Do you think job security is the most important aspect of a job? (employee, average)

[analyze_this]

Would you be willing to sacrifice job satisfaction and pay just to remain in a job that is very difficult to get removed from? I am comparing federal jobs which are more permanent to private sector jobs which are at will.

[Teckeeee]

Originally Posted by analyze_this

Would you be willing to sacrifice job satisfaction and pay just to remain in a job that is very difficult to get removed from? I am comparing federal jobs which are more permanent to private sector jobs which are at will.

It's all relative as they say. Would I take job security for a 15% pay reduction sure, for 50% no way. I guess at 25% I would have to really evaluate the other perks and bennies.

[berkeleylake]

Originally Posted by analyze_this

Would you be willing to sacrifice job satisfaction and pay just to remain in a job that is very difficult to get removed from? I am comparing federal jobs which are more permanent to private sector jobs which are at will.

I would lean towards job security however, I would say it depends on what kind of job you do now. Can your work now easily be outsourced? If so, just consider several factors. Below I am pointing out extreme cases, but they are there.

By working as a permanent government employee you get a great pension, but will you receive it 30-35 years from now as promised? Do you know for sure? We don't really know. For example: the federal government has been doing more and more contract hiring anyway rather than have people go permanent because of the looming problem of paying retirement for them, among other numerous outlays the government is required to pay for.

Think of it this way, if you asked someone who worked at the post office 15 years ago why they are working there, chances are, the average postal employee would have said "job security." Obviously, it is easy now in hindsight the US Post Office has a lot of problems since it's become largely obsolete. In many ways, "job security" is a relative term for the long haul (decades or more).

[luckygirl15]

I used to say NO. I would want a job that I am happy in. But after being laid off a few times, and suffering financially, I look at things totally different. Job security has moved up on my list of "wants".

It used to be a #10 but now it's probably a #3 or even a #2.

Still, if I absolutely hated where I was working, or worked with really bad people, I would be looking for another job but I wouldn't leave until I found one.

I guess the older I get, the less I like change.

[andywire]

Job security... What's that?

The best way to get job security is to work for a company that does work for rich people. They don't seem to be hurting these days...

[slackjaw]

When I was younger it was more about pay, now I'm in my 40s its more job satisfaction.

Job security has never been much of an issue.

[KABurke]

There is no such thing as job security. Nobody's immune from losing their job.

[move4ward]

I don't believe in job security. You could be the CEO and still be laid off. My whole company got laid off twice in 4 years. The first company went bankrupt and laid off over 1,000 employees from multiple locations. The 2nd company laid off another 1-2 thousand people, when another company only bought the assets.

Of course, it's a different story for the Federal govt, as you said. The only layoffs seem to be in the post office.

[statisticsnerd]

Originally Posted by KABurke

There is no such thing as job security. Nobody's immune from losing their job.

This. Even if the job is stable, all it takes is saying the wrong thing to the wrong person or pissing off the wrong person. You hear two words and you're in the unemployment line.

[pvande55]

It is one consideration but not the only one. The US Postal Service has the best job security anywhere and some of the most miserable employees. Secure in a rotten job is no good.