deciding between 2 job offers

<p>Creepy e-mailed me privately and gave the names of the companies. I won't divulge any information here but let me say that he has two very competitive and very good companies to look for. </p>

<p>The non-profit has an affilation with companies/entities that makes it a highly desireable company to work for. I'd send in my resume in a heartbeat if they had a job location close to seattle.</p>

<p>The defense contractor has a long history of high profile government contracts and do really cool engineering. There are some very neat opportunities at that particular company.</p>

<p>I see little reason to choose x over y or y over x based on the career opportunity or type of work that is done. They are both highly competitive and Creepypasta is very lucky to have two high profile entities to work for.</p>

<p>Didn't you just give a terrific reason to choose company y over x? Why let the government molest your personal life for a job you can do with a private company who will likely only want to make sure that you're not a derelict, felon, or bankrupt? I also have a history of mental illness and if somebody, including a government body, even gave it a second thought I would tell them to go F off (no, the illness is not related to psychopathy haha). I understand why they do it, but seriously, I just want people to judge me on the results I produce. Anyways, good job creepy. I'm really happy for you.</p>

<p>Creepy, are you a Mechanical engineering major?</p>

<p>One thing about "INTERNSHIP" in company Y. Is that what they call it? Are you going to work with other interns who are still in college? Let me tell you a REAL story:</p>

<p>Company Z has been hiring interns and extending internships to those who already graduated. Recently, company Z decided they could no longer extend internships to recent grads. Apparently, DOJ has been looking at how companies have been utilizing interns and somehow made it clear to company Z that they must stop extending internships to people who already graduated. Double check the labor law; company Y may be in violation and they are probably not aware of it, just like company Z wasn't.</p>

<p>I am not familiar with the labor law; but if companies can't hire recent grads as "interns", what company Y should offer you is "temp position" (with the potential to turn into permanent position).</p>

<p>"Sure they would get angry, but lets face it, if you get a job elsewhere, it sounds like you wouldn't ever want to work there anyway. "</p>

<p>I'm just worried if they'll get angry enough to give me bad rep to other companies. I heard people do that if you renege a job offer. That is, after you accept a job offer to work for a company, but then shortly afterwards you leave them to accept a job offer somewhere else</p>

<p>Anyways, the offer letter from Y just said that its for a temporary position, with 'intern' as part of the title. As for my previous depression, I used to have some thoughts about hurting certain people I knew, but I never actually considered acting on it. This could also be because I suspect I might have OCD, as some members in my family have it.</p>

<p>"I'm just worried if they'll get angry enough to give me bad rep to other companies."</p>

<p>This is unlikely due to the very severe legal ramifications of doing so.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Like PurdueEE said, this isn't strictly legal. Additionally, how are they going to find out who else you are ever applying to? They won't. In the end, these companies are looking out for their own and care mostly about their own bottom line. Once in a while, we have to do the same.</p>

<p>well about the security clearance, it turns out both places estimate that it'll take me about 6 months to get my interim clearance since I have relatives overseas. This would've helped me make the decision once-and-for-all. But after talking with Y some more, they said that I can work for the ME dept as well and do heat transfer related work, which is my main interest. </p>

<p>Anyway, I don't know how much this matters but if I work for X, I can work ~20 hrs/wk and do my MS part-time. If I work for Y, I'll have to work 40 hrs/wk, and if I have room then I can do my MS as well. Should I consider this in my decision process?</p>

<p>I thought the MS stuff was already chiseled in stone? Now it isn't?</p>

<p>It is chiseled in stone, for companyX that is. But for companyY, I can get reimbursed as well, its just that I have to work 40 hrs/wk as well, which sounds very difficult to pull off.</p>

<p>I also probably should've said earlier that my long-term goal is to get an R&D position, which is why I want to do to my MSME asap. Thus, I thought X offered the better plan for me, as I would have more time to work on my MS, but judging from the replies here, it seems like Y might be a better choice.</p>

<p>If you want to get into R&D, you can do it with an MS, but PhD ought to be at least in the back of your mind, at least for true R&D positions. The other thing is, if you were planning on doing a non-thesis MS (for some reason I seem to remember that may have been the case), you definitely should reconsider that. Having research experience and publications will be invaluable in trying to get a research position. With that in mind, I would advise going straight into grad school, doing a thesis-based MS full-time (which will hopefully get funded), and seriously consider doing a PhD if you feel that research is still the way you want to direct your career.</p>

<p>I was considering doing the non-thesis because ucla can let you still do a research project with it. Anyways, if i do the thesis, whats wrong with doing it part-time while working part-time?</p>

<p>As far as R&D positions go, I'm not too sure if thats what i want. Which is why i thought it'd be a good idea to get some work experience first</p>

<p>A thesis option basically ends up with you acting as a full time researcher who goes to class part time. It is a full time commitment. Unless you are a vet rare case, it would br incredibly difficult to do while working full-time.</p>

<p>I'm working 60 hours a week right now and doing my MS part time. It takes a lot of time management. I'll often watch lectures over my lunch hour or riding the bus to work.</p>

<p>Unless you want to go for a PhD, a thesis is not necessary.</p>

<p>Tht isn't entirely true, bigtrees. A thesis is very helpful if you truly want to get into R&D. If you don't, it is more of a nonissue.</p>

<p>'A thesis option basically ends up with you acting as a full time researcher who goes to class part time. It is a full time commitment. Unless you are a vet rare case, it would br incredibly difficult to do while working full-time. '</p>

<p>does this sound reasonable?: take classes for the first year or so and get the tuition reimbursed while working at X but not doing the thesis. Then after I complete my classes I could quit working at the company to do the thesis full-time</p>

<p>Not really. If you wanted to do a thesis program, it is generally a separate admissions process from the coursework only version, and if you start in the thesis program, your advisor would likely put you to work getting to know the lab in short order. There really just isn't a good way to do a thesis-based MS while working full time at a company unless you somehow are doing your research with that company. I am not sure if opportunities like that exist, to be honest. That is something you may want to ask your advisor at school.</p>

<p>Well I know that at UCLA, I'm sure that my advisor said that its very simple to switch from a coursework-only MS to a thesis-based MS. There certainly isn't a seperate admissions process to it</p>

<p>"A thesis is very helpful if you truly want to get into R&D. If you don't, it is more of a nonissue."</p>

<p>What about doing a research project with a non-thesis MS? You said earlier that you need research experience and publications to get an R&D position, so I don't see how doing research with a non-thesis doesn't help</p>

<p>I suppose a research project would be somewhat useful, but it is no substitute for the real thing where you design, implement and carry out your own experiment(s) from start to finish and get yourself published. That is what will sell you to R&D departments. Now, I am no hiring manager, but I would imagine that a published candidate is much more attractive to an R&D department than an unpublished candidate.</p>

<p>ok, thanks for the clarification</p>

<p>Anyways, I just heard more details about the tuition reimbursement plan from X. Honestly, its not as great as I thought. They essentially can only reimburse tuition costs equivalent to 1 quarter at UCLA per calendar year. Which means I still have to pay 2/3 the price that normal MS students pay!</p>