Going back to big law as a remote associate

[Anonymous]

Has anyone done this? Or work with someone who does it? I’ve been in a small practice for many years because I’m the primary parent and they let me work remote before that was a thing. I didn’t like big law, but if I were to take a remote position for a big firm, I’m not sure it’d be much different than what I’m doing now, though my salary will more than double. I have a niche transactional practice if that matters, and I wouldn’t be gunning for partnership. Am I deluding myself to think big law is different in a remote position?

[Anonymous]

I'm hoping others chime in but my AmLaw 20 firm is headed the other way. Currently 3 days in office but talk of going to 4 days in office after Labor Day to follow Skadden and Davis Polk.

[Anonymous]

It’s hard to know because you haven’t told us what your current remote job is like in terms of hours, evening work expectations, weekend deadlines, etc.

I’m a fed lawyer now (formerly big law) and DH is a big law partner. His firm does not allow fully remote associates, but he does have associates that work on his matters who are in different offices around the country, so they are remote to him and he never sees them in person.

I don’t think he makes any distinctions between the associates he sees in person and those he doesn’t. Deadlines are the same, he expects them to work nights and weekends if they have short client deadlines. (I hear him on the phone at all hours with them so I know which associates he is talking to nights and weekends.) Transactional practices tend to have more up and down workflow, so you might have to go all out around a deal but have a breather when it is done. DH’s practice is pretty constant so there is almost never a break.

If you can find a big law firm that allows fully remote associates, I would expect the hours to be the same as for in person associates.

I speak from experience when I say you should look for a remote government gig!

[Anonymous]

I do it on a flex schedule and I don’t have a billable hour requirement. (I get paid hourly).

What didn’t you like about it before? What would your billable hour requirement be?

[Anonymous]

OP here. I have been practicing and running my own transactions too long now to go back to working under someone. My understanding is that I’d continue to do the same work I do now, but at a higher billing rate and a higher salary. There’s a good chance I would bring a client with me that could fill my time, although the firm claims they have enough work from similar clients if that doesn’t happen. Right now, I am underpaid but I have complete autonomy over my time. I’m hoping to retain autonomy but get paid fairly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do it on a flex schedule and I don’t have a billable hour requirement. (I get paid hourly).

What didn’t you like about it before? What would your billable hour requirement be?

This is exactly what I want to ask for in the next round. Do you get paid a percentage of billables or collections? Are you happy with the arrangement? Do you still get benefits (like 401k, insurance, CLE)?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do it on a flex schedule and I don’t have a billable hour requirement. (I get paid hourly).

What didn’t you like about it before? What would your billable hour requirement be?

This is exactly what I want to ask for in the next round. Do you get paid a percentage of billables or collections? Are you happy with the arrangement? Do you still get benefits (like 401k, insurance, CLE)?

I get paid hourly for the hours I bill but I am also asked write client alerts, etc. and I have a certain amount of non-billable hours I get paid for too (since I’m not really on a promotion track and there would not really be incentive for me to do that for free).

I get 401k and malpractice insurance. I get CLE for free thru the firm - they also pay my bar memberships. I got health insurance and paid vacation at my prior firm - but I don’t get those things at my current firm (we use my husband’s health insurance for our family now). They increased my hourly rate when I first started to account for those things.

I am mostly happy with it. I’m generally glad that if I work more I get paid more.

Where is the office - is it possible for you to go in occasionally? I find it helpful to occasionally see people in person, fwiw.

[Anonymous]

Are you a partner where you are now? It’s not clear from your post.

If a big law firm is thinking of bringing you on, it’s to meet a need that they have. They need capacity in your area to service their current clients. That is the only reason a big law firm hires associates. Therefore, you will definitely not have autonomy. You will be expected to work on the clients of whatever partner has demonstrated to the firm that they can keep another associate busy. If you happen to bring your client along, that’s a bonus but is not why they are hiring you. That would be imperative for a lateral partner, but is not the hiring objective for an associate.

If you want to keep your current autonomy, stay where you are or find a smaller place that will bring you over as a partner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has anyone done this? Or work with someone who does it? I’ve been in a small practice for many years because I’m the primary parent and they let me work remote before that was a thing. I didn’t like big law, but if I were to take a remote position for a big firm, I’m not sure it’d be much different than what I’m doing now, though my salary will more than double. I have a niche transactional practice if that matters, and I wouldn’t be gunning for partnership. Am I deluding myself to think big law is different in a remote position?

That's a nice salary bump, but when times get lean, I'd worry about job security. Probably depends on how much power the partner you service has, and how well you endear yourself to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I have been practicing and running my own transactions too long now to go back to working under someone. My understanding is that I’d continue to do the same work I do now, but at a higher billing rate and a higher salary. There’s a good chance I would bring a client with me that could fill my time, although the firm claims they have enough work from similar clients if that doesn’t happen. Right now, I am underpaid but I have complete autonomy over my time. I’m hoping to retain autonomy but get paid fairly.

I'd fire you if I were that client. All you are doing with that move is costing them more money.

[Anonymous]

You expect to be a fully remote associate with control over your time and clients? LOL!!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I have been practicing and running my own transactions too long now to go back to working under someone. My understanding is that I’d continue to do the same work I do now, but at a higher billing rate and a higher salary. There’s a good chance I would bring a client with me that could fill my time, although the firm claims they have enough work from similar clients if that doesn’t happen. Right now, I am underpaid but I have complete autonomy over my time. I’m hoping to retain autonomy but get paid fairly.

I'd fire you if I were that client. All you are doing with that move is costing them more money.

I would ask about whether current client is at an acceptable billing rate for big law or whether you'd have to bump it up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I have been practicing and running my own transactions too long now to go back to working under someone. My understanding is that I’d continue to do the same work I do now, but at a higher billing rate and a higher salary. There’s a good chance I would bring a client with me that could fill my time, although the firm claims they have enough work from similar clients if that doesn’t happen. Right now, I am underpaid but I have complete autonomy over my time. I’m hoping to retain autonomy but get paid fairly.

What do I know but this sounds like a big risk to me. I'd think very very hard before giving up any remote job that pays decently and allows, as you describe, full autonomy. Unless you're struggling to make ends meet as things are, you are giving up a really good situation for one that is very likely to be quite different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You expect to be a fully remote associate with control over your time and clients? LOL!!!!!!

OP here. Believe or not, I am now, though I manage a significant portion of the firm's transaction volume on my own. I got complacent for years in the payment structure and title because I was so grateful to be able to work remote (long before Covid). But, now I've been offered a similar position at a much higher salary, just for a firm that is based elsewhere and they claim they are good with fully remote and will let me continue to run my own deals. I might ask for a different title than "associate" but I really just care about income and autonomy. Maybe it's too good to be true, though.

[Anonymous]

My biglaw firm has fully remote partners and associates. I think it can definitely work but find out as much as you can about their plans to integrate you so that you actually meet people and get work. If they have a lot of remote people they might be very good at this. If they don’t, you will need to work hard to build relationships and may need to spend some time travelling to offices to meet people and make sure they know who you are. If you are really just going to be feeding yourself work, though, none of this would matter. But if you need to be given work or want to be included in pitches then make sure the remote working is going to actually work.