I dreaded working in the private sector, but the public sector didn't pay enough for me to live on. Here's how I found balance in my career.
This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Joey Nguyen, a 35-year-old senior clinical trial contract and finance analyst in Quincy, Massachusetts. It has been edited for length and clarity.
I have a long history of working in the public sector, primarily in the nonprofit world. I first worked for a nonprofit called The Talented and Gifted Latino Program in high school.
I then studied political science, criminal justice, and Asian American studies. My first job out of grad school was as a community manager for the Youth Lead the Change program at Boston City Hall. I then served a year as the Youth ServiceCorps coordinator at AmeriCorps, a federal government program.
I needed to earn more as soon as that year was over, so I applied for anything I could get in the private sector. I landed a job running clinical trials at ClinEdge from 2017 to 2022. Now, I'm the senior clinical trial contract and financial analyst at the Massachusetts General Hospital.
There are significant differences between working in the public and private sectors
In the private sector, there's more opportunity for growth, and salary negotiations are easier. The downside is you don't get to choose the mission and what the company stands for.
If there's a toxic culture, you must either absorb it, join it, or try to distance yourself from it (this can also apply to the public).
I've experienced work cultures in the private sector where I felt other colleagues didn't get the discipline they deserved for inappropriate behavior. I have also felt that HR didn't take my complaints seriously.
Private sector jobs pay much more
While in the public sector, I worked multiple jobs to make ends meet. The stipend for AmeriCorps was $17,000 a year for a full-time managerial position. The benefits are professional development experience, leadership skills, and enriching work. Many of us had to work several part-time jobs and lived off food stamps.
After moving to private, I stayed because I earned over 2.5 times more right off the bat. I make nearly six figures in my current role.
I feel expendable in the private sector
It's all about capitalism in the private sector. Layoffs happen because the bottom line is the priority.
I devoted so much energy, passion, and dedication to helping my last company grow. When I was laid off after four years, it felt like my work was all for nothing and I was expendable.
Change is slow in the public sector
I noticed a veil over operations from a regulatory standard at private companies. In the public sector, things are more transparent. Everyone has the mission of serving the public.
When I was at City Hall, the taxpayers funded us, but the pace for change, new ideas, and efficiency was much slower. Changes in the private sector can also be slow unless they improve the bottom line or save the company money.
Power can corrupt in both public and private
At City Hall, it seemed like some people worked there just because they were elected, not because of their qualifications. I focused on my mission and did the best job I could for the constituents of Boston. That's what kept me going.
I was proud we were providing direct democracy to Boston's young people. During my year there, we held the record for the most votes and the most access the balloting process had ever had.
Ultimately, the politics were challenging to deal with, and I couldn't stay.
I've also experienced this working in smaller startups. The CEOs could make anything happen. It appeared as if some people stayed employed because of who they knew or were early hires, and HR was often nonexistent.
I felt more fulfilled working in the public sector
At my last private sector job, I would almost always have the Sunday scaries. While working in public service, I wanted to work because I knew the mission's importance. I never dreaded the job, as I sometimes did in the private sector.
I've learned that most people don't get to work in their field of passion. Instead, they find jobs to fund their passions outside work. That helped me realize that I could work in private and still make a difference on my own time. I always want to ensure equity and justice are being served in my work.
I've built my entire career on being comfortable not knowing my next steps
Pressure from family and society pushes us to have everything figured out by the time we're in college. Like many folks, I did everything that was expected of me to appease my parents while exploring what I wanted to do.
I'm a good example of how it doesn't matter what degree you have. If you're not learning and building skills in your job, you can always pivot to a new line of work.
I plan to stay in the private sector at Massachusetts General Hospital because it's a nonprofit hospital, so at least I'm helping find a treatment or a cure for ALS while not compromising my well-being.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 hours ago
- Yahoo
Kalispell City Council to decide on pursuing grant for Main Street redesign
Jun. 2—Kalispell City Council on Monday is expected to decide whether to apply for a federal grant to reconfigure Main Street. Council meets June 2 at 7 p.m. in City Hall, 201 First Ave. E. The Main Street Safety Action Plan, adopted by Council last summer, identified high-risk intersections and streets downtown. Main Street, First Avenue East and First Avenue West were prioritized to receive an array of traffic safety upgrades. The three thoroughfares saw a combined 379 crashes between 2018 and 2022, and traffic has grown dramatically in part because of increased tourism and population growth in the Flathead Valley, according to the resolution to apply for the grant. But aspects of the plan have sparked heated debate among residents and business owners, predominantly its proposal to slim down Main Street to lanes in either direction separated by a dedicated left-turn lane. The space freed up by the loss of pavement would be used for wider sidewalks spanning up to 10 feet. Parallel parking access would remain along the downtown strip. Council invited the community to a May 19 public hearing regarding the project. There, community members expressed concern over the potential for traffic congestion caused by the lane reduction to spill onto surrounding roads. Others warned that fewer lanes would do little to quell reckless driving, whereas tougher traffic enforcement might curb poor behavior. According to a city study, the reduction would delay traffic by 30 to 60 seconds. The delay is projected to increase to between 60 and 90 seconds by 2045. Supporters of the project argued that the wider sidewalks and reduced lanes would generate more business for downtown shops and restaurants. Residents on both sides of the argument agreed that Main Street storefronts don't see enough foot traffic. Frustration with a lack of parking also emerged many times during the hearing, but the grant program can only be used for traffic safety improvements, not parking construction. If approved by Council, the city will ask for $25 million from the Safe Streets and Roads for All competitive grant program. Established under former President Joe Biden, the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law set aside $5 billion in grants to support regional, local and tribal initiatives to prevent roadway deaths and serious injuries. Council will decide on Monday night whether to move forward with applying for the grant, which councilors appeared inclined to do during past meetings. The grant also requires a 20% match, which would come from a mix of downtown and westside tax increment funds, according to the memo. More info about the Main Street Safety Action Plan can be found at ALSO ON the agenda, Council is expected to accept a Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks grant that would go toward improvements to city-owned aquatics facilities, updated signs and fund construction of a climbing wall. The grant, which was awarded through the Land and Water Conservation Fund, amounts to around $126,000, according to a city memo. Council will also vote on whether to schedule a public hearing on changes to police and fire impact fees for June 16. The fees were last adjusted in 2015 and were adjusted again to forecast for the next 20 years. The increased fees are intended to help cover capital improvement costs tied to the public safety levy passed by voters in March 2024. For example, the updated fire impact fees would help pay for an eventual fourth fire station. Council is expected to contract Process Wastewater Technologies LLC for $839,000 to procure equipment for upgrades to the city's wastewater treatment plant. The city is moving away from sending its biosolids to Glacier Gold Composting amid its closure but must first pay for facility upgrades and new equipment to meet the Flathead County Landfill's standards, where biosolids will eventually be sent. Reporter Jack Underhill may be reached at 758-4407 and junderhill@
Business Insider
2 days ago
- Business Insider
I dreaded working in the private sector, but the public sector didn't pay enough for me to live on. Here's how I found balance in my career.
This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Joey Nguyen, a 35-year-old senior clinical trial contract and finance analyst in Quincy, Massachusetts. It has been edited for length and clarity. I have a long history of working in the public sector, primarily in the nonprofit world. I first worked for a nonprofit called The Talented and Gifted Latino Program in high school. I then studied political science, criminal justice, and Asian American studies. My first job out of grad school was as a community manager for the Youth Lead the Change program at Boston City Hall. I then served a year as the Youth ServiceCorps coordinator at AmeriCorps, a federal government program. I needed to earn more as soon as that year was over, so I applied for anything I could get in the private sector. I landed a job running clinical trials at ClinEdge from 2017 to 2022. Now, I'm the senior clinical trial contract and financial analyst at the Massachusetts General Hospital. There are significant differences between working in the public and private sectors In the private sector, there's more opportunity for growth, and salary negotiations are easier. The downside is you don't get to choose the mission and what the company stands for. If there's a toxic culture, you must either absorb it, join it, or try to distance yourself from it (this can also apply to the public). I've experienced work cultures in the private sector where I felt other colleagues didn't get the discipline they deserved for inappropriate behavior. I have also felt that HR didn't take my complaints seriously. Private sector jobs pay much more While in the public sector, I worked multiple jobs to make ends meet. The stipend for AmeriCorps was $17,000 a year for a full-time managerial position. The benefits are professional development experience, leadership skills, and enriching work. Many of us had to work several part-time jobs and lived off food stamps. After moving to private, I stayed because I earned over 2.5 times more right off the bat. I make nearly six figures in my current role. I feel expendable in the private sector It's all about capitalism in the private sector. Layoffs happen because the bottom line is the priority. I devoted so much energy, passion, and dedication to helping my last company grow. When I was laid off after four years, it felt like my work was all for nothing and I was expendable. Change is slow in the public sector I noticed a veil over operations from a regulatory standard at private companies. In the public sector, things are more transparent. Everyone has the mission of serving the public. When I was at City Hall, the taxpayers funded us, but the pace for change, new ideas, and efficiency was much slower. Changes in the private sector can also be slow unless they improve the bottom line or save the company money. Power can corrupt in both public and private At City Hall, it seemed like some people worked there just because they were elected, not because of their qualifications. I focused on my mission and did the best job I could for the constituents of Boston. That's what kept me going. I was proud we were providing direct democracy to Boston's young people. During my year there, we held the record for the most votes and the most access the balloting process had ever had. Ultimately, the politics were challenging to deal with, and I couldn't stay. I've also experienced this working in smaller startups. The CEOs could make anything happen. It appeared as if some people stayed employed because of who they knew or were early hires, and HR was often nonexistent. I felt more fulfilled working in the public sector At my last private sector job, I would almost always have the Sunday scaries. While working in public service, I wanted to work because I knew the mission's importance. I never dreaded the job, as I sometimes did in the private sector. I've learned that most people don't get to work in their field of passion. Instead, they find jobs to fund their passions outside work. That helped me realize that I could work in private and still make a difference on my own time. I always want to ensure equity and justice are being served in my work. I've built my entire career on being comfortable not knowing my next steps Pressure from family and society pushes us to have everything figured out by the time we're in college. Like many folks, I did everything that was expected of me to appease my parents while exploring what I wanted to do. I'm a good example of how it doesn't matter what degree you have. If you're not learning and building skills in your job, you can always pivot to a new line of work. I plan to stay in the private sector at Massachusetts General Hospital because it's a nonprofit hospital, so at least I'm helping find a treatment or a cure for ALS while not compromising my well-being.
Boston Globe
3 days ago
- Boston Globe
Boston wanted tax-exempt institutions to chip in more to help pay for city services. Under Trump, it's looking unlikely.
Recently, however, President Trump's siege on grants and other federal funding vital to many of those same institutions has scrambled those plans. 'We are continuing to have productive discussions with our institutional partners and believe that short term progress is possible, but the unprecedented attacks on higher education, research and healthcare and instability from the Trump Administration is clearly a major factor' in those negotiations, city spokesperson Emma Pettit said in a statement. At issue is Boston's voluntary For years, the program, and increase pressure on nonprofits to contribute more cash. Advertisement Top City Hall aides said the city is still committed to updating the program in the future. But in the current political environment, the city doesn't have the leverage to implement major changes, they argue. Harvard alone has already suffered Related : The city's These institutions form critical pillars of many of Boston's core industries, City Hall aides said, and attacks on them With larger threats and forces at play, it makes more sense for the city to ask for PILOT contributions that are consistent with previous years', officials say, rather than pressuring tax-exempt institutions to make significantly larger payments when many are already facing daunting financial challenges. Now is the time for a united front, agreed Patricia McMullin, executive director of the Advertisement 'Hospitals are bracing for the uncertainty and the potential for catastrophic cuts while simultaneously working to prevent that,' McMullin said, emphasizing that hospitals have been some of the most generous participants in the PILOT program, even through 'unprecedented' financial challenges after the pandemic. Related : But the grassroots advocates who have pushed for changes to PILOT for nearly 10 years want the city to keep up the pressure. Now is 'not the time to take your foot off the gas,' said Enid Eckstein, co-chair of the Boston grassroots organization 'It's reprehensible what the Trump administration is trying to do to universities and to healthcare funding, and I recognize that this is a treacherous environment,' she continued. 'But at the same time, I believe that some of these institutions have an incredible amount of money in their endowment, and that these cities, they [also] operate under a challenge right now financially.' More than In Boston, about 52 percent of all land in the city is tax-exempt, according to a Advertisement If the property owned by PILOT-participating nonprofits were taxable, city coffers could have seen roughly $500 million in additional revenue last fiscal year. Related : The PILOT formula implemented in 2011 tries to partially offset that gap. Under the current system, the city asks institutions to contribute 25 percent of what they might've owed if they weren't tax exempt. Half of that the city requests in cash, and nonprofits can fulfill the other half by providing evidence of 'community benefits,' which can be anything from free health care services to tuition assistance or cultural programs. Eckstein said her group has pushed for changes, including incorporating updated property valuations into the PILOT formula. PILOT contributions in most cases are calculated based on property tax rates from the 2011 fiscal year, and property valuations from 2009, which are assumed to be far lower than what that real estate is worth today. The city re-assessed the property values of tax-exempt real estate in the last couple of years, but has not applied those new valuations to the PILOT formula, said Boston City Councilor Liz Breadon, who chairs the council's PILOT committee. Eckstein said her group also wants the city to standardize the community benefits program, so the city and nonprofits can coordinate and better direct resources to the most urgent needs. They also want those changes to be made with community input. Getting tax-exempt institutions to pay more, even in good times, is easier said than done. Because the city does not have the authority to force institutions to fulfill their full PILOT obligation, the program is entirely voluntary. While some nonprofits consistently pay most, if not all, of their requested contribution, others pay little or nothing at all. Advertisement Breadon said it's a balancing act for the city to negotiate higher payments in the future, while also maintaining good relationships with the institutions. PILOT 'is voluntary, so they could just say, 'Oh, we're done, goodbye, we're not paying anything,'' Breadon said. '[So] it's an ongoing conversation right now, and we haven't landed on the compromise that works for everyone yet.' Since the program's inception, the city has never received 100 percent of the total it's asked for from all PILOT qualifying nonprofits. The most recent data from the 2024 fiscal year shows that the city received 76 percent of the nearly $129 million in requested PILOT payments, about $35 million of it in cash. That only funds a tiny fraction of the city's Still, Breadon and City Hall aides said that doesn't mean they're letting nonprofits off the hook. 'Our expectations of our residents is that they'll continue to pay their real estate taxes, and our expectation of our institutions is that they will also continue to meet their commitment to PILOT even though it's a voluntary agreement,' said Breadon. 'We certainly have a lot of sympathy, but we also realize that we need their contribution[s], especially in this difficult time.' Niki Griswold can be reached at
