Leave a job after 2 month for a higher paying job?

[quickpsych]

Recently got my license and , as I've heard happens, began quickly getting a few emails/messages from recruiters for other jobs. One in particular, and I know some people who work there and seem to like it there, reached out and encouraged me to apply. My current job, which I trained at years ago, recently started about 2 months ago and have in contract a pay bump of around 45% more than the "clinician" salary I was initially hired at. However, this other place (and a colleague who got hired by them a year or so ago confirmed this) offers about 30% MORE than what I'd make at my current place after the pay bump, with a generous signing bonus.

Both are more niche type companies and both are types of work i enjoy. There's more variety at the other place (they assign psychologists to 2-3 sites where psych services are provided to the population (i.e Mon/Tue Site A, Wed/Thur Site B, Fri Site C)) Money isn't everything but reaching low six figures right after licensure is tempting.

So my questions are:

Does it look bad in our field to leave a new job so soon for a potentially much higher paying job and maybe even a little more flexibility or is this common?

Would you apply for the other job then with offer in hand try to negotiate with existing job knowing they can't match it 100% but maybe other perks offered or just take the other job if offered?

At the end of the day it's certainly a good problem to have.

Thanks!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I wouldn't say leaving a job after 2-3 months is common, but it does happen. Whether it burns bridges where you are currently will probably depend on a number of factors, including how much work they put into getting you specifically into that job, how hard it might be to find a replacement (and whether your absence will leave them SOL with regard to whatever it is you're doing/were going to), and the general culture of the workplace. It's probably not going to look great regardless, but some might make the argument that leaving so soon after getting hired might actually be less disruptive than leaving at the 6-8 month mark, after you've become more integrated into the setting.

I'd normally say that if you like where you are now, it's certainly worthwhile to try to negotiate a bigger pay bump with the other offer in hand. However, as you've only been there 2-3 months, I honestly don't know how successful this would be or how it'd be received.

Like you've said, at the end of the day, it's not a bad problem to have. And ultimately, it's your career, so no one is going to look out for it (and your professional goals) other than you.

 

[ClinicalABA]

Leaving after a few month for a 5-10% increase might be a bit questionable. Leaving for 30% increase (which is on top of the 45% bump) is much more understandable (and suggests the current agency is not paying fairly). Take the increase (or give your current employer the opportunity to match). Let's say you take the new gig, work there for many years, then- for whatever reason- decide to leave and apply to work at my agency. When I ask about the 3-month job, tell me that you really liked the opportunity and the work, but were approached by another agency that offered you a life changing pay increase that would have been irresponsible to yourself and current/future family to turn down, despite it being the most difficult professional decision you had to make. I'd respect that. You can only play that card once, maybe twice if it's really spread out, though, or else it's a pattern of leaving that would raise red flags.

As psychologists, our labor is our primary- and often only- commodity. Why should you be expected to sell it to someone for 70% of what it's worth? I bet they have some clause where you are an employee at will, or even some probationary period where they can let you go no questions asked in first 90 days. It's their responsibility to reasonable know the value of your labor and pay accordingly. Moving forward, YOU need to know the value of your labor, and charge accordingly.

 

[PsyDr]

The salary you make straight out of college can define your entire career

What you're paid at your first job matters even more than you might think, and it's related to where you went to school.

www.cnbc.com

 

[failureisnotfatal]

If it were me, I would be out the door. lol. I don't mean it to sound crass, but if we're really talking about a situation where the jobs are basically equal as far as your enjoyment at both jobs, then I am going for the higher paying job every time, especially if the pay is substantially more.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

I should add to my above post--a 30% pay difference, more often than not, would be enough to convince me to leave, all other things being relatively equal. I agree with everything folks above have said.

 

[quickpsych]

I should add to my above post--a 30% pay difference, more often than not, would be enough to convince me to leave, all other things being relatively equal. I agree with everything folks above have said.

It actually turns out it might be upwards of 45% pay difference (on top of the bump I just got for being licensed).

If it were me, I would be out the door. lol. I don't mean it to sound crass, but if we're really talking about a situation where the jobs are basically equal as far as your enjoyment at both jobs, then I am going for the higher paying job every time, especially if the pay is substantially more.

I guess in this field we sometimes feel bad for leaving agencies/practices/companies. In this case I really do believe in and generally enjoy the current work and would feel bad about leaving. I know quite a few staff well , and the population would miss me I think (I had trained there in the past as well). But at end of the day, I think in same situation my peers would also be out the door. I'm very grateful for the opportunities presented to me and I think I would regret not taking a 45% pay increase with additional sign on bonuses for work I also think I would enjoy. The other place is different in some ways but also similar populations somewhat and also a lot of the day to day work is honestly a little more stimulating and varied with more flexibility and shorter commutes.

The salary you make straight out of college can define your entire career

What you're paid at your first job matters even more than you might think, and it's related to where you went to school.

www.cnbc.com

An eye opening article for sure. Really puts it into perspective.

Leaving after a few month for a 5-10% increase might be a bit questionable. Leaving for 30% increase (which is on top of the 45% bump) is much more understandable (and suggests the current agency is not paying fairly). Take the increase (or give your current employer the opportunity to match). Let's say you take the new gig, work there for many years, then- for whatever reason- decide to leave and apply to work at my agency. When I ask about the 3-month job, tell me that you really liked the opportunity and the work, but were approached by another agency that offered you a life changing pay increase that would have been irresponsible to yourself and current/future family to turn down, despite it being the most difficult professional decision you had to make. I'd respect that. You can only play that card once, maybe twice if it's really spread out, though, or else it's a pattern of leaving that would raise red flags.

As psychologists, our labor is our primary- and often only- commodity. Why should you be expected to sell it to someone for 70% of what it's worth? I bet they have some clause where you are an employee at will, or even some probationary period where they can let you go no questions asked in first 90 days. It's their responsibility to reasonable know the value of your labor and pay accordingly.

I wouldn't say leaving a job after 2-3 months is common, but it does happen. Whether it burns bridges where you are currently will probably depend on a number of factors, including how much work they put into getting you specifically into that job, how hard it might be to find a replacement (and whether your absence will leave them SOL with regard to whatever it is you're doing/were going to), and the general culture of the workplace. It's probably not going to look great regardless, but some might make the argument that leaving so soon after getting hired might actually be less disruptive than leaving at the 6-8 month mark, after you've become more integrated into the setting.

I'd normally say that if you like where you are now, it's certainly worthwhile to try to negotiate a bigger pay bump with the other offer in hand. However, as you've only been there 2-3 months, I honestly don't know how successful this would be or how it'd be received.

Like you've said, at the end of the day, it's not a bad problem to have. And ultimately, it's your career, so no one is going to look out for it (and your professional goals) other than you.

Moving forward, YOU need to know the value of your labor, and charge accordingly.

Apparently it's closer to a 45% increase on top of that 45% bump , which really makes me wonder about my current place. I actually think this other opportunity pays more than some of my bosses make at current place. I do intend, and feel it's the right thing to do, to offer an opportunity to current employer to match (if the other place formally makes me an offer) although I do not believe they could even if they wanted to. But I feel, given my relationship with them is so good I think it's important to at least make an effort to stay on board. I don't think they'd fault me for leaving if an offer this high came in, they'd leave too I think. Yeah they might briefly be SOL but they've also made some changes many professional/clinical staff aren't thrilled with either and I wouldn't be the first or last professional staff to leave in recent months. I think I would want to leave on good terms, if only because I know some of the staff well and personally, it's not them, it's an opportunity I have presented to me that I never thought I'd have.

As for the short job history of one place, that's a great point thank you for sharing that insight and how to handle if it came up again. I'm fortunate where I have a nice network of clinicians and psychologists I know and so I think if that ever became an issue I could always go back into more private group practice work rather than a traditional employer.

Well said, too many people undervalue their labor value. A colleague said it best the other day, they said don't feel bad about taking a job that pays a lot more because regardless of what a place is paying; they're often making much more off your labor anyways so best to get a bigger share of the pie you're generating w with your labor.

Thanks all for your insight and thoughts, I did speak more with the other place and am going to proceed with next steps and see where it takes me.

 

[summerbabe]

45% seems like a no brainer unless you’re extraordinarily happy to stay where you’re at in ways that can’t be quantified by salary or maybe if there’s a lot of risk involved and other employment options are limited (they are trigger happy on firing clinicians, the work/workload will make you miserable and not worth any amount of extra pay).

Plus whenever you decide to move next, either within this org or elsewhere, you’ll have more negotiation power based on your current salary. Good luck!

 

[Sanman]

Check the productivity requirements for the new job, weigh the value of benefits from each job, give your employer a chance to match the offer, and then move on. Goodwill and loyalty do not pay the rent.

 

[AcronymAllergy]

Agreed, again, with everything above. 45% is a pretty substantial salary difference, and I agree, it makes me wonder about the current employer. But I would second Sanman's advice to closely review the employment contract and productivity (and other) expectations at the new employer. The devil is in the details. A 45% salary increase may not seem as big an improvement if there's a 70% increase in your workload, but if the current workload is below average, that also may not be a deal breaker.

 

[WisNeuro]

Check the productivity requirements for the new job, weigh the value of benefits from each job, give your employer a chance to match the offer, and then move on. Goodwill and loyalty do not pay the rent.

Monetize everything (PTO, employer portion of insurance premium, quality of insurance choices, 401k/403b match, expected productivity, etc) when looking at OVERALL compensation. Sometimes a higher salary is still lower overall compensation. Or, you may find that two jobs are much closer than they appear when only considering the salary.

 

[quickpsych]

45% seems like a no brainer unless you’re extraordinarily happy to stay where you’re at in ways that can’t be quantified by salary or maybe if there’s a lot of risk involved and other employment options are limited (they are trigger happy on firing clinicians, the work/workload will make you miserable and not worth any amount of extra pay).

Plus whenever you decide to move next, either within this org or elsewhere, you’ll have more negotiation power based on your current salary. Good luck!

Thanks makes sense. I appreciate the input. And makes a lot of sense in terms of future negotiation power.

Check the productivity requirements for the new job, weigh the value of benefits from each job, give your employer a chance to match the offer, and then move on. Goodwill and loyalty do not pay the rent.

Definitely plan, if offered, to at least give current place a chance to try to match. Productivity seems to be a point based system, from what I can tell from someone I know who works there, it's easily obtainable. The workload tends to be condensed most days into less hours than a typical job (i.e. they specialize in shorter medical rounds based services vs traditional full sessions and such). So I guess I could expect to be busier when on site but less time on site.

Agreed, again, with everything above. 45% is a pretty substantial salary difference, and I agree, it m90% akes me wonder about the current employer. But I would second Sanman's advice to closely review the employment contract and productivity (and other) expectations at the new employer. The devil is in the details. A 45% salary increase may not seem as big an improvement if there's a 70% increase in your workload, but if the current workload is below average, that also may not be a deal breaker.

I agree, thank you. I think the workload is more condensed (i.e. making rounds while on site, briefer intakes/sessions) and they utilize a points type system for productivity. So from what I know, clinicians go in their site, get their rounds for the day (or if have recurring sessions see those individuals) then can do their notes/documentation on site or wherever. Compared to current place I have a pretty set schedule but longer services, a lot of meetings, and more administrative work. So busier but in a different way I suppose workload wise? It seems fair given the potential salary and benefits, honestly the potential for a much shorter daily commute is a big selling point too. For reference current place and potential place are both focused on medical/long term care type settings vs an outpatient setting.

Monetize everything (PTO, employer portion of insurance premium, quality of insurance choices, 401k/403b match, expected productivity, etc) when looking at OVERALL compensation. Sometimes a higher salary is still lower overall compensation. Or, you may find that two jobs are much closer than they appear when only considering the salary.

I didn't think of this, thank you a good point for sure. PTO at current place (once eligible) is more days than potential place but potential place has more opportunities for shorter days and thus more time for outside appointments/life stuff/errands. I am also of understanding I could shorten a day at an assigned site then do a longer day next time at the assigned site so more flexibility in what my days look like I guess. This seems to be the primary difference. But also potential place seems to have more measured productivity but overall hours expected seem pretty similar, perhaps somewhat less than current place. Current place more focused on hours/length of services, potential place seems to do shorter services (ie MSEs, brief intakes, supportive brief therapy) focused more on number of services. But busier pace/activity during those hours.

 

[WisNeuro]

I didn't think of this, thank you a good point for sure. PTO at current place (once eligible) is more days than potential place but potential place has more opportunities for shorter days and thus more time for outside appointments/life stuff/errands. I am also of understanding I could shorten a day at an assigned site then do a longer day next time at the assigned site so more flexibility in what my days look like I guess. This seems to be the primary difference. But also potential place seems to have more measured productivity but overall hours expected seem pretty similar, perhaps somewhat less than current place. Current place more focused on hours/length of services, potential place seems to do shorter services (ie MSEs, brief intakes, supportive brief therapy) focused more on number of services. But busier pace/activity during those hours.

Go beyond PTO in looking at this. I've seen offers with similar health plans, but one where the employer pays a big share of the premium, and another where the employee pays a big share. That alone can be the difference of hundreds of dollars per pay period.

 

[Sanman]

Thanks makes sense. I appreciate the input. And makes a lot of sense in terms of future negotiation power.

Definitely plan, if offered, to at least give current place a chance to try to match. Productivity seems to be a point based system, from what I can tell from someone I know who works there, it's easily obtainable. The workload tends to be condensed most days into less hours than a typical job (i.e. they specialize in shorter medical rounds based services vs traditional full sessions and such). So I guess I could expect to be busier when on site but less time on site.

I agree, thank you. I think the workload is more condensed (i.e. making rounds while on site, briefer intakes/sessions) and they utilize a points type system for productivity. So from what I know, clinicians go in their site, get their rounds for the day (or if have recurring sessions see those individuals) then can do their notes/documentation on site or wherever. Compared to current place I have a pretty set schedule but longer services, a lot of meetings, and more administrative work. So busier but in a different way I suppose workload wise? It seems fair given the potential salary and benefits, honestly the potential for a much shorter daily commute is a big selling point too. For reference current place and potential place are both focused on medical/long term care type settings vs an outpatient setting.

I didn't think of this, thank you a good point for sure. PTO at current place (once eligible) is more days than potential place but potential place has more opportunities for shorter days and thus more time for outside appointments/life stuff/errands. I am also of understanding I could shorten a day at an assigned site then do a longer day next time at the assigned site so more flexibility in what my days look like I guess. This seems to be the primary difference. But also potential place seems to have more measured productivity but overall hours expected seem pretty similar, perhaps somewhat less than current place. Current place more focused on hours/length of services, potential place seems to do shorter services (ie MSEs, brief intakes, supportive brief therapy) focused more on number of services. But busier pace/activity during those hours.

Ah, my wheelhouse. If you want to PM me, I can give you more specific advice if you feel like sharing more details. Definitely double check the productivity requirements, find out how long they have had the facility contracts, and how many/what type of facilities you will be covering. Also, what units on the facility (LTC, Rehab, etc). I would also look at how they are handling admin support. Insurance issues can eat up a lot of time in some cases. Ask about bonus/overtime structure.

 

[quickpsych]

Go beyond PTO in looking at this. I've seen offers with similar health plans, but one where the employer pays a big share of the premium, and another where the employee pays a big share. That alone can be the difference of hundreds of dollars per pay period.

Good point. Looks like current place uses a private insurer that contracts coverage through different insurances depending on service covering about 85% of premium and potential place uses a big name insurer like Aetna and covers 100% of premium. Presently I pay about $600 a month for my own insurance (not employer insurance so that’s a good benchmark in my mind for can I spend less than that a month on my insurer costs .

 

[quickpsych]

Ah, my wheelhouse. If you want to PM me, I can give you more specific advice if you feel like sharing more details. Definitely double check the productivity requirements, find out how long they have had the facility contracts, and how many/what type of facilities you will be covering. Also, what units on the facility (LTC, Rehab, etc). I would also look at how they are handling admin support. Insurance issues can eat up a lot of time in some cases. Ask about bonus/overtime structure.

Thanks will send a DM.

 

[molofish]

Related question: I recently (within the past few months) accepted a part-time neuropsychologist position at a private practice. I foolishly did not do enough of my homework before negotiating my compensation, and I've come to find out the rate is a bit low given rates I've since learned about in the community - about 20% lower relative to clinicians with similar amounts of experience at other practices with otherwise similar admin support, populations served and payor sources. From a professional standpoint, would it be wholly unacceptable to attempt to renegotiate a higher compensation after I've seen patients at this clinic for a couple months?

 

[WisNeuro]

Related question: I recently (within the past few months) accepted a part-time neuropsychologist position at a private practice. I foolishly did not do enough of my homework before negotiating my compensation, and I've come to find out the rate is a bit low given rates I've since learned about in the community - about 20% lower relative to clinicians with similar amounts of experience at other practices with otherwise similar admin support, populations served and payor sources. From a professional standpoint, would it be wholly unacceptable to attempt to renegotiate a higher compensation after I've seen patients at this clinic for a couple months?

Probably depends on your leverage. Are you W2 or 1099 status?

 

[molofish]

Probably depends on your leverage. Are you W2 or 1099 status?

W2

 

[WisNeuro]

W2

Do you have a contract? If so, what kind of things does the contract say about compensation, or non-compete clauses?

 

[molofish]

Do you have a contract? If so, what kind of things does the contract say about compensation, or non-compete clauses?

Compensation is outlined in the contract, although there isn't anything about raises/bonuses/changes in pay. I've had written discussions with my employer indicating their being open to raises in time, although we didn't delineate what the timeline would look like. No non-compete clauses in contract (or ever discussed).

 

[WisNeuro]

Compensation is outlined in the contract, although there isn't anything about raises/bonuses/changes in pay. I've had written discussions with my employer indicating their being open to raises in time, although we didn't delineate what the timeline would look like. No non-compete clauses in contract (or ever discussed).

Well, you can always ask, using other compensation figures as justification. How hard you want to push depends on you. Are you willing to walk if you don't get what you want?

 

[molofish]

Well, you can always ask, using other compensation figures as justification. How hard you want to push depends on you. Are you willing to walk if you don't get what you want?

Potentially. Thanks for the feedback!