I have a conundrum

[Darthvoy]

I was in your position and chose money over more time. I know regret because I fee like I don't have time for anything.

 

[Tiamat]

what good is money if you do not have the time to spend it! Take the job that you have more freedom and perhaps less stress!

 

[IEC]

Originally posted by: mercanucaribe
I'd go for the time, but that's just me. Life is too short.

Go for the time, and spend it with your wife and kids. My parents chose to work less and earn less so that one or the other was almost always home. I'd say that in the long run to your family it'll be more valuable than earning more money but never seeing "Daddy".

 

[Corporate Thug]

I cant believe people in this thread acting like 50 hrs/wk is the end of the world. I know a few people in mergers/acqusitions who bill 2500 hrs a year (working roughly 3000 hours)

besides, firm life isnt so bad. They offer things the PTO couldnt: corporate charge cards, better contacts, more court time, etc...

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: patentman

Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
2600 hrs/yr = 50 hr/wk, that's nothing. Do that and retire early.

Yeah really... 10 hour days and weekends off. Damn I did that for $7.50 an hour during the summer last year.

On paper it does work out to be ~10 hours a day, 5 days a week. In reality it is much more. Note that I said a "minimum" of 2600 hours.

atleast you'll get atleast 1 day off

In my experiances, most people dont bill much more than minimum

 

[IEC]

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
I cant believe people in this thread acting like 50 hrs/wk is the end of the world. I know a few people in mergers/acqusitions who bill 2500 hrs a year (working roughly 3000 hours)

besides, firm life isnt so bad. They offer things the PTO couldnt: corporate charge cards, better contacts, more court time, etc...

Read the OP. It's not 50 hrs/wk. He'll be lucky if he's working 60...

 

[patentman]

Originally posted by: Siddhartha
How is your health?

Are you in a relationship, married, do you have kids?

Do you have non-work related responsibilities, parents or family that need your time and support?

I recommend taking the higher paying job for five years only if your health is good and your personal life can survive you committing 100% to this job. Live well within your means and save money. Start planning now for a second career or job which is less demanding and will allow you to have a life.

Physical Health: pretty good
Mental Health: Failing rapidly (almost had a nervous breakdown a couple months ago; went from being generally happy, nice guy 3 years ago to generally bitter, angry guy now)

Relationship: Married with no kids (yet). Planning to have first kid next year and it is extremely important to me for me to be there for my kids.

non-work responsibilities: normal husbandly duties, which I have ignored for the past 4 years because I am working 2 jobs (school + work = 18 hours a day on weekdays, 10 hours on weekends). Mothers health is failing. She was in the hospital for a month recently and I could only see her twice becase of school/work

As for saving/planning: you are preaching to the choir here. Wife and I are doing very well financially. Aside from school loans and mortgage (both of which I could pay off), we are debt free (only reason we have those loans is because I can get a higher return from the market than the interest rate on the loans).

In general: wifey is getting pretty tired of me not being there. If I knew that would change once I get out of school, this decision would be a lot easier.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: ariafrost

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
I cant believe people in this thread acting like 50 hrs/wk is the end of the world. I know a few people in mergers/acqusitions who bill 2500 hrs a year (working roughly 3000 hours)

besides, firm life isnt so bad. They offer things the PTO couldnt: corporate charge cards, better contacts, more court time, etc...

Read the OP. It's not 50 hrs/wk. He'll be lucky if he's working 60...

what am i missing here?

2600 hr / 52 weeks = 50 hrs/wk no?

 

[patentman]

Originally posted by: arrfep

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
2600 hrs/yr = 50 hr/wk, that's nothing. Do that and retire early.

I kind of agree with this. But the great thing about life is that you have pretty much an infinite amount of choices. Why not take this job for a year, maybe two or three if you can handle it. Live a reasonable lifestely and if you bust your butt for a few years, you can put away almost a quarter mil. Then you get a slower-paced, more flexible job after that.

Sounds like you don't have kids now so you have less time constraints. Work hard now to make life easier later instead of vice versa. Then you can have the easier job when you've got kids and want to spend time with them. But you still got a nice chunk of change in the bank.

Problem is, Wife and I will be moving to Boston or New England within the year. If I take the PTO job now, I can still move to New England and have the flexible job now. If I go to Boston with my firm, the PTO opportunity essentially vanishes, because I would have to return to DC fcor 6 months to work at the PTO before I became eligible for the hotelling program they offer.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: patentman

Originally posted by: arrfep

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
2600 hrs/yr = 50 hr/wk, that's nothing. Do that and retire early.

I kind of agree with this. But the great thing about life is that you have pretty much an infinite amount of choices. Why not take this job for a year, maybe two or three if you can handle it. Live a reasonable lifestely and if you bust your butt for a few years, you can put away almost a quarter mil. Then you get a slower-paced, more flexible job after that.

Sounds like you don't have kids now so you have less time constraints. Work hard now to make life easier later instead of vice versa. Then you can have the easier job when you've got kids and want to spend time with them. But you still got a nice chunk of change in the bank.

Problem is, Wife and I will be moving to Boston or New England within the year. If I take the PTO job now, I can still move to New England and have the flexible job now. If I go to Boston with my firm, the PTO opportunity essentially vanishes, because I would have to return to DC fcor 6 months to work at the PTO before I became eligible for the hotelling program they offer.

believe me, work at the firm for a few years and the PTO will be salivating all over you. Work at the PTO first and it doesn't mean much to the firm.

 

[patentman]

Originally posted by: Xstatic1
are you kidding me? this shouldn't even be a conundrum at all!!!! hmmm, with the Patent Law Firm --you'll maybe see the sun one day a week 'cause the rest of the time u'll be on your way to work just before the sun comes up and be on your way home when the sun has already set. hmm, no vacation....what that really means is while you're making all that cash, your wife/family will have be having vacations without you for at least the first 3 years.

on the other hand at the PTO, you'll be making roughly $6k a month, seeing your wife/family since you'll be able to work from home, be relatively stress-free 'cause in your words--"the job is relatively easy for me". and then you'll have a month long vacation each year. and to top it all off, in 3 years, your salary will increase another $35k.

is there really any comparison???????!!!!!!!!!!!!! let me put it another way, do you want to BE MARRIED to your career....or to your wife?

Your points are well taken too. I guessI was just hoping that the PTO would step up and consider my education and experience for salary purposes and split the difference between what my firm will pay and what my old PTO salary was. If I could make 100k at the PTO now there is no question I would work for them. Problem is, with the offer I have from the PTO I won;t be making that kind of money for three years, during which time I will have given up ~150-200k of compensation that my firm would pay.

Now, I have never been the kind of guy to chose money over everything else. But the difference in compensation in this case is extremely large, and I would be crazy to not at least consider it.

 

[theeedude]

Not to threadcr@p or anything, patentman, but what can you tell me about being a patent agent. I have a graduate degree in engineering, and authored some patents. I heard that you can take the patent bar and become a patent agent (not a patent lawyer) without going to law school, and then later go to law school and become a full on patent lawyer. Do you know what the pay and hours are for patent agents, and what's the work like? I am a good test taker, and I think with some studying, I can pass the patent bar. Just want to see what my options beyond engineering are.

 

[patentman]

Originally posted by: Old Hippie
If it were me, I'd listen to the Been-There-Done-That guy Dirigible. "Play Time" is definately more valuable when you're young, but keep a close eye on the future. It'll be on ya in a heartbeat.

BTW, 50 hrs/wk is nothing.

Good Luck!

LOL, its already on me.

 

[Corporate Thug]

Originally posted by: senseamp
Not to threadcr@p or anything, patentman, but what can you tell me about being a patent agent. I have a graduate degree in engineering, and authored some patents. I heard that you can take the patent bar and become a patent agent (not a patent lawyer) without going to law school, and then later go to law school and become a full on patent lawyer. Do you know what the pay and hours are for patent agents, and what's the work like? I am a good test taker, and I think with some studying, I can pass the patent bar. Just want to see what my options beyond engineering are.

you do not need a JD.

http://www.patentbarbri.com/download/pdf/GenReqBul_Feb05.pdf

 

[theeedude]

As far as your conundrum, If it's really only 50 hours a week, I would go with the law firm. My main concern is that they will pressure you to work a lot longer hours, and that 50 hrs is just a downpayment.

 

[patentman]

Originally posted by: Finality
Meh

2600Hrs/50 wks = 52 Hrs a week 10.5 hours a day = no big deal. Get in at 8 leave at 6 pack a lunch and eat it at your desk. Though if you could take the 80/80 option go for it.

You sound relatively young now is the time to make money.

BTW in my opinion govt jobs are loser jobs. Unless its a clear stepping stone to somewhere else I dont see the point. A friend works in the patent office and her POV is shes become as lazy as everyone else there.

Well I certainly undertand your point about examiner's being (generally) lazy, but I never really found that to be a problem for me when I worked there. I constantly produced at ~125% of my required quota and generally enjoyed the job. Although I would have to deal with the realtively large number of zombies that work there, this is not so much of an issue as I would be largely working from home in 6 months.

 

[skyking]

Life is quite uncertain and fickle. Choose quality today. There might not be a tomorrow, or 'retirement' as others have hinted at.
I am living the flex life and loving it. The retirement funding is OK for us, much like our current lifestyle.

 

[patentman]

Originally posted by: DaWhim
where will you be located for the PTO job?

I would go for the second job offer. statistically speaking, more money doesn't make people happier, especially you have to work a lot harder for it.

For the first 6 months: Alexandria Va.

After then, either Portland Maine or Manchester New Hampshire

 

[patentman]

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
I cant believe people in this thread acting like 50 hrs/wk is the end of the world. I know a few people in mergers/acqusitions who bill 2500 hrs a year (working roughly 3000 hours)

As I mentioned, its a minimum of 2600 hours per year. It is not uncommon for me to receive calls from senior level associates while they are "on vacation" so that they can check up on things.

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug besides, firm life isnt so bad. They offer things the PTO couldnt: corporate charge cards, better contacts, more court time, etc...

none of which really matter to me. Ok...well.. the $2500/year of free golf I like a lot, but the other stuff doesn't matter to me, especially the court time.

 

[patentman]

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug

Originally posted by: patentman

Originally posted by: arrfep

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
2600 hrs/yr = 50 hr/wk, that's nothing. Do that and retire early.

I kind of agree with this. But the great thing about life is that you have pretty much an infinite amount of choices. Why not take this job for a year, maybe two or three if you can handle it. Live a reasonable lifestely and if you bust your butt for a few years, you can put away almost a quarter mil. Then you get a slower-paced, more flexible job after that.

Sounds like you don't have kids now so you have less time constraints. Work hard now to make life easier later instead of vice versa. Then you can have the easier job when you've got kids and want to spend time with them. But you still got a nice chunk of change in the bank.

Problem is, Wife and I will be moving to Boston or New England within the year. If I take the PTO job now, I can still move to New England and have the flexible job now. If I go to Boston with my firm, the PTO opportunity essentially vanishes, because I would have to return to DC fcor 6 months to work at the PTO before I became eligible for the hotelling program they offer.

believe me, work at the firm for a few years and the PTO will be salivating all over you. Work at the PTO first and it doesn't mean much to the firm.

Been there done that. Both actually. I worked at the PTO before coming to a firm, and am now thinking about going back. PTO is salivating all over me, but dumbass gov't regs won't let them deviate within the same grade to offer me an attractive salary. If they would pay me a GS 12-step 7 salary or above I'd be happy.

 

[doze]

2600 hours is 50 hours a week, and this is basically a normal work week for most Americans. Go in at 8 and leave at 6 what's the big deal?

 

[maziwanka]

Originally posted by: 2Xtreme21

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
2600 hrs/yr = 50 hr/wk, that's nothing. Do that and retire early.

Yeah really... 10 hour days and weekends off. Damn I did that for $7.50 an hour during the summer last year.

you usually double billables in order to figure out how much you actually work per week.

2600 billable hours is no freaking joke. your starting salary sounds great. in all honesty, i would work at your firm for now and see how it goes.

you will have a much easier time going from the firm to the government job, as opposed to the other way around.

think of your family, save as much as you can and allow your wife and kids to live a very comfortable life.

 

[patentman]

Originally posted by: Corporate Thug
[what am i missing here?

2600 hr / 52 weeks = 50 hrs/wk no?

Well, for one, you assumed I like having no vacation.

In reality the calculation should be more like 2600 hr/year / 49 or 48 weeks = 54-55hrs/week minimum.

Although I posted about this in another thread a while back, I'll clarify since this is apparently a big point of contention here. Most of the people in my firm get in at 7am and leave at 7 or 8 pm, and then they usually work a half day on saturday or sunday. billable hour requirement or no, thats a lot of time, especially when you factor in commute time.

 

[patentman]

Originally posted by: senseamp
Not to threadcr@p or anything, patentman, but what can you tell me about being a patent agent. I have a graduate degree in engineering, and authored some patents. I heard that you can take the patent bar and become a patent agent (not a patent lawyer) without going to law school, and then later go to law school and become a full on patent lawyer. Do you know what the pay and hours are for patent agents, and what's the work like? I am a good test taker, and I think with some studying, I can pass the patent bar. Just want to see what my options beyond engineering are.

Trust me, being a patent agent isn't worth it. The pay stinks for the work you do (expect 65-85k a year for killing yourself) and you are generally given no respect in a law firm. I would recommend going to the PTO before becoming a patent agent, especially as an electrical engineer. The PTO is offering a 10k/year for 4 year bonus to EE's right now. You could easily go to law school while working at the PTO if you do it your first 3 years at the PTO (because production requirement is very low)

On the other hand, because you have an EE, firms will salivate all over you if you have a law degree and pass the patent bar. Right now I think my firm would hire a cadaver with an EE and a law degree.

 

[theeedude]

Originally posted by: patentman

Originally posted by: senseamp
Not to threadcr@p or anything, patentman, but what can you tell me about being a patent agent. I have a graduate degree in engineering, and authored some patents. I heard that you can take the patent bar and become a patent agent (not a patent lawyer) without going to law school, and then later go to law school and become a full on patent lawyer. Do you know what the pay and hours are for patent agents, and what's the work like? I am a good test taker, and I think with some studying, I can pass the patent bar. Just want to see what my options beyond engineering are.

Trust me, being a patent agent isn't worth it. The pay stinks for the work you do (expect 65-85k a year for killing yourself) and you are generally given no respect in a law firm. I would recommend going to the PTO before becoming a patent agent, especially as an electrical engineer. The PTO is offering a 10k/year for 4 year bonus to EE's right now. You could easily go to law school while working at the PTO if you do it your first 3 years at the PTO (because production requirement is very low)

On the other hand, because you have an EE, firms will salivate all over you if you have a law degree and pass the patent bar. Right now I think my firm would hire a cadaver with an EE and a law degree.

Hmm. Thanks for the info. I am making very near 6 figures working flexible 40 hours now . Seems like it's not worth it becoming a patent agent unless I also want to get a law degree. What is your opinion of getting a law degree part time by going to evening classes?