How to change Big Law culture?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You are probably afforded a very comfortable life as a result of your husband being a partner at Big Law. lots of people work just as hard or harder and don't have a fraction to show for it as your husband. He can move inhouse and take a pay cut which I'm sure you don't want him to do.

I agree. I work 65ish hours most weeks and I don’t even make six figures.

OP, I suspect your family is well compensated because of his hours. There are many who work those hours who aren’t.

[Anonymous]

It's the same not in Big Law too, without the huge salaries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's the same not in Big Law too, without the huge salaries.

It's the same in all professional service firms where the only product is your time. When hours billed is the way you bring in money, there will always be pressure to bill more hours

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's the same not in Big Law too, without the huge salaries.

It's the same in all professional service firms where the only product is your time. When hours billed is the way you bring in money, there will always be pressure to bill more hours

The challenge is that associates are under pressure to bill more hours but, once they are partners, it's the ability to land matters where you can leverage associates to bill hours that matters most.

It's a transition that can be enormously stressful once partners realize that the pressure is greater once they make partner. Clients have relatively little loyalty, and most are constantly looking for ways to reduce their legal fees.

However, partners generally make a shit ton of money, so it's hard to have too much sympathy for people who buy into that system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You’re going to get flamed but it’s a good question. Escalating Billable hours and endless nights/weekends/vacations working were not always how it worked at Biglaw. To a certain extent people can draw their own boundaries but that’s not going to solve the overall issue of overwork. If you want a different culture you’re going to have to leave Biglaw (and likely make less money).

Another thing is that top lawschool grads are often very uncreative, hierarchical, conventional and risk adverse. They cannot see any path other than the Biglaw firm. So those characteristics produce an environment where everyone feels they need to bow and scrape and prove themselves by making people above them happy.

Those few Biglaw associates who are more entrepreneurial and creative will get out quickly and go into business or in house for something more interesting. I know one who only made it a year in Biglaw and then left to start his own business and is now very rich and works normal-ish hours. Another who joined a really interesting and high profile trafe association instead of going for partner (which he likely would have made).

This is such an informative and helpful post about Big Law. Thank you for this, PP.

I will add that many who leave Big Law for government or in house jobs seem to come from families with money. They work super hard for three to four years, build up experience and contacts and then leave mostly to work in government since this is DC. Still not exactly creative types when I think about it. But they usually have an inheritance coming their way. People without this tend to stick it out more. Maybe they have to.

OP - I think this is a big thing too. DH grew up very solidly middle class. He is the first person in his family (and extended family) who has this type of job or makes this type of salary. He had to pay for undergrad and law school himself. There is no inheritance no help from his parents.

This is a BS excuse. I also grew up "solidly middle class" with no inheritance or family help. Self-funded law school.

I make a very decent salary of 200k/yr in an in-house job where I have a lot of flexibility and independence in a niche area. I could make closer to 300k but chose to work 30 hr work weeks to maximize flexibility and time with my kids when they are young. DH has a similar job in anoth field making a little less (180k).

We have a nice house with great public schools, can afford a couple nice vacations a year including some international travel, feel good about college savings and retirement, and have great work-life balance. Coming from MC backgrounds without family help I think we've done well and are giving our kids a better life (zero college loans, better schools, more travel and activities) while also being present and involved.

We cannot afford: a house that costs over a million, private school, a vacation home, first class anything, to pay for med school or law school for kids, certain upgrades to lifestyle like a nanny into school ages or very expensive date nights or the nicest clothes and tech.

It's a trade off. I did 2 years of Big Law out if school and it wasn't for me so I used it to pay off loans and moved in-house, then lived frugally until I had kids so we had a big cushion that allowed me to go PT. I "have it all" in that I have a well-paying, rewarding, and stable job, plus kids and time to spend with them. We have plenty of money for an UMC lifestyle and will have a paid off home and 4-5 million in retirement accounts by the time we're 58. We're happy and healthy and our kids are too.

Anyone who tells you they "have" to stay in Big Law for decades because they can't afford to do anything else is either lying or really bad with money. Lots of people (most) put in 5 years or so and then bail for a perfectly well-paying job that doesn't make them miserable. Firms are structured to support this and my firm helped me find my first job after I left (with a client) because it is in their interest to have alums with good relationships in the industries they serve. I also used my firm network to find my next job and currently work for a GC who I overlapped with in Big Law.

I have little patience for people who act like making a million a year while working 80 hour weeks and abandoning their family is the same as risking your life in the local coal mine -- no other options and I'm just trying to support my family, boo hoo.

Nope. If you can get a Big Law job out of law school you have the education and ability to get a different kind of job that still pays well enough elsewhere. You just don't want to. You are NOT a victim of anything.

[Anonymous]

Get him out of there unless he really loves it. My spouse left big law for a government job after I had a hissy fit like the one you are having. He works on the same matters but from a different angle, still makes 6 figures which is enough for us esp. as I also make 6 figures, and has an extremely regular 40 hour work week which allows him to be an equal partner and parent. It's just such a better life. I don't know if we'd still be married if he was still in big law. Yes, money is tighter than before, but it's still more than adequate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You’re going to get flamed but it’s a good question. Escalating Billable hours and endless nights/weekends/vacations working were not always how it worked at Biglaw. To a certain extent people can draw their own boundaries but that’s not going to solve the overall issue of overwork. If you want a different culture you’re going to have to leave Biglaw (and likely make less money).

Another thing is that top lawschool grads are often very uncreative, hierarchical, conventional and risk adverse. They cannot see any path other than the Biglaw firm. So those characteristics produce an environment where everyone feels they need to bow and scrape and prove themselves by making people above them happy.

Those few Biglaw associates who are more entrepreneurial and creative will get out quickly and go into business or in house for something more interesting. I know one who only made it a year in Biglaw and then left to start his own business and is now very rich and works normal-ish hours. Another who joined a really interesting and high profile trafe association instead of going for partner (which he likely would have made).

This is such an informative and helpful post about Big Law. Thank you for this, PP.

I will add that many who leave Big Law for government or in house jobs seem to come from families with money. They work super hard for three to four years, build up experience and contacts and then leave mostly to work in government since this is DC. Still not exactly creative types when I think about it. But they usually have an inheritance coming their way. People without this tend to stick it out more. Maybe they have to.

OP - I think this is a big thing too. DH grew up very solidly middle class. He is the first person in his family (and extended family) who has this type of job or makes this type of salary. He had to pay for undergrad and law school himself. There is no inheritance no help from his parents.

This is really not justifiable. Even in this expensive area, a dual-earning family working “normal” 6-figure jobs can do just fine. Based on what you say, he could go in-house or into government and you guys could have an HHI in the 300-400k range easily. Together with what you’ve saved so far that’s more than adequate. But if you insist on 3 private school tuitions, expensive travel, eating out all the time … well, you’re trading your life for that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My DH has been in big law for thirty years. There was a time before email and blackberries (which were the big change to weekend and evening work) where big law was more family-friendly. Things changed around 2003-4 with the changing technology and really ramped up from 2005-2020. That was the worst period. With the advent of Zoom and the changes of the pandemic, I feel that big law has gotten much less crazy than it was in the mid-2010s. DH definitely does not ride his associates the way he was coming up. You cannot make the same demands anymore. When he was an associate, he pulled all-nighters a couple times and week, worked every weekend, and on all our vacations. He would get in trouble with the firm for expecting that of his associates today. Until the pandemic, there was no work from home ever. I actually really appreciate how things have gotten more humane for big law families post-2020.

Lol there was always “work from home” pre-pandemic- but it was work you were expected to do from home on the weekends/nights/holidays. That’s what I find tremendously ironic about law firms fulminating about WFH: they DEPEND on people working from home!

Sure, but there is a difference between commuting to an office and wasting two hours in transit to sit in your office everyday and then coming home and working for a few more hours and working from home for the whole day and getting those two hours back. When DH goes to the office, he never eats dinner with us because he comes home at 8:30, helps with bedtime, and then works a few more hours. He did this routine for years pre-pandemic. When he works from home, he still works 8:30am to 8:30 pm, but he eats dinner with us, says hi to the kids after school, is more relaxed because of no commute, and then logs back on for a couple of hours. We joke that the firm actually gets more hours out of him on work from home days because he works through what would have been his commute. WFH has definitely improved our family life and he only works from home two days a week.

Oh I agree with you! I find it ironic and toxic that some firms are still resisting WFH. It’s like: “you may not WFH from 9-5 but you MUST WFH from 8-midnight, weekends, and holidays if the client needs you.”

[Anonymous]

I think every year associates should have a written contract with how many hours they will bill, and how much they will get paid. Once they hit the number, no more work. Junior partners/of counsel too. Anyone without equity.

Partners are the business owner, so make them work. They are the system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You’re going to get flamed but it’s a good question. Escalating Billable hours and endless nights/weekends/vacations working were not always how it worked at Biglaw. To a certain extent people can draw their own boundaries but that’s not going to solve the overall issue of overwork. If you want a different culture you’re going to have to leave Biglaw (and likely make less money).

Another thing is that top lawschool grads are often very uncreative, hierarchical, conventional and risk adverse. They cannot see any path other than the Biglaw firm. So those characteristics produce an environment where everyone feels they need to bow and scrape and prove themselves by making people above them happy.

Those few Biglaw associates who are more entrepreneurial and creative will get out quickly and go into business or in house for something more interesting. I know one who only made it a year in Biglaw and then left to start his own business and is now very rich and works normal-ish hours. Another who joined a really interesting and high profile trafe association instead of going for partner (which he likely would have made).

This is such an informative and helpful post about Big Law. Thank you for this, PP.

I will add that many who leave Big Law for government or in house jobs seem to come from families with money. They work super hard for three to four years, build up experience and contacts and then leave mostly to work in government since this is DC. Still not exactly creative types when I think about it. But they usually have an inheritance coming their way. People without this tend to stick it out more. Maybe they have to.

OP - I think this is a big thing too. DH grew up very solidly middle class. He is the first person in his family (and extended family) who has this type of job or makes this type of salary. He had to pay for undergrad and law school himself. There is no inheritance no help from his parents.

This is a BS excuse. I also grew up "solidly middle class" with no inheritance or family help. Self-funded law school.

I make a very decent salary of 200k/yr in an in-house job where I have a lot of flexibility and independence in a niche area. I could make closer to 300k but chose to work 30 hr work weeks to maximize flexibility and time with my kids when they are young. DH has a similar job in anoth field making a little less (180k).

We have a nice house with great public schools, can afford a couple nice vacations a year including some international travel, feel good about college savings and retirement, and have great work-life balance. Coming from MC backgrounds without family help I think we've done well and are giving our kids a better life (zero college loans, better schools, more travel and activities) while also being present and involved.

We cannot afford: a house that costs over a million, private school, a vacation home, first class anything, to pay for med school or law school for kids, certain upgrades to lifestyle like a nanny into school ages or very expensive date nights or the nicest clothes and tech.

It's a trade off. I did 2 years of Big Law out if school and it wasn't for me so I used it to pay off loans and moved in-house, then lived frugally until I had kids so we had a big cushion that allowed me to go PT. I "have it all" in that I have a well-paying, rewarding, and stable job, plus kids and time to spend with them. We have plenty of money for an UMC lifestyle and will have a paid off home and 4-5 million in retirement accounts by the time we're 58. We're happy and healthy and our kids are too.

Anyone who tells you they "have" to stay in Big Law for decades because they can't afford to do anything else is either lying or really bad with money. Lots of people (most) put in 5 years or so and then bail for a perfectly well-paying job that doesn't make them miserable. Firms are structured to support this and my firm helped me find my first job after I left (with a client) because it is in their interest to have alums with good relationships in the industries they serve. I also used my firm network to find my next job and currently work for a GC who I overlapped with in Big Law.

I have little patience for people who act like making a million a year while working 80 hour weeks and abandoning their family is the same as risking your life in the local coal mine -- no other options and I'm just trying to support my family, boo hoo.

Nope. If you can get a Big Law job out of law school you have the education and ability to get a different kind of job that still pays well enough elsewhere. You just don't want to. You are NOT a victim of anything.

+1

Similar story, different details (longer at Big Law, some family help).

Sure, I miss the amazing cash flow from Big Law, but I also like being able to take vacation and weekends etc.

Now that I’m a client, I try to keep requests reasonable, but it’s the sheer volume of work that makes law firm life rough.

I also saw how BigLaw changed people - specifically men. Some of them went from wanting a work/life balance when they started, weren’t cut-throat, etc. then 4-5 years in, some of them just “turned to the dark side”. Sure they told their wives they didn’t have a choice, but they did.

Law firms may change eventually, but not soon enough to make a difference in your life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You’re going to get flamed but it’s a good question. Escalating Billable hours and endless nights/weekends/vacations working were not always how it worked at Biglaw. To a certain extent people can draw their own boundaries but that’s not going to solve the overall issue of overwork. If you want a different culture you’re going to have to leave Biglaw (and likely make less money).

Another thing is that top lawschool grads are often very uncreative, hierarchical, conventional and risk adverse. They cannot see any path other than the Biglaw firm. So those characteristics produce an environment where everyone feels they need to bow and scrape and prove themselves by making people above them happy.

Those few Biglaw associates who are more entrepreneurial and creative will get out quickly and go into business or in house for something more interesting. I know one who only made it a year in Biglaw and then left to start his own business and is now very rich and works normal-ish hours. Another who joined a really interesting and high profile trafe association instead of going for partner (which he likely would have made).

This is such an informative and helpful post about Big Law. Thank you for this, PP.

I will add that many who leave Big Law for government or in house jobs seem to come from families with money. They work super hard for three to four years, build up experience and contacts and then leave mostly to work in government since this is DC. Still not exactly creative types when I think about it. But they usually have an inheritance coming their way. People without this tend to stick it out more. Maybe they have to.

OP - I think this is a big thing too. DH grew up very solidly middle class. He is the first person in his family (and extended family) who has this type of job or makes this type of salary. He had to pay for undergrad and law school himself. There is no inheritance no help from his parents.

This is really not justifiable. Even in this expensive area, a dual-earning family working “normal” 6-figure jobs can do just fine. Based on what you say, he could go in-house or into government and you guys could have an HHI in the 300-400k range easily. Together with what you’ve saved so far that’s more than adequate. But if you insist on 3 private school tuitions, expensive travel, eating out all the time … well, you’re trading your life for that.

+1 plenty of people without generational wealth leave biglaw. My parents were immigrants, I left as did my husband.

Can biglaw change or improve? Sure. It has changed a lot since Covid like many workplaces. Will there always be a lot of demands if you're charging $1500 per hour to clients and making a 7-figure salary? Obviously.

[Anonymous]

OP - DH does not make anywhere near 7 figure salary. Partners at his firm make somewhere between $600,000-+$9 million (at the high end). But the majority probably make around $800,000 or so. Obviously a lot of money but definitely not a million plus a year like everyone seems to think.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think every year associates should have a written contract with how many hours they will bill, and how much they will get paid. Once they hit the number, no more work. Junior partners/of counsel too. Anyone without equity.

Partners are the business owner, so make them work. They are the system.

This is idiotic.

[Anonymous]

There are in house and government jobs that pay enough for a very nice life in the DMV.

[Anonymous]

It's sounds like OP's spouse is a litigator. I wouldn't be confident that her DH's life would materially prove just by leaving big law. Opposing counsel sucks and makes life miserable, even if you're litigating for the government. It's also not super easy for a litigator to move in house.