Quote from: 1.21GW on September 18, 2013, 08:32:27 AM
Since it appears A is general consensus here, why not counteroffer B for higher pay, more vacation, or whatever you need to make it a better option than A?

If they say "No", you go with A.  If they say "Yes", you got a deal making B the better option.

It's a thought.

I'd steer clear of B as "quasi-engineering work" usually means in 2 years you've lost some engineering knowledge due to lack of practice.

For A or C, which dicipline do you find more enjoyable?  Which would be the better focus ten years from now?

At this point in your career gaining experience in what you want to do is more important than where it is at or even how much you're being paid.  The latter two are always changeable; the first gets harder as time progresses.

There was no option for boobies, so I defer. 

Quote from: ZILBERT on September 18, 2013, 09:56:54 AM
There was no option for boobies, so I defer. 

only counts when there is an actual poll....so your post is null and void...LOL

actually i now feel cheated this was not a poll with a third option

Go with A.

Option B is understating the overtime, I can almost guarantee it.  Even if it's true they only work overtime one week a month now, I can guarantee it'll get worse.  "Free labor" in the guise of unpaid OT is impossible for management to resist when they're trying to boost productivity and reduce overhead, and they'll start pressuring you to work more OT.  Then if they're really evil they'll make it part of your performance evaluations ("how many hours are you giving to the company?").

Been there, done that.  Still have to jerk with it on occasion.  After last year's cancer battle, now I look 'em in the eye and say "I have learned first-hand that life is short, and time spent with family is far more valuable than time spent at work."  They back off.

So yeah... unless you have some overwhelmingly compelling reason to leave A, I'd stick with them.

Quote from: 1.21GW on September 18, 2013, 08:32:27 AM
Since it appears A is general consensus here, why not counteroffer B for higher pay, more vacation, or whatever you need to make it a better option than A?

If they say "No", you go with A.  If they say "Yes", you got a deal making B the better option.

Because B. will end up working him on O/T with no extra pay on a regular basis. This is the norm for engineers.

You will make WAY more being paid hourly. You've already built a rapport with management at A and they know and trust He Man enough to hire him. He should stay there.

Quote from: Timon on September 18, 2013, 11:25:27 AM
Because B. will end up working him on O/T with no extra pay on a regular basis. This is the norm for engineers.

You will make WAY more being paid hourly. You've already built a rapport with management at A and they know and trust He Man enough to hire him. He should stay there.

All things I would mention to B when negotiating.

Just saying, it can't hurt to try...

Quote from: 1.21GW on September 18, 2013, 11:37:24 AM
All things I would mention to B when negotiating.

Just saying, it can't hurt to try...

My base pay at the last job was about twice that of the guys I was supervising.

Those guys made about 40K more than me at the end of the year.

He'll never get that high of a base pay out of them, and it makes little difference when you're working your twentieth weekend in a row, for nothing. It's not worth it to keep option A waiting-it sounds like they've been good to him.

To put it in perspective, if you figured out my per hour rate-I was seeing maybe 10 dollars an hour. This was at a 70k+/yr job.

Don't do it-resist being salaried-it's a pay cut.

Quote from: Timon on September 18, 2013, 11:53:18 AM
Don't do it-resist being salaried-it's a pay cut.

This.

Biggest regret so far.   

To me (as a heavy civil consulting engineer) Options A & C are about the same. Just go with whichever company/work type you like better if you want to be a consultant. Just compare the pay levels.

Option B is a contractor. This means they'll work your ass off, but they'll usually pay you well. You'll also learn a ton, although it will be practical "engineering" as opposed to more theoretical calculation-based engineering (knowing both and how to blend them is the best). If they want you to do estimating though, that's probably all you'll do, despite what they say now. Estimators are very specialized and it's hard to get out of it and do engineering. That said, if you like estimating, a good contractor estimator can write their own ticket after 10 years or so experience...as either a contractor or a consultant. You have to like it though, otherwise it'll kill you.

URS or AECOM is A; Kiewitt or Malcolm is B (foundation thing throwing me off)? Neither of those is that big on the world stage though, but are in the US. Personally, I wouldn't want to work for a large consulting company...too much red tape and politics BS.

Quote from: ZILBERT on September 18, 2013, 09:56:54 AM
There was no option for boobies, so I defer. 

Read more carefully. There actually was a boobies option.

sorry for the confusion guys. Option C turned around and interviewed me. and I kept on saying Option B in my comparison. I went back and fixed it.

Quote from: Triple J on September 18, 2013, 01:12:11 PM
To me (as a heavy civil consulting engineer) Options A & C are about the same. Just go with whichever company/work type you like better if you want to be a consultant. Just compare the pay levels.

URS or AECOM is A; Kiewitt or Malcolm is B (foundation thing throwing me off)? Neither of those is that big on the world stage though, but are in the US. Personally, I wouldn't want to work for a large consulting company...too much red tape and politics BS.

You are dead on that A and C are about the same. The only difference is that A is purely structural work and C is design build.

Option A is along the lines of URS and AECOM ish type companies, large and have a strong global presence. (my office has about 400 employees  in the office alone, which is massive for any engineering consultant). I dont plan on staying at A very long. Its well known they dont pay very well as you move up in rank. I just plan on getting my PE and jumping boat. As of right now. 80% of my work is monotonous. Even though Ive been interning for 3 months, I could close my eyes and do most of our typical work with my eyes closed. Ever so often something strange comes up and its fun or frustrating.

Option C is a foundation engineering company. Its throwing you off because of who they are owned by.  75% of their work is US based. THis option is a design build specialty contractor. I would be doing engineering work, not estimating work. (They have more estimators than engieners.) I think they are BSing about the unpaid overtime too, it sounds like its a lot more than they make it seem. I will ask directly what its like.

Everything else....

I agree on the salary pay. Its.... complete bull shit...but its the only way to become a foundation engineer (id be okay not being one, but i just find it as a more interesting job, im really into soil mechanics but in the end i still work with steel and concrete...just that id be shoving it in the ground instead in building it up in the air.)

Again, the big thing is that I wouldnt stay at A.  There are guys that are 10 years in, and are only making 80k.( you turn salary after 5 years). Id probably leave and start my own contracting company since Id meet enough people (who pick contractors to bid). Its not a get rich life, but it wouldnt be hard to make the same 80k in the pocket and only work a few months a year. I really do enjoy living my life outside of work ( i've been possesed with skydiving lately and that shit is $$$ and time consuming) and that strongly pushes me to stay at A. but being a foundation engineer is a strong selling point, even if i have to work harder for not much more.

Has anyone here ever worked for massive contracting companies like Skanska or Turner? Thats essentially what option C is.


For the record, Option A came in with the full offer and said to me that they will upgrade my pay and my title until I officially say no. They are being VERY good to me. And like a lot of you said, i dont know whats the other side, and it could very well be worse.

and THere was a boobies option....

QuoteOption A is right smack in Madison Square Park in the city. Very nice views, nice ladies everywhere. 2 blocks from my Muay Thai Gym, and only a 40 min commute via train. (10min walk 30 min train ride)

If you want to do foundation engineering in the long term then Option C sounds like the right choice IMO. Option A sounds boring. Working for a foundation contractor is an excellent step into being a foundation consulting engineer. You may also decide you want to stay in contracting. The beginning of your career is the time to build experience, even if it has to come at the expense of money. The money will come after a few years.

I'd actually recommend working for them for 5 years to gain practical experience. If you still want to do consulting after that then quit and go get your MS in geotechnical engineering (if you don't have one already). You'll be golden (this is similar to what I did and it has worked out very well). Berkeley has a very good 1-year program (the best IMO, but I'm biased  ). There are a few other really good ones (U. Wash, Illinois, MIT, Virginia Tech), but they're all 2 years.

No FHE, but I know people that have worked for the mega construction companies. One quit and came to work for us...and after a few years went bck to Kiewitt and will probably retire there. He decided he liked contracting better than consulting. If you'd like PM me the company names and I'll let you know what I know about them. Good chance I know about C.