advice regarding jobs and pay

[JHZR2]

Hello,

Im asking advice, really for my wife (which of course effects my financial position too!). My wife is a doctorate level therapist, specializing in pediatrics. She desires to work in a school setting long-term, and does currently do so. She took a job with a company that contracts to various schools in the area, and provides her with free health insurance (for her only) and only a 1% match on a 401k. She really likes what she does, the districts she works in and the kids she treats.

Recently she found out that one of the school districts that she works in was considering hiring a full-time therapist instead of contracting the work out. She did not bite, thinking that it was best to keep with her company.

Apparently the school district is still looking for a therapist. She is very much liked by the district, and they even asked her if she would like to have a job direct. In terms of pay, she would be given a teacher's pension, health benefits and superior pay.

My wife doesnt work a 2000-hr man year, but also doesnt work a teacher's schedule. For reference, the teacher's year is roughly 1215 hours, while I consider a standard man-year to be 2000 hours.

She gets paid a certain level. On a "salary per year" basis, based upon 2000 billable hours in her current job, or taking the school employee pay rate and dividing that by 2000, the "per hour" rate is roughly the same. On a real "per hour worked" basis, the rate in the school is nearly 1.5x. The reality of the school situation is that she could still work an additional 800 hours or so, to have even more income. Or, she could be home 40% more and still have the same take-home pay.

In other words, both jobs pay the same on a "per year" basis. The difference is that the school job has a lot less hours worked in order to make the same amount of money.

My wife never was required to sign a contract or non-compete document when she started work, though she is a full-time worker with benefits.

So all that said, is it just "tough luck" for her company if she decided that she wanted to work in this district that her company currently has a contract for? Given that she doesnt have a non-compete document signed, if her existing company would loose their contract as a result of her going from being their employee to being an employee of the district, could they have recourse after her?

Also, obviously it would be much better for us financially to have her work in the school district. She works a per diem job that pays nearly double her take home rate at her normal job, and she could continue working that over the summers, etc. What Id like advice on primarily is, how does she bring up the subject? How would she best bring it up with the school (or should she), so that it is on the level and ot scheming behind the company's back (though it kind of is), and how does she bring it up with the company, given that she is in the position of strength, with no noncompete contracts or binding issues, but also given that one can very easily burn bridges quick doing something like this?

All in all, how does one gently approach such a subject?

Any suggestions???

Thanks in advance,

JMH

 

[VeeDubb]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2



Also, obviously it would be much better for us financially to have her work in the school district. She works a per diem job that pays nearly double her take home rate at her normal job, and she could continue working that over the summers, etc. What Id like advice on primarily is, how does she bring up the subject? How would she best bring it up with the school (or should she), so that it is on the level and ot scheming behind the company's back (though it kind of is), and how does she bring it up with the company, given that she is in the position of strength, with no noncompete contracts or binding issues, but also given that one can very easily burn bridges quick doing something like this?



What are the negative consequences of bringing it up to the school and to the company? Are we talking hurt feelings or are there business related reasons? What are the consequences of burning bridges? Emotional or business consequences?

 

[JHZR2]

good point... since she didnt sign a noncompete, she isnt tied that way, but then again, her going to the school directly to work could be the catalyst for her company loosing their contract.

Despite the noncompete, this could open us to a lawsuit, I imagine... no basis for saying that though.

The therapist community is small. Does this mean anything? Money is green, and therapists make less than doctors despite approximately the same costs for schooling - so I cant imagine that any of them would see it any differently...

She has no real emotionl ties to the company, she has only worked there one year.

I just dont want to get her into a position where the school can't hire her for some reason, and the company cans her for looking around and trying to take business... its not like she is trying to get a job 25 or 200 miles away...

Thanks,

JMH

 

[VeeDubb]

Maybe a starting point would be for her to ask for a raise from the company. Those benefits sound pretty [censored] and there is a job being advertised that pays more for fewer hours. Sounds to me like the company needs to step up. I'd give the company a chance to do something her. Then if the company doesn't do anything, that's her out for opening discussions with the school. Then the company can't blame her for working it behind the scenes.

I asked my boss for a raise back in March. When he said he couldn't do it, I told him I'd probably be looking because my expenses have increased. He said he understood. But then again, I don't know what your wife's boss is like.

 

[Gary Allan]

Well, one would assume that the single school district isn't "the company's" only customer ..or is it?

The only way I could see this being (in some sense) against you/her is if she freelanced and took over all of her "accounts" from her current employer.

You seem to describe this as an ethical dilemma ..but it's manifested in an expression "fear of punishment".

Now I'm a "fair fool" in this sorta thing. I like to leave all "accounts settled" even if it costs me. I'd openly discuss this with both parties in a candid manner. Deception or the willful withholding of information is not either of your strong suits.

Don't you hate these "crossroads of ethical conflict and debate"?? If you're anything but 100% candid ..it's assured to backfire in one way or another. You're too clean and actually care about your image.

 

[VeeDubb]

The only ethical dilemma I see here might be this:

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

The only way I could see this being (in some sense) against you/her is if she freelanced and took over all of her "accounts" from her current employer.


She is selling her labor and if her currently company doesn't want to pay market value for it when it is an "at-will" contract, I don't see why she can't offer it to someone else who offers better terms. Nobody frets over these things when buying a car or TV. We seem to be perfectly fine with squeezing out another 25$ out of the poor retail guy working on commission while trying to support a family. But when it comes to their career, people seem to feel bad about getting a better deal from a company at their own expense and to the benefit of the company. I'm pretty sure most employers don't face such "ethical dilemmas" about hiring someone for the cheapest they can get them.

Now I can see if a relational contract had developed where the company has bent over backwards to help her when they didn't have to. But that doesn't sound like the case here.

 

[andyd]

Be careful, not for ethical reasons but keep the job reasons. Since I got laid off back in '04, I learned that there is no such thing as fairness or loyalty in the job market. Lip service might be paid, but when push comes to shove, it is just words. If you get a better deal take it. But procede carefully until the deal is inked.

 

[BuickGN]

I'm glad I clicked on this thread. I'm in the same situation right now and financially the smart choice is to ditch the contractor and be hired directly. Morally, however is a bit harder.

 

[Gary Allan]

Vee-Dub. I agree with you ...but this is JHZR2 here. He expects a just world and he's in an approach avoidance conflict. His wife wants the food (the better job) at the end of the electrified runway (the anxiety over taking a job from a current client of her current employer). What she wants is on the other side of pain (anxiety).

Your telling him(her) to ignore the shock of the electrified runway (real or imagined).

I suggest turning off the runway electricity.


For those who don't recall how you demonstrate "approach avoidance syndrome" ..you get some cats hungry and you put food at the end of a runway and they get used to running to the food. After they've been conditioned to running down the runway when you open the door, you introduce a current to the runway that delivers a shock. At first they just keep running and jump around a bit ..but eventually they just keep pacing back and forth ..unwilling to endure the shock. This produces the greatest conflict.

 

[VeeDubb]

Good analogy. You sound like you could be her therapist!

Well, sounds like she's gotta do what works for her and her personality type. I learned a long time ago that the advice I give my wife doesn't suit her and the advice she gives me wouldn't work for me.

 

[JHZR2]

See, our issue is this... Im not sure if it is an ethical issue.

If her company ran out of work, and she was the low person on the totem pole, Im sure they would let her go. As one poster said, there is no loyalty in the job market.

At the same time, it seems that her peers in the same company signed a noncompete... but she didnt. It might have been an honest mistake, but I suppose there are some ethics there. Is it ethical to capitalize on their mistake by taking business if it means she can do better...

To me, money talks. The better deal money and time-wise is the superior deal, given that she is aware of how they operate, their culture, etc. It is part of her day job right now in fact...

I suppose how to approach it is our biggest unknown. Lack of experience, lack of knowledge of best practices, etc. In the end someone will be hurt to some extent (dollars wise). i want to be sure that since my wife may cause the hurt to the other company, that bringing the topic up with all parties is done such that it doesnt open us up to any issues legal-wise, and also doesnt cause her to get fired because of the backroom deals perception. That is the name of the game.

The company does indeed have many other "accounts".

Thanks,

JMH

 

[VeeDubb]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2

At the same time, it seems that her peers in the same company signed a noncompete... but she didnt. It might have been an honest mistake, but I suppose there are some ethics there. Is it ethical to capitalize on their mistake by taking business if it means she can do better...



Well this is interesting. I think this does potentially open up a legal and ethical issue. Do you think they overlooked it, or did they purposefully not have her sign one? And what kind of verbal communication has occurred about this? Because even if she didn't sign it but an expectation of noncompete has been communicated, it could be legally binding. You might want to talk to a lawyer before you continue to speculate on whether she should pursue this job.

 

[JHZR2]

right...

Because if she brings it up and they wanted her to have one, then of course she will be made to sign one. If there is a reason why she didnt have to it wasnt made clear, as she is a full time employee with the benefits, etc. that would be expected.

JMH

 

[GROUCHO MARX]

I think it's the customer (school district in this case) who may have penalty clause issues.

This is how it works with other agency employees.

 

[PandaBear]

Originally Posted By: GROUCHO MARX
I think it's the customer (school district in this case) who may have penalty clause issues.

This is how it works with other agency employees.


Agree. Employee that are at will (no contract length) can leave and work for anyone as pleased, but the customer (school) who hire an employee of a contracting firm during or within a period of time after the contract will have to pay a penalty.

I don't think there is any rule that say an employee cannot work for a competitor or customer in a "non compete" agreement, as long as trade secret or anything bind by NDA is not communicated to the public or new employer. This would prohibit employee from leaving and force them to stay unsatisfied. Usually if a company want additional clause, it has to pay more in a form of bonus. I'd suspect JHZR2's wife didn't have to sign it because the company didn't want to pay extra for it.

Take the job, think of it this way: if she decline it, the school will hire someone else, the company lose contract, and she will still get laid off. Might as well cut out the middle man and take the job. It is the company's responsibility to make their employee happy (benefit, promotion opportunity, salary, stability, etc) and the customer happy (low cost, good service, reliability, etc). If it fail to do so, it is their fault.

 

[bretfraz]

I agree with the sentiment that it would be smart to engage an employment attorney in your state. A one hour session should be enough to know for sure if you'd be at risk of a lawsuit if your wife jumped ship.

Beyond that I would not discuss this with her employer until she had a very good idea of the potential job offer. Her employer will not like their client poaching a good employee then terminating their contract.

You are correct that her employer will demand a non-compete to be signed immediately. The upside is she may be able to negotiate better pay in exchange for her compliance. Before you get to that point you'd better have made up your mind to either stay or leave, otherwise be on the losing end of the deal.

 

[firemachine69]

No contract = end of discussion.

When I got hired for the coach line, I was still working for Wal-Mart. The store manager was in dire need of work - I offered to stay, at roughly $28/hr (approximately what I make with my curent job). Of course, he didn't bite, but I laid it out to him, so he couldn't retract and say I never offered.