Ask the Readers: Is It Unethical to Work a Second Job?
Published on - February 10th, 2009 (by J.D. Roth) To build wealth — or to get out of debt — you must create a positive cash flow. That is, you must spend less than you earn. One way to do this is to cut costs. Another is to increase your income.
Because it has worked so well in my own life, I encourage people to boost their income whenever possible: ask for a raise, make money from hobbies, change careers. For many, the most sensible way to increase income is to find a second job. Even a low-paying part-time job can make a significant difference to your budget.
But in a battered economy, in a nation where unemployment is rising, what are the ethical implications of taking a second job if you don’t really need the money? That’s the dilemma facing Nancy in New Jersey. She writes:
I have a full-time job, investments, housing and health that are as secure as one’s can be now. I used to have a part-time job that recently dried up. I mentioned to a friend (half kidding) that we should go together to apply for part-time jobs at local businesses. She became very angry and said, “Why do you people do that? Why do you take jobs away from people who really need them?” As someone who is still fortunate to be employed, is it morally or ethically wrong for me to look for additional work and income?
I’ve talked with several people who have lost their jobs recently. I’ve spoken with several others who are afraid that they too may soon be out of work. In a situation like this, is it fair for a fully-employed person to apply for a second job just for extra income? Why or why not?
Addendum: Interesting. Based on a couple of past discussions here at GRS, I didn’t expect the response to be so overwhelmingly in favor of working a second job. We’ve had conversations here before in which people have expressed concern about this taking work from others who might need it. I’ve seen similar arguments in the media, too, so know it’s a worry some people have. I thought his question would spur vigorous debate instead of generating unanimous support!
GRS is committed to helping our readers save and achieve your financial goals.Savings interest rates may be low, but that’s all the more reason to shop for the best rate.Find the highest savings interest rate from Ally Bank, Capital One 360, Everbank, and more.
This article is about Ask the Readers, Career, Odds and Ends
Disclaimer: This content is not provided or commissioned by American Express. Opinions expressed here are author's alone, not those of American Express, and have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by American Express. This site may be compensated through American Express Affiliate Program.
Discover is a paid advertiser of this site. Reasonable efforts are made to maintain accurate information. See the Discover online credit card application for full terms and conditions on offers and rewards.
SEARCH FOR RECENT ARTICLES
To that person I would laugh. This is a dog-eat-dog world and those same people she’s trying to protect will gladly stab her in the back to get her job.
Plus many of the people that are laid off aren’t going to take part-time jobs. Why would I go make $8/hour for 15 hours a week when unemployment is paying more?
Your friend’s heart is in the right place, but she’s got this all wrong.
loading....
This is a tough one because the last thing you want to do is make it tougher for the people that are struggling financially to get back on their feet.
But my feeling is that, if you feel like you need the job, go out there and get it. If you’re chosen over someone else, then it’s probably because the employer thinks it will be better off with you.
That’s life.
Besides, I never understood the whole argument of “taking jobs away from other people” that’s often used in the immigration debate.
It’s nobody’s job until it’s given, and then whoever gets it owns it. No one is the “default” person for a job so it can’t be “taken away.”
Just my take but I’m curious what other people think. It’s a touchy subject, especially right now…
loading....
Absolutely its fair. You have to look out for your family first.
It’s silly to think that you’re “taking a job away from someone else” Until someone is hired, it’s no one’s job!
Further, unemployment pays alot more than a 10 hour a week job, so you’re not going to take a job away from anyone who got hit by the downturn.
loading....
I am working for myself but still doing work for the man.
That money I get from the man pays for my handyman to maintain my investment property and make sure things are working for my tenant.
I hire one person, house another and pay a mortgage on time.
This is a good thing.
loading....
You going to worry about other people while your own financial security is at question? Not to sound ignorant but honestly your financial situation should come first. Sometimes by working a second job and being extremely good at managing your finances you could put yourself ahead of the game by saving enough money to retire earlier. If you can find work in a recession then by all means do so.
loading....
There should be no shame in taking a second job. And if you do have shame, my suggestion would be to self-employ and create your income through filling a societal need or providing something that helps people (i.e. create a blog about personal finance, like J.D. and me, that hopefully helps people improve their financial situation).
loading....
The “take jobs away from X” meme is a myth- whether we’re applying it to immigrants “taking jobs” from Americans or the already-employed “taking jobs” from the unemployed. The employer will hire the best-qualified candidate for the rate the employer is willing to pay. No one “deserves” a job by virtue of their citizenship or their economic status. What makes one “deserve” a job is their qualifications and their willingness to accept the offered wage.
loading....
This is a touchy subject, however I don’t feel it’s morally or ethically wrong. In this case the individual had a part-time job and the income it provided contributed to the financial stability of the individual. That loss has forced them to make adjustments, so why not replace that income?
As someone mentioned above a part-time job likely pays less than unemployment so it probably isn’t the job that a recently laid off individual will be looking for.
loading....
I don’t think it is unethical. Like someone else has stated, most people who are laid off will not be looking for a part-time job when they are receiving unemployment. Also, a business usually hires the most qualified person for a job, if that person already has a job so be it.
loading....
This is a free market, you aren’t taking away an opportunity for someone else, you are making an opportunity for yourself. I am not trying to be heartless, but you are essentially hedging yourself against the downturn in the economy, I don’t see any ethical issues with seeking other employment.
loading....
This is a ridiculous argument. The extra money earned also goes back nto the economy through spending, which in turn creates or maintains jobs. There is no “taking someone’s job”. As if the number of jobs is an inelastic or finite number. As the poster above explained, the argument does not work in the immigration debate either, except to stir emotions and inflame the debate.
A healthy economy depends upon producers (rich labor source) and consumers people with “extra” cash. The most qualified/experienced/ person for the job should get it, becuase with limited options for hiring, a good fit from the employers standpoint can end up costing the business more.
What if the person lost their full time job, or lost a significant amount of financial security in investments? Why have al your eggs in one basket? The reason so many people suffer financial meltdown is becuase they are not diversfied enough in their income. Having a disposable source of income is good for the economy.
Once again, the state of the economy, lack of jobs specifically, has nothing to do with the number of players. We have a sharply unhealthy economy right now and the more money can traverse through the system, the better. Disposable income is one way to achieve that.
loading....
I don’t think it’s wrong to look for additional work or income. If you choose not to apply for a job, that doesn’t mean that someone you think is *deserving* will then get the job. Besides life is too short to live it by other people’s morals – use your own values and principals to decide what to do.
In a capitalist economy it just doesn’t normally work that people who need the money get the job, it’s people who can do the job who get it. An employer might choose in favour of the person without an existing job anyway.
loading....
Ever since I was made redundant in 2006 from a job I had held for 5 years I have only managed to find temporary work and a brief period of permanent employment again, so there are periods of unemployment that I have to go through.
I would never begrudge someone who is already in a permanent job from taking an additional job to boost their income.
It is a dog eat dog world out there, I do have moral standards, however they only extend to not doing physical or pyschological harm to another human being.
If I had the opportunity to do a second job whilst employed at another, then yes I would grab the bull by the horns and take that job if I were offered it.
What if you suddenly lost your primary job? At least with your second job you still have an income coming in even though it is reduced.
In this current climate you have to have several income streams incase one suddenly dries up.
Nancy in New Jersey I wouldn’t worry about what others think, just go for it.
loading....
I don’t think it’s unethical at all. If the employer would give you the job, simply because you’re more qualified, there’s nothing wrong with that especially if it helps you to be in a better position financially. Not to mention that it will be better for the business to have a more qualified employee.
I think it’s good that other people are looking out for those looking for jobs, but there are better ways to help them.
loading....
“is it fair for a fully-employed person to apply for a second job just for extra income?”
That question has got to be a joke, right?
loading....
The idea of “sharing” the jobs is very socialist. Does that person give part of her salary to people who don’t make as much to help even things out?
loading....
Good question to consider.
The problem with this logic is you can use it regardless of what the economy is currently doing. Unemployment will never be at 0%, so if you have a 2nd job, you will always be taking a job from someone else.
I have more than one pair of shoes in my closet. Does that mean I’m being unfair to someone who only has one pair?
Seems a little over-the-top to me…
loading....
Nancy’s friend seems to believe that people are *entitled* to a job. The only thing you are entitled to is to use your time that you are alive in the manner in which you choose and are able. If you can and choose to take a second job then go for it.
Nancy is entitled to a better friend. (HAH!)
With social security, welfare, unemployment, housing bailouts, etc., etc. I’m not all that surprised people believe they are entitled to pretty much anything these days.
loading....
Phew!
I was worried people would actually believe this was unethical…
loading....
I happen to have no moral qualms about the second job. In this economy, just because you have a great full time job today, doesn’t mean that you will tomorrow. In fact, it may be the more responsible choice to work the second job and save the money away/pay higher taxes on it because you’ll bump yourself into a higher bracket. In this way, if you lose your job, you will need less government/community assistance and you will be contributing more to the government tax revenue while you do earn that money.
Also, I would wonder how that person would think about a spouse getting a part time or full time job when the other spouse “makes enough”. What does it mean to make enough?
The person’s point only makes sense if there is a strictly finite number of jobs and if everyone is equally qualified and equally willing to take any one of those jobs. I don’t think any of that is true. Emotionally, I sort of get it, but still not really.
loading....
Newsflash: LIFE IS NOT FAIR. I’m so tired of hearing these socialist attitudes. Who is to say your job would have been filled by some struggling person who otherwise would have no income? You can’t know these things, all you can do is work to better your situation.
@Greg–tell American construction workers that the “take jobs away from X meme” is a myth. My dad has been in construction for over 20 years, and he has seen American workers leave because they couldn’t afford to underbid illegal workers, who most of the time send the money back home. Someone DOES deserve a job based on citizenship over someone who is in this country illegally, if for no other reason than that it is illegal to work in this country without obtaining a work visa or becoming a citizen.
loading....
I agree with plonkee’s point that it is up to an employer to make that discrimination on whether an applicant with another job or one without another job is a better fit. I mean, the one without might be a better fit because the manager is biased towards helping the downtrodden or it could simply be the case that the unemployed will likely have better availability and potential to be promoted to a full-time position.
I agree with everyone also who says it is stupid to not apply for a job because someone else ‘deserves’ it more. That is not a judgement call for you to make and you are not ‘taking away their job’ because if they want it, they too can apply and if they are better than you then they will get it.
I do have to split with the group consensus on one aspect though. It has been said “Besides, I never understood the whole argument of “taking jobs away from other people” that’s often used in the immigration debate.”
While I think the quoted term used of ‘taking jobs away’ is a bit of a misnomer, in the immigration debate there is a complex issue that is not existing in this moral question. That is the fact that illegal immigrants are willing to work for wages below the legal minimum wage partially because they do not pay taxes on these wages. As a result, a legal resident of the country who wanted the job could not compete with the price point offered by the immigrant because the legal resident’s employment needs to be official and of the legal rate. Whether minimum wage laws should exist and whether they should be circumvented by businesses hiring illegal immigrants is a discussion for another post.
loading....
Here is the problem with our present situation, there is more than enough work to be done, be it the very large, building a bridge, to the very small, installing a sprinkler system. What is missing from the equation now is simple, there isn’t enough money, actual liquid capital in the hands of those that need the work. I can definitely understand the needs of those who have money owing and want to get back to a cash positive situation (or at least break even). If what you need however isn’t just cash (money for a luxury like a massage, or work done on your house) I would seriously suggest working on a barter level, finding and creating tit for tat work that takes advantage of your other skills. The benefits of this sort of work are multiple, increased activity, increased social bonds and an increased sense of well-being. The obvious downside for industrious people will be occasionally getting taken advantage of, but when it works it is an incredible wonderful system. Don’t think that every solution requires printed money!
loading....
The one thing that I question is the most qualified for the job idea. For many jobs I don’t think there is necessarily a clear most qualified candidate. The hiring person never has all the relevant information on all the candidates. Being most qualified is fairly subjective in many hiring situations.
Is there a point, 25% unemployment rate, where the ethics change?
loading....
No definitely not! That is ridiculous! This is capitalism so go out there and make some money!
loading....
“Fully-employed” is 40 hours? Not in my world.
loading....
@AD: Then the job does not belong to the American worker. If the employer places the price of the bid above all else, and the bid from the American worker is always going to be higher than the immigrant, then the job will always go to the immigrant. Nothing is going to change that unless the government starts going after the people who employ illegals over American candidates.
But, that doesn’t mean the job “belongs” to American workers. In fact, it’s quite possible that the employer themselves will have bid for a contract using figures that would be impossible to achieve without illegals. If American workers were necessary, the contract might not exist in the first place. So, the job cannot “belong” to an American. It’s a sad truth, but as you said, life is not fair.
That’s my take on the situation as well. Caring about others is not “socialist”, whatever you seem to think. But, if it is necessary to take a second job to feed your family, even if that means making it more difficult for others to work, then so be it.
loading....
It’s not their job you’re taking until they get it. If you get it and they didn’t it’s because they either didn’t apply are weren’t as good a fit for the job.
Just leaving a job sitting there untaken until someone more deserving gets it is never going to work… by that logic there would always be someone more deserving, more needy than the person who got it and employers would have no employees as we wait for the most pathetic person to walk in for it.
I want the person who wants the job. The number one symptom of wanting the job is applying.
loading....
It’s not unethical or immoral. As has been said, the number of jobs isn’t finite or inelastic.
Let’s assume Nancy has it all together. In fact, let’s assume she’s passed the “crossover point” so that she’s actually earning enough from her investments to maintain her lifestyle for as long as she wishes. That doesn’t mean she needs to quit work altogether and just volunteer her time. Just the opposite. Even if she does nothing with the “extra” money except invest it, that act of investing is, ultimately, helping to keep jobs or create new ones.
Let’s now assume that Nancy is not in a position that she can live off her investments (she hasn’t yet reached the crossover point). Then how can anyone say that she doesn’t need a job or two?
As has been pointed out, her spending from her “extra” money from this job is working its way through the economy, and that’s a good thing. If she stops that job, she spends less on little extravagances, or she invests less. Cutting spending and not investing is not going to help the economy.
Ultimately, I don’t think that people who have lost their jobs in this economic downturn are going to settle for part-time, lower wage work. The proof of that is in the fact that there are part-time jobs available for Nancy to look for with or without her friend.
loading....
We ran into this a while back. My husband took an evening bartending job a year or so ago to keep his hand in, while also having his professional job. He suggested an unemployed acquaintance interview too. Ultimately my spouse got and took the job.
Husband was later laid off from his primary job and the bartending was paying for his petrol/cigarettes/fun. We were fine regardless, I earn enough to support us, but it’s always good to have two paycheques. Be careful that your “ethics” don’t eat you alive.
loading....
I’m surprised this is even an issue. My family’s well being is the most important thing I need to worry about. We finally woke up back in June and began a change in lifestyle, hitting the Debt snowball, etc. Then when the economy really went down hill in September, we concentrated more on Saving cash. While discouraging that the snowball had to be stopped, does this mean I’m ‘entitled’ to some protection because the economy upset my plans? Nope.
Does this mean that I should stop looking for ways to help my family get out of debt? Heck no! I’ll craigslist things, garage sale them, whatever. I’m making my preparations in case my Company (already in Chapter 11) goes under.
This include either me getting a second job, or my wife re-entering the workforce. It will be tougher to find a job, as the rules of Supply and Demand are in force. But should I sit back and wait for a Bail out? (Maybe if I change my name to include the word ‘Bank’).
Do what you can legally to increase the chances of you and your family surviving the next year.
Speaking of Legally, the illegal immigration issue and taking jobs away is rather a moot point. Until the illegals (ie. not Legally here) are sent home, this won’t be resolved. If the legality were enforced, then there would be more jobs for Americans. Supply and Demand would then take over here. Supply (US Workers) would either accept lower wages, or the Demand (US Work) would have to cover their costs by raising their prices.
Sorry if I ranted, but this entitlement thing has really gotten to me…
loading....
I’m always alarmed by the static number of jobs argument. The reality is that the more jobs that are worked, the more will be created. The value of working for the society is not the paycheck earned, but the work done. Individuals have disparate training, ability and ethic, and utilizing the best person will create the greatest wealth for us all, even in these pensive times.
loading....
I agree with the general sentiment here, there is nothing wrong with having a second job, especially in this economy.
There is no such thing as entitlement to a job, it should be given to the best qualified person, period. As to illegal immigrants underbidding others, I agree that there should be more scrutiny, but I also have to say that some jobs aren’t worth the wage that regular works would demand. For example, cleaning jobs are usually done by immigrants because they offer relatively good work for a cheap price. On the flip side, if those services would cost more, less people would use them, it’s a discretionary job, it’s only filled if it’s cheap enough. As such, the impact here is really minimal.
loading....
I am joining the list of unanimous agreement. Who defines whether you ‘need’ a job. Just because you are using that extra income to pay off debt instead of put food on the table does not mean that you don’t ‘need’ the job. Many people define ‘needs’ to include financial security or freedom from debt, and by taking that second job they may be protecting themselves from a truly dire situation later on by increasing their own security.
loading....
I think taking a second job is one of these weird situations in which it’s a good thing for the individual, but it could hurt others looking for work.
The first comparison that came to my mind is this “debate” about people saving more. (“Debate” is in quotes because I feel like there’s a certain amount of astroturfing from the “don’t save” side.) Each person should be saving more and spending less, but when everybody does it leads to a drop in spending overall, which isn’t helping the economy to recover.
I see the “spend, don’t save” side of the argument, but I’m not going to do something stupid because it “helps” in this nebulous, no-way-to-tell sort of way. I remember reading the response an economist gave to this question of “spend or save”, and he said, “I’m going to save, and hope everyone else spends.” You have to take care of yourself first, then you can worry about “The Ecomony As A Whole”.
It’s the same with a second job. I’m thinking about starting a little side business doing IT work. If I do that, will I take away someone else’s possible income? Probably, but I’m going to try to make more money, and let others contribute to the job market.
loading....
I would say…evaluate your motives.
Are you getting a 2nd job to pay for frivolous wants, or to meet necessary needs?
Examine your own conscience and respond accordingly. There is no blanket answer to this question. The answer will always depend on personal circumstances.
DebtFREEk!
loading....
Any job should be done by the person that does it best. If you happen to be employed, yet are interested in taking a part-time job on the side and can do it better than others, then you deserve the job. It is morally wrong to force people who are supposedly “fortunate” to not do work that “less fortunate” people should be “allowed” to do.
loading....
On the one hand, I can see how people with a good job and investments and all shouldn’t be taking extra jobs just for extra income.
But if one didn’t have a good enough job to pay the bills and have food, shelter, etc, then it would be morally and ethically wrong to not allow that person to seek a second job, if needed.
Also, if people haven’t taken the time to apply for the job in question, why not take it? I get so pissed when my friends’ roommate complains about how poor he is, but he refuses to get a job and spends all of his money on gaming equipment instead of cleaning up and getting new clothes so he looks halfway decent for an interview. If some rich guy took an extra part time job that this guy could have taken, I’d be fine with it since the poor roommate didn’t care enough to take it seriously.
loading....
i am totally with debtfreek on this one.
loading....
It’s got nothing to do with fairness. The ‘fair’ part is that everyone can apply for the job. Everyone’s got a fair shot at that.
The notion that fair means equal is a silly and naive one. Is it fair to make a business hire someone who is unemployed but less capable than another who wants a second job?
Fair means simply we each have an equal chance. After that it’s the survival of the fittest.
loading....
I think this really depends on the situation and the part-time job.
I’m a librarian living in an area with a library school. I’m fortunate that there are a lot of colleges in the area, but, there are still only so many jobs. Relocating is not currently an option for me.
I spent months looking for jobs close to what I wanted to do. I was advised to “volunteer” and to “try to get a college to take you as a substitute librarian.”
I watched retiring librarians or librarians who wanted to make some extra money take the part time jobs that would have been the best way to break into the field. The schools keep saying that the library field is greying and they need new librarians, but, none of them can afford to retire. When they finally go, it will be a gush. But many of us will have left the field because there was no room for us.
People will take part time or grunt work jobs if that’s all they can get. They’ll try to work two or three of them if they have to to make things balance out. Unemployment runs out. When it does, you’re going to do what you have to do to make ends meet.
I graduated in 2006 — I’ve spent three years sandwiching part-time & temporary work together in my field. And if I weren’t married? My only option would be to move, but, I don’t know that I could afford to do it.
loading....
J.D. those comments the woman made to Nancy smack of entitlement. Like somehow, the people that are out of work are entitled to those jobs. One of the reasons that this country is in the current financial predicament is entitlement. There are many in this country that feel they are entitled to the American dream. They are not willing to go the extra mile, and it is always someone else’s fault when things do not go their way. I for one am tired of it. If you have the where-with-all to take a second job, then kudos to you.
Keep up the good work.
loading....
Since when is wrong for me to better my self by having two jobs? This makes no scenes to me. It sounds bad to say but i needed financial help from a stranger do you they would hand over? So why should I miss on money to be made for them? The world is not a perfect place and not everything works out in the end like a movie. So Im going to do what i need in the mean time to keep afloat. If someone gets layed off I am truly sorry, but im not going to hurt my circumstance for you.
loading....
I see absolutely no moral dilemma.
Get as many jobs as you are willing to work!
loading....
@DebtFreek:
Would you say it is unethical to get a 2nd job if it is to pay for frivolous wants? Just curious….
The reason I ask is while I don’t agree with or condone frivilous spending in any type of economy, I would still consider it a personal choice — far from unethical….irresponsible at best!
~~~~~
Personally, I’ve never considered it unethical at all. As so many have already mentioned, it is a capitalist society.
To think that we are somehow “helping” the unemployed or balancing the playing field by not taking that second job — I think we’re fooling ourselves.
I’ve been on both sides of the fence (unemployed and held 2nd job) and while unemployed I never felt resent for those who were working multiple jobs.
Unless you’re “under-cutting” your unemployed friend to get that part time job then I believe your conscience should be clear
loading....
As long as the fully employed person isn’t low balling the wage, there isn’t anything wrong with it. Wouldn’t you want to have the most qualified person you can get for the part time job versus the guy that needs it? The response of the Woman’s friend sounds like it’s right out of “Atlas Shrugged”. One of the underpinnings of a market economy is the phrase “willing and able”. If you are willing and able to take a second job, then go for it. If you get hired over someone that isn’t fully employed IT’S NOT YOUR FAULT and you shouldn’t feel guilty for it.
loading....
I guess I’m of the mindset: there but for the grace of God go I…. I have a secure job and great benefits but I’m paying down debt as well, so a second job would be great. But I know there are people out there who could use what I’d see as “extra income” as “only income” so I’ve avoided getting another job.
The caveat is unless it’s something specialized with what I and only a few others can do. For example, last semester I taught in my field. Your average joe blow can’t do that so I didn’t feel like I was taking food out of anyone else’s mouth.
But I’m a die hard liberal…I suspect a lot of your readers (obviously) aren’t.
loading....
Work all you can, at whatever endeavors most satisfy and enrich you, at however many jobs as you can competently and productively apply yourself, as long as you’re not robbing yourself of health and rest and your family of your presence and love.
loading....
My sig. other and I each have full time jobs. They pay quite nicely, so we don’t both have to work if we don’t want to.
Which one of us is the unethical one for “stealing” some poor, laid-off software engineer’s job?
It’s kind of illogical to think that someone who needs a job will find a part time job you don’t take.
(hint: neither)
loading....
I don’t understand this “logic” at all. You take whatever job you can get. No one is “owed” a job. Plus, I don’t think the reason for taking that job matters. My mother says that it’s unethical for me not to spend every penny I make because I should buy stuff to keep other people employed. So, there you go. Extra money means more money for you to circulate, which means a little extra boost for the economy. Do what works for you and don’t worry about the rest. As long as you’re taking care of yourself and your family and doing good work, you’re contributing plenty to society. I hope that eases your conscience.
loading....