Reply to: Currently considering a big cut

[DiscoStu]

It sounds like he's trying to avoid a big hole, not get into one.

[PAH]

Did noone else read this thread as having a N in it?!

Is it really just me?!!

It sounds like he's trying to avoid a big hole, not get into one.

[SallyAnne]

Did noone else read this thread as having a N in it?!

Is it really just me?!!

[BrilloPad]

take the money.

[DS23]

Have no idea why this is a dilemma – of course accept the reduced rate, and work like hell to find another gig paying you the rate you need. If you only have a few months savings worth, then you have no choice, the longer you don’t have to touch the savings the better.

wss

[DS23]

I was in a similar situation around 2000.

What I did was to accept the rate cut but match it with an hours cut so I had time to look for work and develop plan B.

In the end I picked up a couple of direct contracts to cover the days I had off and did OK till I got a full time gig.

If you don't have a decent fighting fund, I'd say take their money while you look for something better. Who knows, you may be able to moonlight with them in the future.

wow i read that and got a real sense of deja vu. or maybe you wrote it before? weirder things have happened - i mean i have written things before too. ah feck - you know what i mean. maybe.

[NetwkSupport]

NET Winforms roles seem to have dried up except for city slicker types with banking sector background. My CV is pretty good with recent .NET 2.0, 3.0 WCF, LINQ and the like but I'm getting the usual agency banter with nothing concrete emerging...not even an interview after a month of looking despite a couple having been promised.

My current client where the gig ends this Friday has offered me a rolling 1 week open ended contract until I can find something else paying better which is nice except it's at 65% of my current rate. They know I'll be off if something more lucrative appears but they have dangled the one week notice thing to make it more attractive.

I know some on here will respond with "tell 'em to screw off" but I do have bills to pay and only a few months backup in the bank, so it's a proposition I'm seriously considering. It seems a better option than going perm and still keeps a workable level of cash rolling in. Anyone else in a similar position?

what about a same rate but less hours contract? cost client less and you get more time for plan B. You dont get something for nothing.

[TheRefactornator]

Thanks for the feedback everyone. The general opinion follows my gut feeling that it's better to is to keep on trucking at the reduced rate rather than go broke.

The 3 day week thing could be a viable option and it is work from home (er myco office) so it doesn't really matter when I put the hours in.

When they say a 35% cut, is your agent still getting paid?

No agent here, I'm direct to the client which always makes me feel good

[SandyDown]

Have no idea why this is a dilemma – of course accept the reduced rate, and work like hell to find another gig paying you the rate you need. If you only have a few months savings worth, then you have no choice, the longer you don’t have to touch the savings the better.

[rootsnall]

If you take a new contract at a lower rate, should you work less hard?

YES

[d000hg]

When they say a 35% cut, is your agent still getting paid?

[d000hg]

Are you saying if he got a 20% raise he should work an extra 20% more hours?

If he accepts a lower rate, that's not like a mandatory pay cut as a permie. He chooses to work for less. He accepted it as his rate. If you take a new contract at a lower rate, should you work less hard?

[oracleslave]

How professional...

sensible

Unless it's a charity shop no-one should have to work for free

[d000hg]

Go for the reduced hours offer or if they won't go for it readjust your productivity accordingly and use 35% of your time on your own projects.

How professional...

[rootsnall]

Go permie.

HTH

Never ! I'd work for £5.50 an hour rather than become permie scum.