Legal jobs -- anyone hiring seventh year associates? Looking for gov agency position

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don't waste your time. The attorneys who will screen your resume will often be the types who couldn't hack it as a second or third-year associate, so they'll look for reasons to find fault with someone who is smarter than they are and lasted until they were a senior associate.


With a general litigation background, I'd look for an in-house position in MD or VA.

First paragraph spoken like a true moron based on my 26 yrs. in fed service after private practice... most of the hiring people I dealt with and saw were easily as good as the private practice types I know and dealt with and in many cases better, as far as substantive expertise (but may have chosen to avoid the private firm b.s.). Your stereotype is easy and snarky and maybe it works somewhere, but not with the people I worked with at my agency & others.

So tell us, how many federal applications have you put in and been rejected for? You sound angry and entitled.

Thanks for proving the point. It's why the OP will probably have a hard time. The government hiring attoneys don't want talent, but instead mostly younger lawyers even dumber than they are whom they can boss around while claiming they are above the "private firm b.s."

Your second statement continues to operate at the thoroughly clueless and uninformed/stereotypical level of drivel as your first one.

Your last sentence is utterly idiotic contrasted with the actual experience I had in over 20 yrs. of experience with DOJ and other federal agency lawyers: (a) talent is key; (b) younger doesn't matter, skill, production the ability to work independently does; and (c) the smart managers all know that the best thing to have is staff attorneys who are smarter, not dumber, than they are.

That illustrates at least 3 reasons why you probably haven't made the grade and have such venom based on stereotypes and silly generalizations.

Nice try but you still don't get an interview, Sherlock.

[Anonymous]

p.s. thinking back over our hires for the past 10 years, I can't think of one who had less than 7-10 yrs. of experience... kind of kills your convenient anger-based fantasy.

[Anonymous]

I've worked at one BigLaw firm and one regulatory agency. The "private firm b.s" I saw came in the form of shameful condescension toward non-attorneys, and flagrant taking credit for the work of those below one in the hierarchy. At my agency job now, everyone is kind to everyone, and those at the top freely acknowledge when someone below them is an expert or has a good idea. For me at least, the non-financial benefits are enormous; I can imagine nothing worse than returning to that firm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've worked at one BigLaw firm and one regulatory agency. The "private firm b.s" I saw came in the form of shameful condescension toward non-attorneys, and flagrant taking credit for the work of those below one in the hierarchy. At my agency job now, everyone is kind to everyone, and those at the top freely acknowledge when someone below them is an expert or has a good idea. For me at least, the non-financial benefits are enormous; I can imagine nothing worse than returning to that firm.

PP here who said "private firm b.s." ... yes, that's true, too, but I was thinking merely of people who are excellent lawyers who would prefer to spend more time on being lawyers, and less on firm management, rainmaking, etc., that's mostly what I meant. What you describe exists too, as does the absurd pressure created by the bankrupt BigLaw model requiring more hours every year ... time is your inventory and you can never make more of it. A losing battle.

In any case, our angry little poster clearly would not fit in with a more collegial environment focused on a public service mission or focusing on good quality work. He/she is all about the snark and will be stuck wherever they are (BigLaw? at home? McDonalds?).

[Anonymous]

Look, I'm not trying to defend the poster with so much disdain for fed attorneys, but there is hyperbole on both sides. I did not enter the federal work force because of dedication to the public service mission. I did it because I wanted to continue my legal career, which I love, in an environment that gave me security and time with my family. I don't pretend otherwise. I am lucky in that the legal work I do is interesting and challenging. The actual agency "mission" I am not particularly passionate about. Nor do I think I am somehow more virtuous than people who choose a career inBig Firm. Everybody dial it back a notch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP here. Slight hijack -- curious what fed opportunities an experienced management-side labor/employment associate should explore (other than the most obvious agencies).

I am not a labor law attorney, but AFAICT, every agency needs management-side labor law attorneys because every agency has its own HR dept and own employment law issues. EPA, or Interior, or Ag. all have thousands of employees and the agency management need counselling on labor law issues (union and non-union). It's actually one of the few areas where there's some mobility from agency to agency.

slight caveat here when it comes to traditional labor: federal workers are covered by a different law. similar enough, but an entirely different law and governed by a different agency. those skills probably aren't all that portable. most of my experience is in traditional labor, and i applied to a bunch of fed jobs when i got laid off from a small firm a couple years ago. didn't even get an interview. (ended up at one of the national L&E firms).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I assume you are OK with a huge paycut and don't need to make seventh year associate pay?

The postal service is often hiring for people to litigate contract disputes. The work is deadly dull and the pay is lower than the GS scale (you will probably start around 80-90k).

Yeah-- the Postal Service is hiring.

[Anonymous]

OP here -- I am well aware that it is a terrible time to be looking, but I have some time, and I am also aware that many agency jobs are more prestigious than biglaw. I am also obviously prepared to take a pay cut. I had a second child very close to my first, unplanned, and had planned to continue to practice, so its also not an issue of poor planning. I really was just wondering if any agencies are moving at all, and will continue post shutdown.

I have reasonable education credentials, good firm experience, but not great on any level. I am really average, and have not committed myself to volunteering. I am honestly really just looking for a job right now -- I need to get paid a reasonable salary. So maybe the post office thing is a good idea.

[Anonymous]

Career-wise, the best agencies are probably DOJ, the financial and trade regulators, and maybe Commerce, IRS and DOD. They attract some reasonably smart people. The quality of the lawyers at places like Labor, HUD and HHS, in comparison, is really low. Some of those people are astoundingly stupid and could never have gotten a foot into the door at a BigLaw firm.

[Anonymous]

The quality of the lawyers at places like Labor, HUD and HHS, in comparison, is really low. Some of those people are astoundingly stupid and could never have gotten a foot into the door at a BigLaw firm.

I don't think that is fair. I worked for HUD for four years. Some of the lawyers were not that good, but some of them were smart people that just cared about quality of life and time with their family more than working at the most prestigious firm/agency.

[Anonymous]

OP here -- I am well aware that it is a terrible time to be looking, but I have some time, and I am also aware that many agency jobs are more prestigious than biglaw. I am also obviously prepared to take a pay cut. I had a second child very close to my first, unplanned, and had planned to continue to practice, so its also not an issue of poor planning. I really was just wondering if any agencies are moving at all, and will continue post shutdown.

I have reasonable education credentials, good firm experience, but not great on any level. I am really average, and have not committed myself to volunteering. I am honestly really just looking for a job right now -- I need to get paid a reasonable salary. So maybe the post office thing is a good idea.

OP, just keep trying. It is a tough time out there, but if you don't play you can't win, as DH says, so keep sending stuff out, networking etc.

[Anonymous]

dunno about DOL, but the regional attorneys at the NLRB who investigate and try cases tend to be very high quality. I think it's also harder than shit to get hired at the NLRB. I have a decent amount of NLRB trial experience and have to guess I'd have to try for a while to get a gig there (and even if I did, it might not be in this area).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:dunno about DOL, but the regional attorneys at the NLRB who investigate and try cases tend to be very high quality. I think it's also harder than shit to get hired at the NLRB. I have a decent amount of NLRB trial experience and have to guess I'd have to try for a while to get a gig there (and even if I did, it might not be in this area).

Can't speak to NLRB. But the litigators I've come across at govt agencies are, as a group, exceedingly smart, capable, and devoted to the agency mission. Many are Big Law alums. I think the idea is that these agency litigators need to be able to go toe to toe with Big Law, so that's why they look for the best and the brightest. Can't say the same about the wonky general counsel types, though.

[Anonymous]

Board of Veterans Appeals is hiring. But starting pay probably only GS 11 step 1.

[Anonymous]

Not all great litigators are big law alums. Big law doesn't mean skilled litigator... it can but great trial lawyers also come from small firms, can be sole practicioners, etc.