Leave GS-15 for in-house counsel position

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Considering a similar move myself, OP, but it is certainly not for the more interesting work. I have a surfeit of that in government. but I need better cash flow and better hours and less travel. and it looks like at least some companies offer that . . .

Careful about the travel. I had a friend go in-house from a firm (did anti-trust work), in part because of travel, and she travels more than she did before. Certainly depends on the company.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Considering a similar move myself, OP, but it is certainly not for the more interesting work. I have a surfeit of that in government. but I need better cash flow and better hours and less travel. and it looks like at least some companies offer that . . .

Careful about the travel. I had a friend go in-house from a firm (did anti-trust work), in part because of travel, and she travels more than she did before. Certainly depends on the company.

Duly noted!

I have a friend who (like me) was a federal litigator. She somehow got herself hired as an attorney negotiating licensing agreements for some tech company. She works (barely) 40 hour weeks and never has to leave the office, and yet her salary went up. I keep trying to get her to explain her magic to me, as I know she had zero experience in contract negotiation and very little in tech. she claims she just kept networking and sending out her resume until someone bit. May I somehow work the same magic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:how did you come up with 2 mil number?

And why do you say you'd lose your pension? It's not vested?

Also, a pay increase of 20% is peanuts from my perspective, given the "soft" benefits of being in the gov't - cheaper health care, flexible work schedule, ability to actually take/use vacation time, etc. Of course, there are more factors that may be at work in this decision, such as the ability to advance in your career and whether the work is likely to be more interesting to you. If you're at $140,000 now, you're looking at @$170,000 -- that's not a wash but unless the "soft" benefits on the in-house position match the gov't's it's close.

I'm sure OP meant she would lose increased accrual of the pension benefit. Agree with your other points regarding flexibility of working for the govt vs. private employer.

That's right. Pension isn't currently valued at $2m - otherwise, I'd be done today!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:take this with a grain of salt but it looks to me as though retiring with 26 years at 155k gives you a pension annuity that would cost you about $1m in savings to purchase from TSP (private market would likely be worse)

I didn't consider the cost of what I'm paying for the pension - you're right, I should probably do that.

This was literally a simple back-of-the-envelope calculation based on the fact that I would receive $60k/year starting at 65 for 30 years or so. I tried to find a more accurate online calculator to determine the pension value, but haven't found one. If anyone knows of one, please let me know! I would greatly appreciate it.