Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: Senior Planner vs Planner II?

  1. #1
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    439

    Senior Planner vs Planner II?

    I have been looking at various positions, and was recently offered a position with a fairly good sized city. The position is titled as a Planner II, the position I hold now is a Senior Planner position with a smaller city of under 25k in pop. With a 22% increase in salary and an additional say 5 hours of work each week, is the position a good move? Really my thoughts are the experience, what I'm concerned about is the Sr. Planner to a Planner II, is that a step in the wrong direction??? I have been employed for about 5 years with this small town and started out as an intern and worked up to Sr. Planner....

    Thoughts, comments, yada yada???

  2. #2
    Cyburbian Masswich's avatar
    Registered
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Ocean to the east, land to the west
    Posts
    1,057

    Six of One

    Quote Originally posted by Vlaude
    I have been looking at various positions, and was recently offered a position with a fairly good sized city. The position is titled as a Planner II, the position I hold now is a Senior Planner position with a smaller city of under 25k in pop. With a 22% increase in salary and an additional say 5 hours of work each week, is the position a good move? Really my thoughts are the experience, what I'm concerned about is the Sr. Planner to a Planner II, is that a step in the wrong direction??? I have been employed for about 5 years with this small town and started out as an intern and worked up to Sr. Planner....

    Thoughts, comments, yada yada???
    Don't think the titles mean much of everything- first of all they are in different places, second of all in a good organization it is the people not the titles that matter. For example, my first job was as a Senior Planner for a consulting firm (how does that work?) and my second job was just as a Planner for an RPA. The second job had much more responsibility than the first and was a better job (although it didn't pay better).

    So look at the job responsibilities, look at the organization and whether it seems interesting and exciting, look at the hours required, but don't look at the title. I once knew someone who gave me a business card of theirs and stressed to me "I know it says Planner I on there but I am now a Planner II" as if it made any difference to me, being from a different state.

  3. #3
    Cyburbian Emeritus Chet's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    South Milwaukee
    Posts
    8,935
    I agree with Masswich. It's more a function of each organization's structure, and is only a relative indication of rank.

  4. #4
    Cyburbian zman's avatar
    Registered
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    9,015
    Blog entries
    2
    At my job, all the planner II's are designated as Senior Planners, I should be a Planner I, but I am designated as a City Planner.

    Kind of screwy, but go for it, sounds like a good way to get an increase in pay.
    You get all squeezed up inside/Like the days were carved in stone/You get all wired up inside/And it's bad to be alone

    You can go out, you can take a ride/And when you get out on your own/You get all smoothed out inside/And it's good to be alone
    -Peart

  5. #5
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    439
    Yeap will increase the pay, however when I figure a bit longer work weeks I figure the raise isn't quite as significant. I'm just wanting to put myself in a position to be a Director in a smaller town. I think this position will put me on a good learning curve to get there a bit faster. I basically do all the planning work now, but do not get paid for the title of Dir. nor the title. I agree too that titles are overrated, but I just don't know what others think when hiring. In my position now I do a lot of stuff both comp and current, though the Council isn't always real receptive! In the new position it would probably be in the grinder of development review! So tough decisions... I gotta decided ASAP!!!


    ???

  6. #6
    Cyburbian Michele Zone's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2003
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    7,061
    Quote Originally posted by Vlaude
    So tough decisions... I gotta decided ASAP!!!


    ???
    [flake] Do a tarot reading or similar. [/flake]



  7. #7
    Cyburbian Emeritus Chet's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    South Milwaukee
    Posts
    8,935
    Quote Originally posted by Michele Zone
    [flake] Do a tarot reading or similar. [/flake]


    Tarot cards are for sissies! Ask Oujia!

  8. #8
    Cyburbian Trail Nazi's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Encroaching on something
    Posts
    2,713
    It all depends on the organization and how many levels there are in the Planner w/numbers. If there are Planner IVs, then yes, it would be a step backwards, imo. At least, that is how it is seen in my region. If there are no Planner IVs, then the world is good and you should take it. But sometimes, in order to get ahead, you may have to take a step backwards. Go for it if it is more responsibility because in the long run, you will be more rounded.

  9. #9
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    439
    Trail Nazi, the position has a Planner III and a Planning Mgr that would be above me... then 3 positions below so kind of in the middle. Maybe a bit of step back in that regard. As far as responsibilty... It'd be less in a sense and more focused on development review, something I am lacking at this point. I do a number of different functions in my position now. I feel like I need to dive into it and just put some time in to immerse myself in current planning. Though long-term probably not a position I want to stay in.

  10. #10
    Cyburbian SW MI Planner's avatar
    Registered
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    3,164
    Quote Originally posted by Vlaude
    Trail Nazi, the position has a Planner III and a Planning Mgr that would be above me... then 3 positions below so kind of in the middle. Maybe a bit of step back in that regard.
    I agree with what the others have said. Plus, at this new job it sounds like there is room for advancement.

  11. #11
    Cyburbian donk's avatar
    Registered
    Sep 2001
    Location
    skating on thin ice
    Posts
    6,958
    As a person who has gone from a Director's job to a "planner" job to a "planner 1" job (all backward steps) I can tell you that the "planner 1" job I am in now has the best long term outlook for promotion and personal/professional growth. Look at what the tasks and opportunities are, not what the job title is. You can always explain a "backwards" move be defining the roles and responsibilities you have in the job and why you took it.

    As for a 22% pay increase for a 14% (assuming a 35 hour week to a 40 houtr week) that is for you to decide. I had an offer last year that went on and on about a $2500 raise, but when I figured it out it was 25 cents and hour more, a week less vacation and an extra 3 hours a week. Not such a good raise afterall.
    Too lazy to beat myself up for being to lazy to beat myself up for being too lazy to... well you get the point....

  12. #12

    Registered
    Dec 2004
    Location
    At Silly Mid-Off
    Posts
    517
    I don't think titles mean anything; as others have said, its the organisation that counts. In my relatively short career so far I have been called: (1) a Planning Liaison Officer, (2) a Planner, (3) a Planning Assistant, and now (4) a Planning Advisor. I've also been called a lot more besides

    If the job looks good, if the prospects for learning and promotion are good then go for it. The increase in salary is a bonus too.

  13. #13
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    439
    Well thanks for all the good comments, I was leaning toward the direction of the move... I just wasn't sure how important the "Title" is... Which I personally haven't put a lot in a "Title" but someone recently said "Don't take a step down in title" like is was some "Big Mistake" just wanted to get some other opinions. My thoughts are Planner II with a large Municipality vs Sr. Planner with a town of under 25k is possibly comparable anyways... Thanks again for the info, I think I'm gonna make the move...

+ Reply to thread

More at Cyburbia

  1. Planner vs senior planner
    Career Development and Advice
    Replies: 8
    Last post: 06 Aug 2007, 8:35 PM
  2. Become a planner
    Career Development and Advice
    Replies: 4
    Last post: 23 May 2007, 3:52 PM
  3. Senior Planner vs Planner II?
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 12
    Last post: 19 Apr 2005, 9:59 AM