Job Transition While Spawning

I think I've decided to take the new position. My conflict comes not from the decision to take the job itself, but from my ennui. It seems stressful to have to alter work environments with a new little one at home (they'll let me start after my leave and I'll take on some contract work before then). I just kind of want to sit back right now, wait, and enjoy the status quo. Which is what I think makes me have to take the job. Complacency has always been a major weakness of mine - I blossom in high-stress high-performance environments. I'm definitely one of those people who "plays to their competition", or in this case, performs to the demands of my position. The Breadwinner agrees, and we'll find a way to make the commute thing work - whether it's a new school for the kids closer to my office or a nanny at home.

At the end of the day, I want to go back to the lab. What would I do if I had 20 million dollars? Go back to the lab. What would I do if I didn't have kids? Go back to the lab. The only things preventing me from pursuing science are time and money (both of which are in short supply in a scientific career). I think that's the reason this doesn't feel exactly right. Nothing will ever feel right except exchanging my life for science. But I'm giving editing one more shot, and the added responsibilities and higher pressure environment should help.

The key question remaining is when do I tell my current boss. My first inclination is to tell her immediately so they have time to prepare for my absence/find a replacement if they intend to do that (doubtful). I would be willing to do some contract work for a while to help them out. The problem of course is this may backfire in a major way. I have enough sick days/annual leave to get paid through my leave. But what if they decide to terminate me beforehand (and cut out my insurance???) I can't be uninsured while pregnant or with a newborn... I truly like the people I work with and don't want to screw them over, but I can't seem to find a compromise between the two situations. Any advice on this would be greatly appreciated.

Interviewing While Spawning - Offer

I got an offer. Why do I not feel excited? It's clearly beneficial career-wise and not beneficial personally. They want me to start immediately. What do I do? I've tried to get my start date pushed back a bit, but I won't get paid for my time off. Plus, I feel like a traitor to my current position and boss, especially as they've been so good to me even though my job will be changing drastically. Would they be happy to lose the extra salary? Crap. More later.

Interviewing While Spawning - Still Waiting

It's now been 3 weeks, and I feel that my personal situation is distinctly different from what it was 3 weeks ago. I have 6.5 weeks until my due date. Even assuming 1) I get an offer tomorrow (they're calling my references) and 2) I like it and want to accept it, how would the negotiations work out? After I give my 2 week notice, do I then start the new job only 1.5 weeks from my good-to-go date or can I get them to wait to start me until after my leave (like mid-Sept/early Oct). The job is definitely far superior to my current position skills-wise, but I have a number of deal-breaker concerns. 1) The $$ would have to be better to compensate for my commute expenses. 2) My benefits would have to start immediately, can't not have benefits as a pregnant woman. 3) Do I get paid for my leave? Probably not, although I've accrued enough time here... Many things to discuss if I get an offer. What frustrating timing - these things would have been much less of an issue a month ago!

I guess the question is, if they want me, will they be patient and wait for me? And considering (always) the Breadwinner's tenuousness, is it a good idea to commit to something new right now? If my current position weren't going to be seriously altered by the end of the year (for the negative), I'd definitely say 'no'. Plus, I have loyalty to my employers. I wonder if they'd take me as a contract worker for a while until they can find someone else to fill my role...

Interviewing while Spawning - an Update

Had my second round interview on Friday. I think it went well, although not 100% stellar. I had a clear conversation about my whole spawning plans, which I think eased some concerns. I walked out of there wanting the job, and truly feel that the decision on if I get it or not will depend on the quality of the other candidates and not my personal situation. But if I get it, do I want it? There's the rub. The commute is 45 minutes driving (1 hour on the train), which might be tough with the kids. There's more travel. The responsibilities are more to my taste, and I would get to be more of a scientist, but there would also be more work. Should I mess with a good personal situation for an unknown?

Some plusses - a lot of people work remotely, so if the Breadwinner ended up moving next year, I could go with him. Less likely in my current position. The Breadwinner is actually looking at something in the same direction of my commute - maybe we could move closer? Definitely scientifically more challenging and interesting - I miss a higher stress environment. Plus, I'd be able to tell if I actually don't like editing or if its just my current job that rubs me the wrong way.

Minuses - again - time for the kids, distance from home, higher stress position. Plus, there's something about spawning that makes me not want to undergo another major change right now.

Eh, I'm not going to think about this in any detail until I see if I get an offer or not. Wish me luck!

Spawning and Job Hunting - Part 3

Well, despite my misgivings, I've managed to land a second round interview in a couple of weeks. I still feel ambivalent about the job (good career move with more interesting responsibilities and possibility for advancement; definitely more inconvenient personally - especially since it's in the opposite direction from The Breadwinner's commute AND his job situation is tenuous). I actually kind of enjoy being ambivalent (unlike my decision over the teaching position, which was torturous) - it makes me more confident.

Turns out they want me to give a scientific talk (which I used to be able to do in my sleep, but I'm a little removed from at this point). We'll see how it goes - it might actually be fun to get back into the nitty gritty of my research again. I've been responding to requests to help people replicate my work and really going through my old files and data lately. It's intoxicating, and I worry that the old life is going to draw me back in against my will. I'm a natural problem solver, and an open question is just tantalizing. Yet I have to be practical as well, and 90 hour weeks for minimal money doesn't exactly put me in good stead as a parent. The only worry is that when I'm finally personally ready to go back, nobody's going to want me anymore.

But enough dreaming about science. I'm even larger now that at my last interview (nearly a month ago), and I've decided to bring up my spawning situation if there's any discussion at all about timing. I guess ideally if I'm offered and decide to accept the job, I could start AFTER my maternity leave, but that seems like a pretty big stretch. But first things first - time to prepare that talk!

Spawning and Job Hunting - Part 2

In light of the tenuousness of my current position, I decided to at least try to explore other opportunities. Why assume people are going to have prejudice against a spawning woman? Not trying would be saving them the effort of the worry. I send in an application for an editor position that called for exactly my expertise. It's, admittedly, a lateral move (although for a more prestigious Journal), but it would probably be good for my career long-term if I really want to stick with this editor thing. The downsides are not duty-related: a 3x longer commute, probably more stringent working hours (and less flexibility), greater costs with the commute (it's downtown). What it comes down to is that I'm PERFECTLY qualified for this position.

So I put on my maternity pants and a professional-looking maternity top, with my suitcoat on top, and trained my way down to my interview (with an HR person followed by the Managing Editor). The interview went exceedingly well - I got along well with both people and answered all the questions clearly. I had a really good vibe during the conversations, and could really see myself in the position. One catch - we didn't discuss my obviously growing stomach. I would have gladly addressed it, but it didn't come up in the conversation, and they didn't bring it up (perhaps for fear of bias?). I'm unsure what the etiquette is on this, but since I'm obviously not hiding something, I'm just planning on discussing it when/if I get an offer (which is when I would discuss money, timing, other personal things anyway). However, the grimace associated with the glances at my stomach by the Managing Editor make me wonder if I should have brought it up anyway. We'll see if I get invited in for a second round (it's only been a few days), but my feeling right now is that the job would be mine if it weren't for my spawning handicap.

And really, I can't blame them. I would probably hire the non-pregnant over the pregnant woman if they had equal qualifications. I just have to hope that my stellar 'fit' can overcome my obvious handicap. We'll see...

Spawning and Job Hunting - A Toxic Mix

As mentioned in previous posts, the nonprofit that I'm working for is currently in the process of selling out to managed publication. Despite the incredibly rosy picture painted by my Executive Officer, ("everyone will now have more time for interesting projects that they've had to put on the side burners"), and reassurances that my position at least will not be "downsized," I'm privy to the financial benefit information put forth by our business staff. The projected savings in staff salary do not merely include the 1-2 editorial assistants that have already been warned that their positions will likely be "downsized" or "repurposed" within the society. A significant portion of my responsibilities (admittedly the ones I don't like) are going to be transferred to our new publication manager (final approval in a couple of weeks), leaving me to wonder exactly how I'll be "repurposed." Although my knowledge of society functions is limited, I can see how my scientific and editorial expertise could be of use to the society, but I cannot imagine how these new responsibilities will be any more fulfilling than my already mundane and purposeless existence. I'm an action-based person and I've been stalling long enough. It's time to flee.

The problem of course is that I'm currently incubating Spawn #2, and showing pretty seriously. So seriously that random strangers have started touching my mid-region (despite repetitive strong discouragement.) Hiring managers are not so far-sighted to choose a pregnant woman, no matter how stellar and desperate, over an equally (or even not equally) qualified candidate. Even if I get an interview, I'll likely walk in and be dinged on the spot. The other option? Hang on until after Spawn 2 is born, then try to flee. Of course, at that point the Breadwinner will be looking for a new position of his own, and tying him down locally for anything but the best of positions will significantly inhibit HIS job hunt. The timing on this whole thing just sucks. There's also the distinct possibility that if I stick around, come November when things are fully transitioned, I'll be out of a job anyway. I can even imagine my EO justifying the decision, "Well, she has a new Spawn at home, so it's OK for her to be out of work right now."

These are problems that a man would never have, and I'm incredibly glad that I'm having another boy so that my spawn won't have to deal with this type of bias someday. I've been very fortunate to have never felt overtly discriminated against based on my gender. But although the roles of women in society are changing, there's still a strong expectation (and a necessity in my case because of the Breadwinner's situation) that the woman will be the primary caregiver for the child. Because of this, I've made career decisions (admittedly my own fault), that I would not have made as a man. People wonder why women drop off of the career ladder. It's not so much discrimination as lack of support. As a feminist (and a poor domestic), it pisses me off that due to my desire to procreate, I now have to worry about grocery shopping, potty training, and ironing instead of curing cancer and autoimmune disorders. It pisses me off that if I refocus my career, the spawn will suffer - a compromise that I'm unwilling to make. It pisses me off that I have to sacrifice my life and goals for theirs. There has to be a way to be a good parent without losing your soul.

But right now I can't restructure the social situation to provide me with the support I need to basically be a single Mom with a successful career. I can't afford a live-in nanny on my salary, and family support is strong but distant. I just have to hope that my predictions of hiring bias of pregnant women are overly dismal, and that I'll either find something else or that my current position will turn out to be as rosy as my EO predicts.

And the winner is...

For those who've been following my overly melodramatic story about my job 'crisis', I've finally made my decision. The tears, sleepless nights, and hours of hashing have all led me to decide to stay in my current position. Dream job? No. But neither was the other. What really decided me was the people - they were very nice, but for all of them, the job was the goal and not the stepping stone. While I could (and would) ask the Breadwinner to compromise his career/familial happiness for the right position, this one definitely wasn't worth it. Now, if Harvard calls up and offers me an Assistant Professorship, we'll be having a different discussion (and moving to Boston)... :) Cheers.

And yet more debating...

I seem to be coming around to the teaching position (perhaps precipitated by the not-so encouraging news on the commercial publication sell-out front from my Journal). It could be bad if I turned down the position and then lost my current job in April. Of course, we could always save money by pulling the Spawn out of school for a while, but I am not meant to be a stay-at-home Mom. Greater than 3 days at home with my admittedly incredibly charming and engaging child makes me want to scream and pull out all my hair. Patience is a virtue I lack.

The Breadwinner correctly points out that this was the first job that I interviewed for, and I got it. Of course, that's not counting the numerous CVs I sent out unanswered, but I do have a 100% offer rate if I interview for a job. Do I need to be so desperate as to take a not ideal job at a not ideal University when I'm probably very marketable (although becoming less so every day)?

My main concern about "letting it go" is the timing of the academic job cycle. It's not like I could turn it down and apply for other positions starting in Fall '10 - I'd have to wait for Fall '11 (and who knows where we'll be then). But then the academic job cycle is my main concern for accepting the teaching position (that and that whole amorphous "doesn't feel right, but maybe get me in a better place someday" feeling that pervades my entire thought process about this. Here're the numbers, and I don't know how to work around them. Spawn 2 is due in early August. Classes start early September (with necessary class and lab preparation throughout August). When planning this before, I didn't take into account the necessary pre-start, on campus lab setup time (just the lecture prep time, which I can do earlier). If S2 is 3 weeks early (technically possible b/c of 2nd pregnancy), I'd be totally fine. If, however, s/he follows the example set by S1 and is 2 weeks late, that'd have me start lecturing on campus with a 2 week old. Beyond not ideal, plus we wouldn't be able to put S2 in daycare at that point.

Maybe it's just too much change in a very short time period. I don't know. I'm struggling to think of someone that I can ask for advice on this one, but I don't know anyone who's been in a similar situation. Have to decide soon.

The Lesser of 2 Evils

Admittedly, my title is overly melodramatic, but I am currently in a career conundrum. I've decided to use this blog as a forum to start sorting through my thought process and (eventually) come to a decision.

I am currently in a position as a Scientific Editor for a small society publisher for a couple of medium-impact scientific Journals. At the end of the day, I enjoy editing and the people I work with and find my day-to-day life quite pleasant. The job has a number of perks:

-I can work from home and have flexible hours.
-My boss is incredible and focused on my education in the publishing industry as well as in editing.
-I get to read and write about science constantly.
-I get to travel to international scientific and editorial meetings.
-There's not a lot of bureaucracy.
-I'm incredibly independent.
-The hours are great, the benefits are good, and the pay is on par with what I could make elsewhere (more at this stage of my career).
-There's opportunity for advancement.
-Great with the Spawn and for up-coming Spawn 2.

These are all the reasons I took the position, and they still apply.
Unfortunately, there are some key problems:

-Primarily, I'm just not inspired by the work. It doesn't stoke my imagination and make me excited to go into work in the morning. It's a job, just a job, and with the Spawn (v1 and 2) I don't have time for other passions in my life right now.
-Secondarily, but perhaps of more concern, is that the Journals have currently submitted an RFP to be published by a Commercial Publisher. The decision won't be made until April at the earliest, but that would very likely result in the loss/significant alteration of my job by year's end.

Nothing new here, I've written all this stuff ad nauseum.

Now the twist - I have a job offer to be a non-tenure track professor at a large public university. It's a teaching position, and I'd get to teach my specialty without generalized classes of a million students. Sounds cool, huh? Sounds like what I've always wanted, right? So why am I leaning toward turning it down?

Plusses:
-I'd get some teaching experience, which is probably necessary for the tenure-track position.
-It's a change from what I'm doing now, which I'm slowly being burnt out by and am definitely not inspired by.
-I like teaching and student interaction, and doing something new would be a refreshing challenge.

Now the bad side:
-The University has funding problems - my equipment would be way beyond outdated, and the salary offered is less than an administrative assistant straight out of college would make. (Our budget is already pretty tight). Plus, even with pay increases, years down the line I'd max out at what I'm making now.
-The students are, shall I say, not exactly 'top caliber', and I'm a bit (or more than a bit) of an Ivory Tower Snob.
-I'd be starting over (again) on the experience scale. How many times can you start over when you're at my advanced age?
-The commute is much longer (1/2h-1h), in the opposite direction of The Breadwinner (who commutes over an hour each way). And while I'm on the Breadwinner, his position is temporary and in the next year he'll be looking for a more permanent position. Do I want to inhibit his search for a not nearly dream career?
-Hours will be strange and will have to find alternate care for the Spawn (v1 and 2).
-Speaking of the Spawn, S2 is due in the beginning of August, when I'd have to be preparing my classes. Assuming on-time delivery, I'd only have 3 weeks at home, all the time working.
-The non-tenure track thing really rubs me the wrong way, and I'm afraid that instead of a stepping stone, this position may be seen as a change in track/career ender.
-I feel loyalty to the Journal. My boss (most inconveniently) is pregnant and due at the same time as me. She's counting on me to help run things when she's out (I plan to still be involved in Journal-life if here). I feel like I'd be betraying her to leave.
-What if, after the novelty wears off, I'm just as bored by teaching the same thing over and over again as I am by editing?

So the debate - out of the fire and into the frying pan? Should I risk a significantly decreased quality of life for something that's key attraction is that it's significantly different from what I'm doing now? Should I risk limiting The Breadwinner's career options and the Spawn's family time for a mediocre position at best? Would it be better if I continue to bide my time and wait? Even if the RFP goes through, I'm now qualified to be an editor. Maybe I would feel more important at a major publishing house reading cutting edge papers that I think are really cool rather than the slightly above mediocre, incremental crap that we get. I'm in touch enough with myself to know that my ego takes a blow every time I come into work and have to sit in my storage room 'office', reading horrible papers. I'd be willing to wager that I'd be happier and have more purpose if I worked for Science or Cell or Nature...

If we move across country (or even closer to the Breadwinner's job), my decision will be quite easy. Do a postdoc (which I can't really afford right now, but I'm assuming The Breadwinner's new job will have increased salary). No, I don't want to do a postdoc, but it's the decision that I feel the most comfortable with. If I KNEW that he would get a higher paying position in X amount of time (higher paying enough to afford the nanny we'd need to take care of the Spawn while I worked my hopefully only 60-hour weeks - or conveniently close to family so it didn't matter), I would definitely wait and take the postdoc. Despite all of my previous railing against it, I actually feel sometimes that it's my fate to be a scientist, like it or not, happy or not. Even in my misery, it felt RIGHT, which is something I haven't felt since I started this position and that I still don't feel about the teaching position.

So I guess what it comes down to is that I'm not deciding between being an editor or a teacher. I'm deciding between the known escape (teaching) and the unknown languishing (how much longer can I stay here before my skills atrophy and I turn into a complacent suburban Mom lump and not an edgy, angry, motivated scientist).

What's my dream job? Shit - I want to cure diseases. I want to know that my work has helped saved people's lives, or at least that I tried. I want what I do to be important (to me at least), and to me the only thing that's important is science. It's crystal clear to me, and it only gets fuzzy when I try to think about things in my life other than what I want. Everything about science sucks - the money, the hours, the job security, the frustration, the people, the publish or perish environment. But if I had 20 million dollars, I'd set up my own lab and just do work. So why shouldn't I do that now? I'm a GOOD scientist (at least I was) who hates the trappings of the career. And maybe that's why this teaching position doesn't feel right. If there's such a thing as meant to be (which I don't really believe), I'm meant to be a scientist - even if I suck and hate it. So I should turn down the teaching position, suck it up as an editor for a while longer, and hope everything will "work out for the best". Not exactly a good plan for someone who needs to be in control of everything, but probably the lesser of the 2 evils...

'Cadillac plans'

Pardon my soap box rant. I'm going to preface this by saying that I'm, if not a card-carrying Democrat, a leftist liberal that strongly supports health care reform. Working in the biomedical sciences field, I know a lot of doctors and academic researchers who know that the system is broken, who can't provide treatments because of inadequate insurance plans. Members of my own family are uninsured because they can't afford the insurance premiums on their working class salaries. They live day to day hoping that they won't get hurt or become ill, especially with something so tragic and expensive as cancer. The system needs to be fixed.

I'm not incredibly schooled on the intricacies of the current bill. I do know that some important things (public option) have been gutted, whereas others (outlawing a pre-existing condition clause) remain. I would be satisfied with a smaller bill that didn't fix everything, but just fixed some of the smaller problems. The government is in an incredible budget deficit, with frightening levels of debt. I shudder to think about what would happen to the US and the world if that debt were called in. We can't, and shouldn't, expect our government to foot the bill for our lives. (I know, I'm sounding like a Republican here). But the government can and should provide regulations for insurance companies.

What really is getting under my skin right now is this proposed "tax on Cadillac plans'. I've worked in both academia and for a non-profit society. These jobs are low-pay, but one of the perks has always been really great benefits, so much so that I just assumed that everyone's benefits were as great as mine. Apparently not. Now, in some convoluted effort to save money, Congress is trying to tax the really nice benefits packages that are out there. I'm not certain how giving companies, universities, and even nonprofits an incentive to provide crappier insurance is supposed to either save people money or provide them with better care, but apparently this is the plan. On top of this, the labor unions (who are justifiably pissed off about this) will likely get an exception. I know this is an elitest statement, but somehow it doesn't seem fair to me that someone with a high school education who works 40 hours a week on a redundant task for a for-profit industry for a decent salary should get an exception on this task while an academic researcher who has a PhD or MD plus years of additional training and works 70-80 hours a week for half as a much trying to develop cures for diseases that affect everyone should be penalized. Maybe it's my whole "hard-work should pay off" Puritan/American ethic or my underlying meritocratic tendencies, but the whole thing drives me crazy. It just doesn't make any sense to penalize companies/people who actually are trying to provide decent/affordable health care to their employees.

During the health care bill process, I went from an avid cheerleader to a staunch opponent, which I think reflects the opinions of many of my compatriots as our hopes for the bill were dashed with a harsh dose of political reality. I have market-driven economic leanings, and they're reflected by what I think should happen to the insurance system in the US. On the radical side, I would like to see health insurance be mandated to be a not-for profit enterprise (not govt run, just non-profit). This would drive down medical costs and cover people who weren't covered while at the same time not limiting the quality of care. I know there's no way this is going to happen. {And for those that think medical costs aren't driven by insurance companies, I defy them to explain how I (or my insurance company) was charged $1200 for a 1/2 hr ER visit with a benedryl shot for my son's last allergic reaction.}

More conservatively, I think people need choices. Perhaps insurance should no longer be provided by employers - instead they could just match certain amount of premiums. I realize that large corporations negotiate discounts based on volume, but there's no reason this couldn't be done equally as well or better by consumer groups with specific focuses and different care needs (young singles, families, the elderly). Maybe this is the "coop" system that's been floating around, I don't know. Having individual insurance needs met by a company's bottom line seems incredibly counterproductive. Although the statistics may say that only 1/1000 people needs this treatment, so it's not going to be covered, if I'm that 1 person, I want to be able to make the decision myself.

Anyway, I realize that this post is quite diffuse and lacks substance. Sometimes I just need to vent. I really wish the AMA hadn't shut down the first version that would have gone through during the New Deal Era. I'm sure they regret it as much as I do.