There is a silent debate going on for so many unemployed professionals in our country. And that is should they accept work for which they are knowingly overqualified? And as a result become underpaid relative to past responsibilities and income? Or should they keep looking?
In a recent Washington Post article, a husband expressed frustration that his wife will not take a job because he thinks she is holding out for what she had beforee, a senior VP level marketing job with a Fortune 500 company. He and the author assert that the wife should take a job for financial reasons and to help mitigate the widening gap on her resume.
The following email comes from Theresa Moretti, a Director-level professional (be sure to reference her insightful blog on Marketing). Theresa highlights key long-term considerations. In terms of compensation, I do not see employers making material salary adjustments (over a 10% increase) for any new hires when market conditions improve. Admittedly, state of market conditions is a relative term based on the industry and locality.
My recommendation is for Theresa to leverage her experience and connnections for freelance work in the interim. Independent work will be a very justifiable and praiseworthy addition to her resume. Plus it is entirely appropriate for Theresa to determine her own resume "job title" for the freelance work (e.g. President, Director, Marketing Consultant). Freelance work for many professionals I know often starts in the form of pro bono work.
Whether you are paid or not in the short term looks equally impressive on a resume. Most importantly, you are building a larger professional network by staying active. Your good work will not go unnoticed when it comes to referrals. Who knows... it may lead to a lucrative new marketing business.
In terms of salaried positions with employers, she should focus her search on positions within a certain range of her target total compensation. A 50% drop in compensaton is not a good short term or long term solution for a lot of people, but perhaps 25% is reasonable. The focus of course should always be more on the scope of responsibilties, and great people like Theresa deserve to make a good living in accordance with their experience and the results they deliver.
I told Theresa I would share her message with all of you so that you could share your thoughts here as perhaps a fellow job seeker or career professional. Should experienced professionals like Theresa intentionally stay unemployed until the right opportunity comes along?
Thank you for sharing this post with others and for your recommendations. - Brent
Here's Theresa's email:
As a job seeker who has been part of the 'laid off and looking' crowd for a year, I wonder which is worse, taking a lower level-lower paying job or having a gap on my resume. In some circles, we are reassured that everyone will remember this time and that the gap can be explained and will be forgiven. I wonder about that.
I have a friend who was sent on an interview recently and the recruiter told him the client had "concerns about the amount of time he's been out of work." Really? California is a top five state for unemployment and LA county matches the state level of unemployment, but this guy wants an explanation?
On the other side, taking a lower level-lower paying job does get you back to work, but somehow that seems like it would be harder to get out from under. I've worked hard to achieve my director level status, and to take a marketing manager job that pays half, yes half, of what I am worth seems counterproductive to my future.
Will employers remember that they hired an overqualified individual, promote them and pay them what they are worth when the economic ship rights itself? I doubt it. In the future, will hiring managers look one step back on my resume and see that I am actually worth X amount of dollars because I once worked at that level?
Therein lies the quandary for the job seeker. Get back to work at a lower level, swapping your unemployed status to underemployed and be counted no more, or hold out hope that a great job befitting of your experience is just a handshake/push of a button/recruiter call away.
Your recommendation, Brent, in my opinion, is very sound advice and sounds appropriate for Theresa's situation. Freelance work will keep the momentum going on Theresa's resume which will be very important to a future employer. Demonstrating to an employer that one was innovative and remained employed during these incredibly difficult economic times will be invaluable.
I made the choice to become one of those who is underemployed and underpaid significantly. I made the choice, because economically, I had to make more money than what unemployment insurance offered in order to maintain a mortgage, debt, and living expenses. I am a Human Resources professional at a mid to senior level who took an entry level Human Services position making 50% less salary and with an inflexible work schedule. It has been a struggle economically and emotionally. But, I have learned some invaluable skills, lessons, and I've been able to leverage my experience to help hundreds of unemployed individuals. I have the confidence that in time I will be rewarded for all the hard work and concessions that I've had to make over the past year.
One thing that influenced me and really drove me to accept the job offer for an underemployed position is my experience with Hiring Mangers while partnering with them as their Staffing Recruiter. I encountered a significant number of managers time and time again who only wanted to extend offers to those that were employed. Because of this experience, it is my sincere opinion that those that are struggling with this topic should seriously consider being underemployed in order to further their long term career goals. Underemployment in the short term, may improve their chances of reaching a level equal to or exceeding the level they were at before the underemployment began. I’m counting on it!
Theresa Moretti said on Feb 26,2010 at 9:16:13 AM
Thanks for the comment, Darryl. I think you make a good point that the a position you can learn from is important to consider, and if it takes care of your immediate needs, so much the better!
I wish you the best in your new role! Thanks again for your thoughts.
Since freelance work has been hard to come by, I recently volunteered to do a case study for a local company with a group I belong to. I'm really excited about it and it's giving me valuable experience in an area that I don't have, thereby adding to my resume.
Jonathan said on Feb 26,2010 at 9:37:01 AM
This is a great article, and raises some valid points. My only issue is that I think the author underestimated the willingness of many employers to bring on "overqualified" employees. From my own personal "Catch-22" experiences, I can't begin to count how many times over the past 9 months I've heard the words "We just feel you're overqualified" or "Given your salary history, we feel you're not a good fit/good match, etc. for us..." I think employers are just not willing to invest time & money in bringing aboard an "overqualified" resource. In their view, it's too much of a risk to hire someone who may just jump ship once a better opportunity presents itself.
It's been extremely frustrating for someone in my field to constantly hear the same refrain over and over. I have had a couple of small independent projects since my layoff last summer, but nothing approaching the volume or level of work I've done in the past.
Jonathan said on Feb 26,2010 at 10:08:47 AM
Another thing that's frustrating are consulting "body shops" that try to recruit people at ridiculously low rates for contract work, especially in IT/IS consulting. More accurately, the rates are low, but they then expect them to be all-inclusive, so an out-of-town consultant would have to cover their own travel/housing etc. out of pocket. I don't normally have a problem billing with an all-inclusive rate, but there's a point where you can't afford to take a fixed term, long-distance assignment due to costs. By the time you work out the details for air travel, motel, etc. you're either in the hole, or pretty close to it.
Melissa said on Feb 26,2010 at 12:52:01 PM
Excellent discussion!
Another pitfall I can see to accepting something that would have you underemployed is that when you would seek a position that is at a more appropriate level, people may question why you weren't "employable" at the higher level previously. Frustrating -- you can't just look at a person's job titles (particularly if there are downward shifts in titles/responsibilities) without considering the context in which everything occurred.
Another suggestion I would make is talking with some of your local nonprofits to see what kind of use they could make of your skills. Yes, it's pro-bono, but the work would be at an appropriate level, you'd get some wonderful references, and you'd be expanding your network with others involved there. Plus, the community benefits!
Brent Peterson said on Feb 26,2010 at 8:30:07 PM
Thank you Darryl, Theresa, Jonathan, and Melissa for your comments. This subject comes up often in private conversation but rarely in the media. There aren't easy answers especially for the long term implications of these decisions.
Danie Jones said on Feb 26,2010 at 10:31:53 PM
When I was made redundant in early 2004, I took the role I have now and a £3k a year pay cut in order to relocate to be closer to my then-boyfriend. He's now my husband and although I still haven't achieved my goal of getting back to the level of earning I was on nearly 6 years back, the experience I have gained looks likely to put me there in my next role. I've also learnt reams about how I prefer to work and under what conditions, plus where my specialities and passions truly lie. Added to that, a solid block of work in 3 different divisions of the same company never goes amiss, even if I have spent much of that time woefully unhappy with my lot.
cathy said on Feb 27,2010 at 12:12:12 PM
People need to realize that small business can't and never will pay as much as big businesses do - unless you share in their risks.
When big businesses, with big salaries, lay off - sticker shock sets in. Small business tell you "your overqualified" when in reality - you were overpaid.
I have to agree with article, get out there and do something. It is critical to maintaining good mental health.
I'd also suggest people working two jobs, I did and still do... But this requires a drive and committment to oneself. Personally, I listen to Earl Nightengale & Zig Ziglar - I know them by heart - but listen to them continually.
Jobs are hard to find, but I always see signs in the windows of those stores that are looking for help. The one thing I can tell you about small businesses, start low and shoot high. Turn over is great so opportunity abounds. Help them in any way you can, make suggestions for improvement, solve problems and create a relationship with the owner. Once they know you, know how you think, know what you offer, you will advance & advance quickly.
Another thing that is great about small businesses, is they are the creative heartbeat of America. They create more "new" companies than any other group, so maybe now is the time to get onto the ground floor with one.
However, if you are an individual who shys away from difficult work, works in a one dimensional plane, or works to stay hidden within the corporate jungle, for fear of losing your job, then my suggestions will not work for you. For timid people seldom advance in small businesses.
Lisa Sullivan said on Feb 27,2010 at 3:10:20 PM
I am one of those that has been unemployed for nearly a year but I have not wasted my time by any stretch. As a matter of fact, I have been doing much of what Brent suggests in this article. I have volunteered my expertise for causes or events that not only I believe in but that are also in my field of choice. I have performed both pro bono & paid freelance work, also in my field of choice. I have been out networking at various events always keeping my face & my expertise out there. I even started my own women's professional organization (small but thriving), one that I don't make any money at but one that is needed & welcomed in this area. In other words, I maintain my skills and continue to hone my crafts, while building contacts knowing that at some point somewhere something fabulous will come along. If that perfect opportunity does present itself, I completely understand I may take a pay cut or I may not. Either way, I have done nothing but to make sure that I am skilled and current.
Every experience I have gained I have added to my resume, and not under "related experience" but rather, under "Professional Experience".
Bottom line, the market WILL change and when it does, I will be ready!
Great post & discussion!
Johnny Frisk said on Feb 27,2010 at 8:54:13 PM
Theresa is scared that she will never get back to the level that she was at before. Is it fear that her skills are now irrelevant, or that she will not be recognized as competent? If you know that you're qualified to do something, you shouldn't fear getting back to that summit. But, in the meantime, there is always something to learn.
While my own experiences are not exactly the same as those of my suit-and-tie brethren, I do know what it feels like to have the brass ring, walk through the valley, and achieve new heights somewhere else. In the in-between time, I had to stay busy for my own sanity. I took a job that left me underemployed for a time, and I learned something interesting. Even though I knew a lot and was very good in my previous setting, in a very similar, but slightly different setting, I still had a lot to learn. When the opportunity came, I was ready, and got a job that was in many quantifiable ways even better than the first one. I had to lose in order to gain. But I can tell you that I would have went insane if I had spend a year and a half on the sidelines waiting and watching. I don't regret for an instant taking an underemployment job in order to enhance my skills later on.
Every case is different, but I would encourage Theresa to go ut and be active in some way, even if it is volunteering for a non-profit. Being idle is hard on a person mentally. The right job will come for her in time, if she is taking the right steps to look like she is a person that is proactive towards her situation.
Echoing everything that has already been said, don't let fear stop you from adding to your skillset and to your own personal growth.
Eileen said on Mar 2,2010 at 5:02:44 AM
Brent,
Thanks for sharing that article. I'm not sure if you remember from a year ago, but that is exactly the situation I find myself in. I was even told to "dumb-down" my resume so that I could qualify for a position I was long past and expect a $30K reduction in salary. I have integrity and ethical issues with "dumbing-down" my resume and an attitude problem with going back to enty level when I worked so hard to position myself for the next step in my career. I keep networking and am even looking into buying a franchise (who knows what will come of that). My hope is that with all of my skills I can find employment using at least one of them without going entry level.
Sometimes you just feel invisible and I'm glad to know I'm not the only one out here struggling with this issue.
Janet L. Falk said on Mar 2,2010 at 6:16:36 AM
The statement:
"the recruiter told him the client had 'concerns about the amount of time he's been out of work' " is disingenuous and a self-deception on the part of the hiring manager.
It takes 12 weeks, at best to hire a new candidate, as follows:
Week one: develop and circulate the job description. Weeks two and three: collect resumes. Week four: sort resumes and select candidates. Week five: schedule interviews with candidates.
Weeks six and seven: meet with candidates. Weeks eight and nine: narrow field and bring back top three candidates. Week ten: select top candidate, extend offer and negotiate with candidate. Weeks eleven and twelve: candidate gives two weeks notice.
Twelve weeks, and that mean everything goes according to plan. All the key players are in the office. No one is traveling or too busy to give their attention to the important matter of bringing on a new team member to lighten the weight of the world on everyone's shoulder. All the interviewers and the candidates have mutually convenient schedules.
There are two ways to shorten the cycle:
Accelerate the interview process.
Hire someone who does not need to give two weeks notice, because they are immediately available.
Employers have yet to connect the dots with the length of the hiring process and their own role in its timetable.
Brent Peterson said on Mar 2,2010 at 9:28:22 PM
Thank you everyone for your valuable feedback. As an extension to this post, I contributed another article titled "10 Ways to Create Work When There's No Work". The link is noted in the text.
Other thoughts...
1. Darryl - Thanks for your story. I'm sure everything will work out for you in the long run.
2. Jonathan - I hear what you're saying (I've been there as a consultant). I spoke to a manager today from one of the largest staffing firms in the country, and they are feeling the squeeze too from clients in terms of lower and lower rates.
3. Melissa - Great suggestion!
4. Danie - Thanks for sharing your story. Every job is indeed a learning experience and we all come out smarter.
5. Cathy - As a small business owner myself, I agree on all counts. Thank you.
6. Lisa - Thanks for your positive story. I included your example in my other article.
7. Johnny - Thanks for sharing your story. Good perspective.
8. Eileen - I do remember. Kudos to you for standing tall.
9. Janet - I concur on your analysis of the hiring process. To your point, even a best case hiring scenario can take 3 months.
Mark said on Mar 5,2010 at 10:08:43 PM
Isn't there such a thing as a "pro bono rate" in hiring (or consulting) agreements? Where hiring managers and candidates agree up front that the candidate is worth Z, but they are making an exception to accept Y because of a special case (volunteering for a cause, agreed upon review every 3 months based upon productivity, results and/or general business conditions...)??? Anyone want to hurl some darts at the merits and tradeoffs in this option?
Jason said on Mar 12,2010 at 6:37:53 AM
Great advice. I am starting to check your blog/twitter more and more. Thanks for great insights.
Amit said on Apr 19,2010 at 10:34:26 PM
Hi, your blog is really nice & wonderful, while reading it I truly like it. mba india
Mandrake said on Jun 28,2010 at 8:48:44 AM
The economy is so weak, you can often get an employer to work with you on title -- particularly if they infer less commitment to you as a worker. When I went to work for a previous employer (at 25k less than my last job) I negotiated the title of "internal consultant" -- and while it was a fulltime job with what eventually was a 10 month lifespan, in subsequent interviews I have been able to legitimately point to an anuallize version of the jobs salary plus income from previous project based work I did earlier in the year/further project work I feel I will receive. This way I show work, long term commitment -- but don't have to dial in the lower wage that just the position would indicate.
Flower Delivery said on Jul 28,2010 at 3:17:22 AM
I really liked your article. Keep up the good work.
Add a Comments
