Engineering Technician III Vs. Sys Admin

Hello,

I'm currently a Sys Admin but not a traditional one in the networking world. I applied to the position not really knowing what it was, and basically ended up being the sys admin of a propriertary system/software that isn't used any where in the world accept at my job. The system is basically useless knowledge any where else. Recelently, a position just opened up within the company for a Engineering Technician III, which the description is clearly what a sys admin would be doing like building up servers, managing switches/routers, and along the lines of that kind of work. I initially wanted to be doing this kind of work when I first applied any ways. Now, my only conscern is would this look like a down grade on paper or are they equally the same or what? I'm also kind of curious if it'd pay the same or potentially more.

Find more posts tagged with

Free for TechExams community: Cybersecurity salary guide

Compare cert salaries and plan your next career move

Button

Comments

ChooseLife

Obozo wrote: »

Now, my only conscern is would this look like a down grade on paper or are they equally the same or what?

Don't know about HR and others, but I tend to pay more attention to job responsibilities than titles on the resume, mainly because titles do not really have the same meaning across companies.

If you want to be a sysadmin, I think it is much more beneficial for the future career to have an Engineering Technician III title followed by the job description of a sysadmin, rather than a title of a sysadmin followed by an app.support specialist's duties.

This also seems like a good opportunity to move into a regular sysadmin role, easier than moving from your current position to another company ("Thank you for applying, but we decided to hire a person with more relevant experience").

Obozo

I applied and have an interview this upcomming Tuesday. I hope the manager is as good as my current one. This job I have now is pretty perfect if I was around the retiring age, but it's a gov contract job and there is no guarantee I'll keep the position. I'm pretty young and need to keep up all the IT skills I can get. I haven't been an actual sys admin in like a year and half, but the stuff they want you to have knowledge on is : ms server 2000, 2003, 2008, ms exchange 2003, basic sql knowledge, ms iis, basic cisco knowledge, and a few other minor things I understand. The only one I'm missing experience on is the ms server 2008, but I don't think it'll be too much an issue.

ChooseLife

Obozo wrote: »

I'm pretty young and need to keep up all the IT skills I can get.

*nods* It's wise to plan the game ahead

Obozo wrote: »

I haven't been an actual sys admin in like a year and half, but the stuff they want you to have knowledge on is : ms server 2000, 2003, 2008, ms exchange 2003, basic sql knowledge, ms iis, basic cisco knowledge, and a few other minor things I understand.

Yeah, better move back into normal sysadmin realm sooner before that gap becomes bigger.

good luck with the interview on Tue!

Lamini

keep in mind that what you have and where you are are specialized skills that are unique to only your projects. While that may sound like it keeps you down, you and only yourself know and understand these operations and no one else does. Some call this job security.

Yes, it can/might keep you down, but I also know people who have impressively easy jobs but get paid high because the skills are proprietary or specific system only. The managers dont care if someone else is an MCSE or CCNP if it doesnt mean they know what to do for the job, they dont know how to get the system up when it goes down or something goes wrong. Matter of fact, these people get that much because no one else can do it, not because of their credentials. Of course, this isnt one of those you only gotta know how to flip a burger job.

If anything (since all I have understood is this is some small software), keep educating yourself and apply that knowledge to your systems whether it be improving its performance, operations, making it scalable, modernising its hardware/software, allowing it to interoperate with your competitors, simplifying, saving costs, or improving security. Sounds like a nice stepping stone at the very least.