said:

Guys, I do need help with a big decision between the two offers.


Option1 
One is from Lloyds, a management trainee who needs to go for different rotations. Even though it is said that most of the graduates will get a permanent role, it is no guarantee there. The program will be two years and cover different aspects of risk, but I will probably need to relocate to other cities. 

Lloyds seems to be a very attractive company because of its scale and other training structure.

The major concern is that as it has no guarantee to have a permanent role there and also, it might need me to travel to different places. I am currently living with my partner, and I do not know how to make it if I need to relocate. 


Option2
The second offer is from Santander, which is a senior credit analyst. The role will be implementing and testing the different credit policies to validate the new policies. 

The major concern is that I do not know if the job is really something I like to do, even though I asked some persons and they say it is not too hard to transfer to other teams in Santander.

The good point about this offer is that it is not in London which will save me a lot of money and compared with Lloyds, it is a permanent role and no need to relocate.

The salary and benefits packages for both are pretty similar.  It would be great if anyone could offer any advice and help.

On the basis of such limited information about you and your priorities, tossing a coin is about the best I can do! More seriously, do as suggested above: write yourself a list of pros and cons for each job, and see if that focusses your thinking. Given your comment under Option 1, you might also discuss with your partner if you see this as a serious, long term relationship.

thecornflake

I'm not sure if there was other posts on this but assuming you're a grad and these are first job offers?

The second option sounds better financially and job security wise (although most large banks seem to have a history of making redundancies fairly often when needing to cut costs). However a decent graduate program with rotation etc can be a really good opportunity and possibly more interesting. Personally I would always take a better role\company over more money but I'm probably at a different career stage than you. I will also say being based in London can just be better generally for future prospects in terms of networking etc.

Have you read glassdoor reviews for similar positions at both places? Obviously take all bad reviews with a little pinch of salt as it can sometimes just be a former employee with a grudge but it usually gives you a rough idea.