dads/moms with "professional careers": do you eat dinner with family on weekdays?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:dad here, lawyer at midsize firm. zero chance I am home in Vienna before 7:30pm. and a few times a month, or more, I have board meetings, business development, etc. When I was in biglaw it would have been impossible to get home before 9pm.

So let me know, and if the answer is what I expect, how do you explain to your family?

No, we do not eat dinner with family during the week. BigLaw x2. We do not eat dinner as a family during the week except on very rare occasions. We tried family breakfast for awhile, but once the kids had to be at the bus stop at 7:30 a.m., that stopped working.

There is nothing to "explain" to my family. This is how it is.

No. This is not "how it is." This is your choice, BigLaw x2 was not ust dumped on you.

Not that you have to explain it if you don't feel that's necessary, but you are not a passive recipient of this life either.

Ditto this.

OP - I feel for you and if you can do later dinners, I would definitely swing it. My father was never around for dinners during the week growing up and it left an impression on me. We typically eat between 6:30 and 7:15, except for Wednesday, when overlapping kid's activites prevent us from eating together.

[Anonymous]

Perspective! It's not the end of the world. I hardly saw my father when I was growing up but loved and respected him for working hard to make our family comfortable.

We have always eaten dinner as a family because our hours happen to coincide, but I really think it's not that important. If the rest of the parenting is in place, who cares???

[Anonymous]

I just can't believe a person who says their only job choices are (a) the $300K job that does not allow time for being home at dinner, (b) $50K job or (c) unemployment.

That doesn't seem logical to me. And if I had a job making $300K and I couldn't see my kids at least 2 hours per day (most days of the week), I would definitely find a new job and a new lifestyle. You just can't outsource being there and you don't get to write rainchecks for time spent together.

Cat's in the cradle???

[Anonymous]

Ditto. My father worked 2nd shift and was never home for family dinners or anything else after school. No father was more respected and loved than my father.

My SAHM, who was always at home, not so much. There is nothing magic about eating dinner together with the family on weekdays.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:dad here, lawyer at midsize firm. zero chance I am home in Vienna before 7:30pm. and a few times a month, or more, I have board meetings, business development, etc. When I was in biglaw it would have been impossible to get home before 9pm.

So let me know, and if the answer is what I expect, how do you explain to your family?

DH and I are both practicing lawyers, both working full time. We make it a family priority to eat dinner together as a family every night. We eat at 6:30. Coincidentally, we also live in Vienna, and my DH commutes to DC.

We do this by declining evening obligations as much as possible, going to work super early, working at home after dinner and being happy with secure but low to medium powered careers. Our HHI is over $300,000 though so not any financial sacrifice to do it this way.

this is the OP. getting to work early would not make a difference, unless I could change all of my co-workers and clients. I need to be there when they need me. and yes, if your combined HHI is $300K you are making a sacrifice. That is fine for you and I'm happy it works out, but my target in a few years is approx $350-400K or so myself. besides, it cuts my commute in half if I can get on 66.

Hey OP, I'm sorry to be judgmental since you are obviously trying to make more family time but $300K HHI is not a "sacrifice." If you want to pursue your career goals of making $350k-400k, then unless you are in charge of your own schedule, in most jobs, clearly you are not making it home for family dinner at 6pm. I am the PP who is a 2 lawyer family who has dinner at 6pm nearly every night. Our HHI is probably $250k. We own a house in DC, have 30 minute commutes via metro and have zero financial stress. I would not trade in our comfortable life (including family dinners) to make an extra $150k. But you do. You can't have it all.

OP here, and I will catch up on the rest of this thread - but wanted to respond to this one. for my career, there is not much middle ground possible. I would KILL for an in-house $200K type job. I've tried and tried, but I cannot get one. The market is impossible for people with my skillset and credentials (transactional, finance, corporate, real estate type stuff). I will continue to try. So for now, I can either advance (small firm) or get canned, not much in between. Not too many non-equity types at my firm. Besides, its not that hard to make equity where I am, and they don't work hard at all, and do make $400Kish. That would be the ideal life for my family. Comfortable good place to work and very family friendly. I can get there. But I've been laid off before and would rather not take that risk again. It is a real risk.

Then why were you so mean to the PP who said her HHI was 300k? Something doesn't add up here.

that came out wrong. I apologize. Its not that I am driven to make more money, it is that there is honestly no other career path for me right now. Either I work hard, develop clients and bill hours and make equity partner at boutique type firms (or try to land another biglaw job and work even longer hours as a non-equity or senior counsel type), or I go to plan B. And there really is no plan B. So I cannot be satisfied with that because it is not an option. I need to keep a roof for my kids, that is #1.

I get this, and it makes you more likeable (and your position more understandable). If you can't be home for dinner, try to find other ways to integrate into the family. Can you give baths? Read books at night? Put the kids to bed?

Is your spouse okay with your work schedule, or is that part of the problem that you are trying to address?

[Anonymous]

NP. I don't want to derail the conversation, but I'm curious about something. I'm always amazed at how many lawyers post on DCUM. Given how many hours most of them say they work, how do they find that much time to post on DCUM?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are all you government lawyers who get out so early? DH is a fed lawyer and he never gets home before 6:45/7:15.

What time does he start, and does he have a long commute? Does he take a long lunch, or just get his 8.5 hours in and get out?

gets in by 8:30, eats lunch at desk. he doesn't just clock in and out - i think therein lies the problem - he still has the firm mentality of having a solid work ethic and not just clocking out... it actually bothers me that so many ppl want to work govt to have an easier lifestyle - its so obvious to me (a non-lawyer) that he public sector is so much less efficient b/c there is this notion about 8.5 hour days and then you're done. and these are the ppl fighting the bad guys - they shoul;d be working harder than the firm guys...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just can't believe a person who says their only job choices are (a) the $300K job that does not allow time for being home at dinner, (b) $50K job or (c) unemployment.

That doesn't seem logical to me. And if I had a job making $300K and I couldn't see my kids at least 2 hours per day (most days of the week), I would definitely find a new job and a new lifestyle. You just can't outsource being there and you don't get to write rainchecks for time spent together.

Cat's in the cradle???

why is it not logical? I've applied for countless govt and in-house jobs. My skillset is unique. Do you think securitized lending is really big these days? Do you think in-house jobs are easy to get? There are thousands of uberqualifed biglaw refugees looking for those jobs, and most have much better credentials than me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I just can't believe a person who says their only job choices are (a) the $300K job that does not allow time for being home at dinner, (b) $50K job or (c) unemployment.

That doesn't seem logical to me. And if I had a job making $300K and I couldn't see my kids at least 2 hours per day (most days of the week), I would definitely find a new job and a new lifestyle. You just can't outsource being there and you don't get to write rainchecks for time spent together.

Cat's in the cradle???

why is it not logical? I've applied for countless govt and in-house jobs. My skillset is unique. Do you think securitized lending is really big these days? Do you think in-house jobs are easy to get? There are thousands of uberqualifed biglaw refugees looking for those jobs, and most have much better credentials than me.

Just to back up the OP - my DH has a similar skill set and has an in-house position. It took him many, many interviews to get such a position, and he has a fabulous resume, along with terrific networking and interviewing skills.

Btw, many in-house positions are not as cushy as you'd think - they are often 50-55 hours per week, with a massive paycut from the firm life. It's not like he could just pick a job with fewer hours for $240K. It's more likely that he'd make $150-180K - IF he could get the job.

[Anonymous]

What's wrong with making $150K or $100K or $80K? If it is important to you to have a life outside of work, you take a job that is less demanding.

When you're surrounded by people making $300K or more, you think you have to stay in that realm... but there is a world outside of the $300K professionals.

(You CAN live a different life, but maybe it doesn't match up with the prestige that you've always thought you were suppose to get.) This town is overflowing with people chasing the big cheese -- I think West Coast people look to enjoy life more than East Coasters -- which is why the East Coast has such an uptight/workaholic reputation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What's wrong with making $150K or $100K or $80K? If it is important to you to have a life outside of work, you take a job that is less demanding.

When you're surrounded by people making $300K or more, you think you have to stay in that realm... but there is a world outside of the $300K professionals.

(You CAN live a different life, but maybe it doesn't match up with the prestige that you've always thought you were suppose to get.) This town is overflowing with people chasing the big cheese -- I think West Coast people look to enjoy life more than East Coasters -- which is why the East Coast has such an uptight/workaholic reputation.

I'm the PP. Here's what I meant:

1. The hours in in-house positions are not cushy. He still might miss dinner half the time.

2. The paycut might force the family to move, different schools, etc. That's a big deal for elementary kids. Not saying it's the end of the world, but see #1. They would get only a marginal increase in Dad Time.

3. These positions are very hard to get. It could easily take 2 years or more to get one, even he tries really hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. I don't want to derail the conversation, but I'm curious about something. I'm always amazed at how many lawyers post on DCUM. Given how many hours most of them say they work, how do they find that much time to post on DCUM?

A lot of time I'm on a conference call listening but not speaking. Also, I'm often waiting for my secretary to turn around draft documents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who are all you government lawyers who get out so early? DH is a fed lawyer and he never gets home before 6:45/7:15.

What time does he start, and does he have a long commute? Does he take a long lunch, or just get his 8.5 hours in and get out?

gets in by 8:30, eats lunch at desk. he doesn't just clock in and out - i think therein lies the problem - he still has the firm mentality of having a solid work ethic and not just clocking out... it actually bothers me that so many ppl want to work govt to have an easier lifestyle - its so obvious to me (a non-lawyer) that he public sector is so much less efficient b/c there is this notion about 8.5 hour days and then you're done. and these are the ppl fighting the bad guys - they shoul;d be working harder than the firm guys...

Is 8:30 the earliest he can start? If he started at 6:30am, he could leave at 3pm. I start at 6:45 and leave at 3:15; I much prefer that, even though getting up early stinks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I don't want to derail the conversation, but I'm curious about something. I'm always amazed at how many lawyers post on DCUM. Given how many hours most of them say they work, how do they find that much time to post on DCUM?

A lot of time I'm on a conference call listening but not speaking. Also, I'm often waiting for my secretary to turn around draft documents.

Ditto.

[Anonymous]

Mom of toddler, working at big law firm. Home every day by 6 - in exchange for being back online by 8:30 (after DC's bed time) most nights. I've missed dinner for work reasons maybe 5 times in 2012. I do expect this will get a lot harder as I get more senior - I'm not yet the one trapped in a conference room prepping a witness until the lead partner decides we can finally go home. It also helps that I've wound up on a team with fellow parents who share my desire to start early and go home early, rather than some of my single colleagues who roll in around 10am and stay late to catch up.