Government vs. Contractor vs. Private companies for IT professionals - pros, cons?

For those who work in either sector, can you chime in and tell us why you like to work for Government or contractor or private owned companies?
My husband was in the military but didn't get to retire so he would like to buy his time back by getting into government job. However, government job will pay less than private companies or contractor position what work closely with government. Would going into government sector worth it? We heard that benefit is better with government jobs, is it correct?
For example, with a govt. job, he might earn 50-53K where in private companies, he might earn 65-70K. However, he would acquire more diverse experience and more advancement chance with private sector, wouldn't he?
Would love to hear your opinions or experience.
Thank you.
Kim
ETA: husband's work is network administrator/technician role now, he want to move up to IT manager role.

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

lsud00d

Depending on what level of government, what sector, and what organization...might not be a good time to hop on board.

Government will always be dependent on contractors, and if you get on with a good company then pay and benefits will be good. If you're a good employee they will do their best to keep you employed and happy, whether that be on a long term contract or various engagements with different responsibilities.

shodown

I work 2 of the 3

The only thing I can say about the govt positions is that pay is less. However it depends on the agency that determines the type of work. Some agencies the IT people are just vendor managers, Others they are the NOC. In Govt Contracts the pay depends on the contract so in some contracts you have overpaid people, and in others some are underpaid so shop around. For private companies it depends on the business. If you work for a company that makes money from the services IT provides to clients your going to make way more money as you are billable. If the company is just has IT to keep certain things operational don't expect much in terms of salary as IT to them is a expense. If you after more $$$ then professional services is the way to go, but expect long hours and travel. Stability your thing then I'm sad to say its pretty much gone from today's economy.

matt333

I work for a IT consulting company, the pay is good but there is alot more stress and time that goes along with it

neo9006

Yea the government route is true, lower pay, and depending on who you work for, that is all true, I am switching fields cause I have no advancement where I am at now.

instant000

Gov't vs. Contractor vs. Private Company

Gov't pays less.
Contractor and Private pay more.

I contract with the government, and the contractors usually make significantly more than the civilians.

Of course, it depends on your character. Nothing is really that definite. But, face facts, you can't determine what happens tomorrow. Today is enough to worry about.

As far as advancement opportunities in the private sector, that would require working some place where you know advancement actually happens.

I agree with shodown. A consulting type of role can usually pay a lot more than just working for a single customer. (If you work for one private sector company, you usually have just one customer for your services.)

spicy ahi

Agree with all the above. The nice thing about gov't contracting is that because of the nature of contracts (most are 3-5 years in length and lately many are 1 year renewable) you can have a lot of jobs with short periods of time (less than two years in my opinion; others may vary) without it being detrimental to your employment chances with other contractors. They all know that the contracts are short so when I interview and they ask why I'm looking my response (which is probably true 90% of the time) is that I'm in the last year of my contract. So what's the benefit you ask? Well, you get to move around often enough that you can gain experience in many different areas similarly to consulting. The nice advantage is that unlike consulting where most often you're there to set it up and then move on to the next project and only come back to fix problems the on site folks can't fix, contracting allows you to stay a while and see your baby "grow" and when you're finally itching for a new challenge (and usually by then the contract is ending as well

) you can go and look for another position.

I also used to work as a civilian once upon a time and left to enter contracting because there was no promotion opportunities in my job and waiting for another opportunity to move into is tough where I live. If you live in military heavy areas like DC that might not be as big of a deal, but out here in the middle of the Pacific, once you get a civie job, you're there for life or until someone else dies and you can move up!

dave330i

When you add in total compensation, gov't pays more. Unless you're a high-in-demand specialist. Also, dispite the current "downsizing" gov't position offers longterm stabilty the other sectors can't match.

lsud00d

dave330i wrote: »

When you add in total compensation, gov't pays more.

I've read various articles on the topic and each study is typically slanted with cherry picked data...are you including 'long term employment' as a factor in total compensation (as a justifiable factor in your statement)?

Outside of that I've typically seen benefits around the same between both but salary higher outside of government.

thegoodbye

lsud00d wrote: »

I've read various articles on the topic and each study is typically slanted with cherry picked data...are you including 'long term employment' as a factor in total compensation (as a justifiable factor in your statement)?Outside of that I've typically seen benefits around the same between both but salary higher outside of government.

I second this and government benefits are very similar across the board. I know of a few contractors that provide much better benefits (e.g. full healthcare coverage --no copays, no deductible, nothing taken out of your paycheck at all) in addition to much larger pay. Even when you factor in the potential pension from long term gov. employment, it's still a lot less overall compensation.

jdballinger

The pay differences between government and contractor vary wildly. Where I am at, I do pretty much the same work as the senior network engineer (he's contractor I'm government) and he is paid significantly more than I am. In the same vein, there are contractors who are doing network and system admin stuff, and getting paid a lot less than the GS-9 helpdesk guys that we have. It really all depends.

Ultimately, the best place to work at is the one that is willing to pay you the most, while effectively balancing your home and work life.

And Dave, I'd be interested to know what you mean by 'total compensation.' My paycheck is my paycheck, I get no benefits on top of it, no perks or kickers. As a matter of fact, I haven't seen a pay raise since 2010 (my healthcare premiums have skyrocketed however, which means I'm effectively losing money every year.) Just curious what other compensation you are including in your statement.

zidian

shodown wrote: »

I work 2 of the 3

The only thing I can say about the govt positions is that pay is less. However it depends on the agency that determines the type of work. Some agencies the IT people are just vendor managers, Others they are the NOC. In Govt Contracts the pay depends on the contract so in some contracts you have overpaid people, and in others some are underpaid so shop around. For private companies it depends on the business. If you work for a company that makes money from the services IT provides to clients your going to make way more money as you are billable. If the company is just has IT to keep certain things operational don't expect much in terms of salary as IT to them is a expense. If you after more $$$ then professional services is the way to go, but expect long hours and travel. Stability your thing then I'm sad to say its pretty much gone from today's economy.

I don't agree that pay is less. If your job requires a security clearance, pay is about 10k+ higher than a commercial position.

nmarlowe

I work in government. The way it worked out for me is I remained a sworn law enforcement officer when I moved to IT. This allowed me to keep my hazardous duty retirement. Yes, I make less than what I could make in the private sector. However, I can retire with full pension at 50. I only have 15 years left (which sounds like a lot, but the first 15 flew by). I can move to the private sector at 50 and basically get 2 paychecks.

My medical benefits are some of the best I've ever had.

And if I'm being honest, I feel like I am contributing more here than I would in the private sector. To me (and this is completely subjective and mean no disrespect to others) I feel like I am giving back to my community in a sense vs. doing my part to maximize shareholder returns.

I feel like I've reached a stage in my life where the size of my paycheck is low on my priorities. Maybe I've just learned to conform and adapt, but I make enough to be fairly comfortable most of the time. If I'm not, I figure that's more my poor money management than how much I get paid. I tell people that if they doubled my pay tomorrow, I'd just find new and creative ways to spend it. One of my only worries is that if or when I do decide to go private, will prospective employers think that there is something wrong with me and I couldn't move to other companies or make tons of money. But, I'm happy now and really that's all that matters.

As for diverse experience, I think I've benefited and lost out due to where I work. On one side, we're a small department with me and 2 employees. This has forced me to become a jack of all trades. I've had my hands on a lot of different technologies, but have never felt I mastered any of them. This used to bother me as I felt if I didn't specialize, I was somehow failing. Now, I accept that this is the path I found and actually relish it. It took a long time to finally be comfortable with that. I think this more depends on the size of the organization than govt vs private.

Advancement: I'm currently at the top of IT in my organization. There was only 2 levels. This is where I'll most likely be for the next 15 years if I stay.

Probably much more than the OP was looking for...

shodown

zidian wrote: »

I don't agree that pay is less. If your job requires a security clearance, pay is about 10k+ higher than a commercial position.

I worked in the cleared sector with a TS/SCI. I make way more at a Cisco VAR. Even when cleared positions contact me now today for Sr level jobs my salary is still 10-20K higher.

zidian

shodown wrote: »

I worked in the cleared sector with a TS/SCI. I make way more at a Cisco VAR. Even when cleared positions contact me now today for Sr level jobs my salary is still 10-20K higher.

I think that is more an exception than the rule. For your run of the mill positions, cleared contractor positions typically have to offer more money because the pool of available skilled workers is less than the overall market. I've priced my position specifically and would have to take a 15k a year pay cut for the same job title at the next closest place.

That being said, I could take an "upgrade" to my position and make more money in the commercial market, but then again, if I had that position at my current company I'd again be about 10k higher than the best I can find in the market (we don't have any openings in the one I've looked at or I'd already be applying).

kiki162

I'm having this debate with my hubby right now myself as he's about to retire here in a few years from the military.

I can tell you from experience on both ends that it has it's pluses and minuses. With Contract work, you do get paid well and probably more so than most. After a while you get used to the "extra pay", and along with that comes a restricted area to work in. What I mean by that is when you work on a government contract, you are hired to do and work with a limited set of tools and technologies. For example, if your hubby worked with Windows Server all day long, but didn't get the ability to work with GPO's, DNS, etc...etc. Say he wanted to get into other areas, like Cisco, or VMWare. With that option your are kinda stuck, plus you have a limited budget to work with that may not pay for school/training.

These days with the government it's roughly the same, but you get a little more exposure to other technologies and you aren't AS limited as you would be on a contract. They pay is still good, but for ppl like me who have to get my infrastructure upgraded, and is stuck with old servers till this budget stuff gets resolved in Washington. The one bonus, depending on which branch of the government you work for is having some stability. You'll get more stability here than you would on the outside. However it's not always 100% which goes with any job.

If you get a clearance above a Secret (i.e.: TS, TS/SCI, TS/SSBI) you can almost always get into a contractor position that requires it...that's like the golden ticket right there.

On the outside, you "can" get more exposure to other technologies (again it depends on the job and where you work), you also may get better job perks...like paid training, paid school...etc.

With most of us working in IT, we like the training perks in a job. However these days that's a "pipe dream". I would agree with most of the posts on here, and say that your hubby should be prepared to do training on his own.

bryguy

There's a common myth that private-sector workers, get paid more than their federal counterparts. However, according to the CBO, that just isn't the case:

"The 2012 Congressional Budget Office report concluded federal employee compensation, on average, is 16 percent above that of comparable private-sector workers. In that study, most of the advantage involved benefits; federal employees were found to be ahead in salary by 2 percent on average. Also, the CBO found substantial variation within that average, with a larger pay gap in favor of less-educated federal workers but a pay gap in favor of the private sector for those who are more educated."

In addition, job security is another factor.

"... the federal government remains the place to work for those who want to avoid losing a job. The job security rate for all federal workers was 99.43% last year and nearly 100% for those on the job more than a few years."

Food for thought.

ptilsen

The problem is this data is looking at government jobs vs private jobs, not government IT jobs vs private IT jobs. Maybe the government pays average paper pushers more than private industry, but I have seen exactly zero evidence that government IT is even close to commensurate with private industry outside of entry-level work (I'm sure helpdesk for a government agency is a great gig).

Every single federal IT job I've looked at listed pay range that, at the top, was at least $10,000 less compensation than I would expect from a private company. Slightly better benefits and maybe an extra week of vacation do not equal $10,000 to me. And the non-manager technical positions paying well into six-figures simply don't exist in the public sector. They're not even hard to find in the private sector; you just have to have the qualifications.

Admittedly, I haven't seen any hard data on public or specifically federal IT vs. private sector vs. private, but every job ad, interview, and actually job I've seen has pointed to the public sector horribly underpaying for IT positions.

I think you'll find this in general for high-paying fields which face real scarcity. As employees, IT professionals above entry-level have the power. There is far more demand for us than there is supply. We're getting 10%, 20%, 30% raises for switching jobs because there aren't enough people that do what we do well. Public positions generally pay less for these types of jobs, because yes they have job security, better benefits, but also because they attract people interested in civic service. If you're not willing to accept a pay cut for civic service and needless job security (who ever heard of an unemployed virtualization engineer?), the public sector is not for you.

Just talk to a public defender or prosecutor. The competent ones are generally there because they get fulfillment out of what they do that they don't get being a litigator or private attorney. The good ones give up hundreds -- hundreds, plural -- of thousands of dollars a year to work for a state or the Executive branch, and it's not for job security or benefits.

I've not worked or interviewed for government contractor positions, but the ads I've seen indicate they'll pay pretty well. Granted, any contract position is going to pay more since you'll eventually be looking for a job (but hey, won't you anyway, realistically?), but even the FTE positions at defense contractors that advertised pay were very competitive with other private sector, from what I've seen.

Xyro

bryguy wrote: »

There's a common myth that private-sector workers, get paid more than their federal counterparts...

I'm addicted to looking at job postings. I do this everyday for at least an hour. Government jobs pay more than private-sector, not less, according to the thousands of job ads I have recently looked through.

Also, when I've compared government-posted salaries, in the ads themselves, to private-sector salaries for the same positions on salary-listing sites, this is also higher.

Plus when you add in all of the benefits, as another posted stated, the difference becomes even more dramatic.

MiikeB

It varies greatly and everyone is going to have different experiences.

GS jobs generally pay less, and the ability to get a large raise isn't there (IE if you are a GS employee with a CCNA doing CCNA level work, getting your CCIE doesn't mean you can just slide in to a CCIE job and get paid a ton more like it does in the private sector).

Government contracting jobs are like working in the private sector to an extent. Some companies hire for the contract and when the contract is over let you go. Generally people stay at these jobs 2-3 years. However there are a few companies that specialize in defense contracting who value keeping their employees on, and while you may move every 2-3 years or do a much different job you stay on with the same company.

The private sector is a whole different ballgame. From what I have seen, if you work for an MSP or VAR then there is mobility within the company, however if you work for a company where IT is just a support staff and not a profit center mobility is much more limited unless they are very large.

andrewluong1991

It really depends on you and what you like. Do you like stability or do you like doing different things each day? Do you like to work hard and be rewarded for your effort or you are ok just doing the minimum work and be ok?

Working for the government is great if you like stability. You get a lot of health benefits, very hard to get fired. However, it's not a meritocracy where your hard work will be rewarded. Another guy might get promoted before you because he's been there longer not because he works harder than you. The only con I can think of is that your pay is not going to be as high as an employee at a private company.

Private sector is the total opposite. More risk but more reward and potential. But not as stable. It's really up to your personality.

Sources:

Working for the Public Sector is MUCH better than the Private Sector CMV : changemyview

https://www.careerdean.com/c/2/what-the-pros-cons-of-working-cs-job-government-compared-regular-job