Crazy for a working mom to go from Mid Law to Big Law question

[Anonymous]

I recently left government for Mid Law and I'm a mom and honestly have struggled with the demands of private law firm life. I am barely able to bill 30 to 35 hours per week. A part of it is the adjustment to the private sector (I realize now my government job was a cake walk) and hating being away from my child (and I want to have more kids). But on top of the adjustments, some of my lack of billing has been because I am finding the Mid Law practice group I went into is not a good fit for my skills. They have struggled to find me work as my training is in work they don't do (or do a lot of). My training at gov was in a more complicated area and I enjoyed that work. An opportunity has opened at a Big Law firm doing work that is more complicated and more like my training. It is more the work I'd like to do and think I could be more successful there because it would be a better fit. However, I dread working any more than I am (mostly because I dread giving up any more time with my child), and I would have to bill closer to 40 hours per week there (and more when things are busy). The money would be nice but it is not my motivation. My motivation is to enjoy my work more and be more successful in terms of having more complicated skills. But given my reservations about working longer hours am I crazy?

Just curious what others think...

[Anonymous]

You already see the pace of work & billing at these firms is insane, why would you want to ratchet up that pressure by a significant amount?

I wouldn't suggest going in that direction.

[Anonymous]

pp here ... IMO/IME to bill 40 you have to work 60+ every week, if you bill honestly.

[Anonymous]

Can you negotiate an 80% schedule with the biglaw firm?

[Anonymous]

OP here. Thank you for the response. I appreciate any perspective I can get as I'm quite confused as to what to do. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Big firm will likely be easier if you are in a sophisticated practice area. Note I said easier not easy.

I would do it.

[Anonymous]

I would further explain that among other things having a full plate of sophisticated work you enjoy doing is easier than trying to eek by on scraps at a mid size firm. Plus you have skill in that area and can plan how long things will take. Also the client base will likely pay for your time enhancing your realization rate rather than clients used to smaller bills and discounts at smaller firm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can you negotiate an 80% schedule with the biglaw firm?

Yes, this is good advice. Find out what the possibilities are.

[Anonymous]

15:40 here ... 16:11 and 17:26 are right IMO.

Understand that even at an 80% deal at BigLaw, that's a full-time+ job to normal people and probably will be a typical 2 yr. produce-or-else scenario ...

As long as you know what you're going into it's your choice to make. Not attractive to many but right now govt. practice is becoming horrible even w/ the relative security and not having enough to do in your area of strength is very frustrating, I'm sure.

[Anonymous]

I would go for the big law opportunity if you think it will make you happier. Mid law can have just as much, if not more, billing stress as big law.

[Anonymous]

OP I haven't read the responses yet but one thing to consider is the incredibly generous maternity leave that most big law firms have. You say you want to have more kids. My advice. Take the big law spot. Get pregnant. Have another baby and return from maternity leave at 80% schedule.

[Anonymous]

Any chance of going back to your government job? Or do you not want to?

What is your field? That may make a difference. I was a litigator and my DH was in a regulatory practice group. We both worked about the same number of hours in a month-long period, but his were more or less consistent and predictable, whereas I was constantly required to stay late (11 pm or later) unexpectedly, work weekends, etc. But he could just work until 8 pm every night and one afternoon per weekend and be fine. If your schedule is more like that, and you can do a fair chunk of it from home, then BigLaw might not be bad. But if your schedule will be unpredictable and/or you can't work from home in the evenings, I wouldn't do it. We both eventually left for government and are much, much happier.

In BigLaw, I had friends who came in around 7 am and left at 4 or 5 pm sharp every day, then logged hours from home. It required them to set firm boundaries with the partners, but they were able to do it. I had a harder time setting boundaries, but that is me. Might that work for you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[...] I was constantly required to stay late (11 pm or later) unexpectedly, work weekends, etc. But he could just work until 8 pm every night and one afternoon per weekend and be fine. If your schedule is more like that, and you can do a fair chunk of it from home, then BigLaw might not be bad. But if your schedule will be unpredictable and/or you can't work from home in the evenings, I wouldn't do it. We both eventually left for government and are much, much happier.

In BigLaw, I had friends who came in around 7 am and left at 4 or 5 pm sharp every day, then logged hours from home. It required them to set firm boundaries with the partners, but they were able to do it. I had a harder time setting boundaries, but that is me. Might that work for you?

Exhibits A & B of the insane schedules referred to earlier, IMO (see 1st paragraph above)....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:pp here ... IMO/IME to bill 40 you have to work 60+ every week, if you bill honestly.

+1. I loved the substance of my Big Law job but 60+ hours a week to [barely] make the annual billables requirement was no fun. When you're at work you feel guilty for not being home, and then when you need to be home you feel guilty for leaving work. That said, there was more support -- e.g., marketing, collections, opportunities to pick up spare projects -- than I imagine would be available at a smaller firm. (I've never been at a mid-size, though: went from Big Law to govt.)

Maybe you could find a staff attorney or other non-partner-track position with a lower billable requirement? Or, have you looked at those no-overhead firms, like Axiom?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:pp here ... IMO/IME to bill 40 you have to work 60+ every week, if you bill honestly.

+1. I loved the substance of my Big Law job but 60+ hours a week to [barely] make the annual billables requirement was no fun. When you're at work you feel guilty for not being home, and then when you need to be home you feel guilty for leaving work. That said, there was more support -- e.g., marketing, collections, opportunities to pick up spare projects -- than I imagine would be available at a smaller firm. (I've never been at a mid-size, though: went from Big Law to govt.)

Maybe you could find a staff attorney or other non-partner-track position with a lower billable requirement? Or, have you looked at those no-overhead firms, like Axiom?

Ugh, don't do the staff attorney route. They do all the shit work and get no respect. At least at my BigLaw firm, they were pretty much viewed as expendable doc review machines. They got paid only slightly more than the most experienced paralegals, and put in crazy hours -- not like the associates, but easily 50 hours per week. And they seemed miserable and were the first to be blamed if any problems arose. I'd be a paralegal before I'd be a staff attorney. But actually, I'd probably get out of law altogether before I'd be either. And I love being an attorney.