Deliberate downwards career move

[Journeyman]

This might get a bit long, so apologies in advance if it does!

I've worked in the rail industry for a long time, in operations, projects, control and customer service roles, some of which have been quite senior. I'm currently employed by a company that isn't part of the UK rail system as such, but does a lot of work for TOCs, Network Rail etc.

Unfortunately, my commute is long and the job is not one I'm enjoying, so I'm very keen to change to something more hands-on, and involved in day-to-day operations. Also, because of personal circumstances - I have a family member recovering from a lengthy illness - I want a shorter commute, ideally shorter hours and a lot less stress.

I'm fortunate enough to have some savings, and my wife works, so I can afford to take a fairly major hit in my income, at least in the short term, and so I've been applying for fairly junior roles with TOCs and Network Rail - similar to stuff I've done before, and easily jobs I could do. I've made it to interview several times, and I've felt the interviews have gone well, but I haven't landed any of the jobs. It's all getting a bit discouraging, and I think a common sticking point is this...

Despite my best efforts to explain why I want to do it, and plenty of enthusiasm for the jobs I'm going for, employers seem to have a major problem with anyone that wants to leave a job for another one that pays less and has less prestige. I don't seem to be able to convince anyone that I'm genuine, and that I can afford to do what I'm doing, and want to do it.

I know you're not supposed to slag off your current employer at interview, so I never do, but ultimately right now, I'm stressed and unhappy, and I want a low-stress job I don't have to think about too much. I'm happy to stand on gatelines or sit in ticket offices - I've done it before and I've enjoyed it. My plan is to do something like that for a year or two, until my family member is better, and then maybe move up a rung or two on the ladder, but I'm certainly not ambitious and my lifestyle is not particularly expensive, so I don't actually need to earn as much as I am at the moment.

Well done if you've read this far - how do I convince employers that I actually want their job, and that I value an easy life over status and money?

 

[Cavan]

I don't think it is unreasonable to say that I'm looking to move as I need a more convenient location/shorter commute etc due to personal circumstances be that caring responsibilities/child care etc

 

[Journeyman]

I don't think it is unreasonable to say that I'm looking to move as I need a more convenient location/shorter commute etc due to personal circumstances be that caring responsibilities/child care etc

Yeah, I did actually emphasise that in my latest interview, but wasn't successful. Thinking about it, though, they wanted someone to start very quickly, and I have to give a month's notice, so I suspect they found someone who could start quicker. I'll make sure I make that clear in future, though, it's not something I've mentioned in the past.

 

[galaxynew]

Are you familiar with the latest interview techniques and "point" scoring?

Depending what you believe and read, one opinion is applicants are appointed purely on how they perform (score) at interview which would effectively rule out previous railway experience

 

[Journeyman]

Are you familiar with the latest interview techniques and "point" scoring?

Depending what you believe and read, one opinion is applicants are appointed purely on how they perform (score) at interview which would effectively rule out previous railway experience

In my case, is that a good or a bad thing, and how should I play it?

 

[Quote]

In my case, is that a good or a bad thing, and how should I play it?

It's a good thing for you. The questions should all be competency based so match your answers with your experience accordingly. Use key *buzzwords* relevant to the role you're going for and only bring up your reasons for taking on a *lesser* job if asked/relevant. Good luck.

 

[Topcat999]

i was in a similiar position years ago in another industry. I loved my lower ranked job...then they promoted me for an extra £5,000 a year but it was not worth it. The workload responsibility and stress was through the roof. I wanted my lower position back. They could not understand why.

 

[CC 72100]

Are you familiar with the latest interview techniques and "point" scoring?

Depending what you believe and read, one opinion is applicants are appointed purely on how they perform (score) at interview which would effectively rule out previous railway experience

I disagree with this in part. Railway experience absolutely can count but only if it's used as examples.

But if you just put down "5 years as a Guard" and not expand on that or use it in the interview. - despite the interviewing manager knowing full well that this should mean you have certain competencies that are beneficial - then it is worthless.

An interviewing manager can only point score you on what you display, not what they think you know based on your previous positions because there is no evidence for that.

 

[MidlandsChap]

I would probably avoid mentioning your care obligations, they might think you will need time off at the drop of a hat, even if it isnt the case. Unfortunately most people these days are too motivated by money and material posessions and cannot comprehend why people want to move into a "lesser" job.

I would perhaps mention you have come to realise money is not the be all and end all and now want to take a job that allows a much better work/life balance and can spend quality time with your family without being exhausted. If you currently manage people I suggest also mentioning that you want to get out of people management as this is an understandable reason for making a "downwards" career move. Try and avoid mentioning you want to job that you "don't have to think about too much", this implies you dont want to work very hard.

In response to the above post, I will say that yes managers are supposed to recruit purely based on the point score, but sometimes you just know a person isnt correct for a team or reading between the lines you see somebody is applying for a job for all the wrong reasons. Recruitment should not purely be a box ticking and point scoring exercise, I can understand why its done to try and be consistent and remove any discrimination, but sometimes despite scoring more points a recruiter will just have a gut feeling that a candidate who has scored less will be better in the post, or a candidate who has scored more will be a nightmare to manage and has the sort of personality that will clash with others in the team. As long as it is done for the benefit of the company and the team they will be working in and without prejudice, the hiring managers should have the ability to make a judgement call irrespective of the points total. In practice and more importantly on paper, I will leave it to your imagination as to how they go about doing this to present it for HR to sign off on the final recruitment offer of employment to the successful candidate.

Not saying any of the above is appropriate to OP, but just thought its worth mentioning.