Originally Posted by
clacko
if you can cover the home front, go for it.....$20 ain't chopped liver....
concentrate the flying/hotels/cars on 1 program each if you can....
good luck...
What clacko said.
Originally Posted by
It'sHip2B^2
It might not cost any more in child care. Dads don't charge.
But I wonder if the responses would have been the same for a dad of two small kids...
It might not be a dif in child care, depending on how the 50% (vs the current 25% travel) works out. If the children are in daily day care currently, then that's not going to change. The evenings might have to be adjusted, either w/ dad, relatives or neighbors covering.
I doubt the question would even be asked of a man.
Originally Posted by
LandingGear
Well, 20K will become the starting point for raises and all, so it is not just a flat 20K. It is more. Besides, all the points and miles can also lead to free hotel nights for vacations and such.
If you have cover for childcare and have a little flexibility on travel (e.g., not travel when an exam is coming up, or a concert, or birthday), then go for it. If opportunities will not come too often in your region, I think you should give it your best attention.
Agree, especially if opps don't come up in the region that often & also agree w/ the $20K being starting point for more $$ down the line.
Originally Posted by
PDPhoto
"(e.g., not travel when an exam is coming up, or a concert, or birthday)"
So the OP is to receive the full benefits of the role, but not fulfil the role fully? That is hardly fair or equitable to the company or her fellow workers who will have to cover for her under performance. would the same allowances even be considered for a male worker?
Where did you get that the OP was suddenly going to be underperforming? People can travel & still perform well. People can arrange their travel around some personal events (that includes dads btw
) and not have it impact a position or client. There may be times when the OP might have to miss some home events if a meeting can't be scheduled around it, but that might not be the norm for each event.
Originally Posted by
LandingGear
If you have the option of traveling on one of two days and you exercise that option, that is hardly evil. If you see the part before the stuff you quoted, I said, "have the flexibility."
Agree.
Originally Posted by
JujuJLT
I think you have to weigh the type of travel it is, meaning does 50% mean that you are gone for two straight weeks a month? Or does it mean 2-3 days a week? Do you have control over it - can you plan meetings for days that you know you won't have kid events?
I am a single parent, and my kids are now 8 & 10. I've been traveling about 35% on average for most of their lives and do have full custody (marriage failed for non travel/work related issues about 4 years ago). However, there are very very few trips (like 2 a year) where I am gone more than 3 days at a time, and most (probably 80%) of my trips are either day trips or one night. Some months I'm home for 3 weeks at a time, but that is the nature of my job - it is project based and sometimes my projects align where no travel is needed for 3 weeks.
I DO have the flexibility to say I can't travel on the day of the school musical, or their birthdays, the day I promised to take them to the waterpark or whatever. It doesn't mean I'm not doing my job fully (to reply to whomever said that) - it means my job respects that I have a life and they don't own me. Even more, I take them along with me whenever I'm traveling somewhere that I have someone who can watch them while I'm working - for example a city where we have a friend or relative who doesn't mind hanging out with them for 3 hours while I go to a meeting. Later this month we are going to Asia for a vacation which ends in a meeting for me there. They've had a great opportunity to see the world that they would never have had otherwise.
When I'm not on the road, I work from home. When I add it up, I'm home and actually with them much more at 35% travel than I was working in an office. Yes, I do miss them, but as a single parent with 100% custody, a day or two where I get to be a human and not just mommy is actually nice. And no different than any other divorced situation where the father would have visitation. My job pays very well, and I'm grateful every day that I can provide for my kids (no child support) without having to worry about making ends meet. Lots of single parents aren't as lucky. I don't feel like I've missed too much. For me (and for my children, who are happy, healthy, secure and do have me at all of their important events) this works. I know that isn't true for everyone, but for us, it does - and if any of the variables I described above changed, it probably would not work for me.
So, despite the resounding no chorus above me, take into account all the aspects: what can you control, what will it mean, and will the negative outweigh the positive... before you decide.
Thank you for sharing your first-hand experience.
Originally Posted by
ALittleSurreal
Fathers would rarely ask this question and a father would not get these responses.
Whether a father or mother, this has got to be hard on the kids I would think. I guess just take that into the equation when deciding.
Much luck that everything works out for your family!
Agree.
Also to the OP - we had a thread in the last year or two where a female FTer was starting a job on the road & there were a lot of suggestions on how to keep connected w/ the kids (Skype, postcards, taking pictures of them to put on the beside stand, etc) that were helpful. Both you & the kids will miss each other on the days of travel, but it can be managed. And no your kids won't end up needlessly broken/you're not an evil person. I'll see if I can find the thread, as FTers had some great advice. But if I don't get to it, you might want to do a search.
Good luck whichever you choose!
Cheers.