Financial Security Changes The Conversation

I have been writing for the past several years about wanting to cut back.

Twice, I have asked to cut my salary in exchange for cutting my time.

However, I was recently in conversation with senior people about a new project. It’s something different–a change–and something that the department needs. However, it will most certainly be time consuming.

In discussing the terms of compensation, I am struck by how different things are for me now, compared to several years ago.

Not too long ago, with a kid in college and a nice big mortgage, I would have been all about the money: I needed it to pay the bills, and was willing to work longer to earn it.

Now, college is in the rear view mirror, as is the mortgage.

We could always save more, true, but these days we have enough saved that some years the stock market returns are almost as much as much as my gross salary. Somehow, a little more saved doesn’t seem to make as much of a difference.

I’m also a few years older and tireder, and would like to have more time for my personal life.

A thought experiment

I am still mulling my options: time vs money.

It sounds like my time commitment will be about 4 hours or 1/2 day a week, for a 6-month time frame.

It’s not yet clear what my compensation would be, so I am going to make up some round numbers to help me decide if (a) I would prefer to be paid in time or money and (b) whether either hypothetical offer would be worth it to me.

Some real scientists. David, Jacques Louis. Antoine Laurent Lavoisier (1743-1794) and Marie Ann Lavoisier (Marie Ann Pierrette Paulze, 1758-1836). 1788. The Metropolitan Museum of Art. NY, NY. www.metmuseum.org.

Show Me the Money!

Let’s say my salary is $200,000 a year (it is not, but this is a nice round number). If an outpatient 1.0 FTE position commits to 5 days a week, or 10 half-days, then one half-day is worth $20,000 over the year.

So, for a 6-month period, devoting an extra 4 hours a week to this project implies that being paid an extra $10,000 would be quite fair.

But wait! I don’t get that $10,000 in my pocket. After various taxes (see Xraysn’s post: The Least Valuable Dollar), I will probably see $7,000.

So the question I have to ask myself is: is that $7000 worth working an extra 4 hours for the next 6 months.

When I was hungry, the answer was yes.

Now, I am not so hungry, though I certainly wouldn’t sneeze at an extra $7000. That could be a year’s contribution to a Roth IRA (with the catch up contribution), 2 very nice vacations, or a few overdue house projects.

Time Keeps on Slipping (into the Future)

The other option would be to swap 4 hours in clinic for 4 hours doing the new project, while keeping the same salary.

Now that money isn’t quite as tight, this is a much more appealing option.

I would not be working more hours. In fact, given the way clinic time spawns more work after hours (finishing notes, reviewing labs, etc.), I might work less.

Of course, I would now have the problem of how to get my patients seen when I don’t have as much time in clinic.

One thought I have, which is not entirely correct, is that I don’t have to pay taxes on my reduced clinic time. That is to say: if I take the extra money, I don’t see all of it in my paycheck. But if I take the reduced time, I get the full benefit (I don’t have to work 30% of it to meet my governmental duties).

I am still making up my mind about this.

Which option would you choose?