Are govt lawyer jobs more flexible in terms of time, and is it worth the huge pay cut?

[Anonymous]

Here's my question: How easy is it to find a "family-friendly" and flexible hours arrangement in government, and for how many years do you have to pay your dues before you get this flexibility?

Right now, I am an associate at a big law firm making almost $200K. I do employment work. The hours, although unpredictible and occasionally insane, are not impossible. I'm not a junior associate, and so I have autoonomy and an interesting practice. I generally enjoy my job and my work but I'm just not sure what the "end goal" of this position is.

Eventually, in 3-4 years (if not sooner), I would like to be able to work 3-4 days a week and/or work from home so that I can spend more time with our son (and our second kid, assuming this happens).

I recognize that a federal job now would not provide "instant" flexibility from the start. However, in 3-4 years time, would I be able to have more flexibility in a govt job so that I could have more time with my children and participate in their school events? Does this depend on the job/supervisor? How easy is it to move from one govt lawyer job to another ( I do employment work )?

Is getting a fed govt job worth the enormous pay cut I would take?

[Anonymous]

I would say it varies greatly depending on supervisor. You will likely be able to do a flex schedule and telework once a week fairly early on if others in your group do it. I would get a good understanding of the state of affairs before accepting an offer. Part time may take more time is very doable in many places in the government. Good luck - I gave up biglaw for the government five years ago and am so much happier. Sitting on my couch as I type this (telework day).

[Anonymous]

It definitely depends on your job and supervisor within government. I'm not allowed to telecommute nor is anyone in my division.

[Anonymous]

I agree with the pps. I have two friends who are lawyers for the govt. One with Patent and Trademark and one with Homeland Security (Immigration law). The Patent and Trademark lawyer seems to have a much more strict schedule than the immigration lawyer. After working there for 2 years, she is allowed to work one day a week at home. She always seems very busy and sometimes works overtime. The immigration lawyer was able to work at home full time from the start, except for having to go in 1 day every two weeks. She seems to have a TON of flexibility with her schedule and is often doing things during the work day that don't relate to work. I am sure this is not what the govt intends her to do, but she gets her work done on time and has gotten good reviews. So, it really depends where you work.

[Anonymous]

I was a lawyer at a gov agency and I moved to another, and took a pay cut, to have a job that will let me work from home 3-4 days a week or work part-time after a year here.

I have been with 2 agencies and been offered a position at a third agency and only my current agency allows telecommuting after a year.

[Anonymous]

I have a friend who does employment law at an agency. She is able to work part-time and from home, but she had been there a while before she requested to do so. Her job seems pretty flexible, i.e., she can leave early without taking leave if something comes up, but because the job involves litigation, she sometimes has to work late and on weekends. It seems there is a demand for employment lawyers in federal agencies, more so than the "mission" attorneys, and over the years, employment law attorneys seems to be able to move around more easily because the law is generally the same from agency to agency. Good luck!

[Anonymous]

If you're working as an employment lawyer for an agency (defending the agency), you're going to have less flexibility because you're going to have to be at hearings, depositions, settlement conferences, etc. at times when the judge or opposing counsel or your clients need you there. If you work someplace doing more policy work, like the department of labor or NLRB you may have more flexibility. At least, I have a friend at NLRB who has lots of flexibility - AWS, work from home, etc. Not as sure about Labor.

[Anonymous]

here's a question of a different sort - what's the career path in your current firm? is it up-or-out? most of the firms i've heard about expect you to either become a partner or leave as you advance. there are some firms that have senior non-equity associates who aren't expected to advance or leave. a friend of mine just accepted a position at one of them - most of the associates are women, several of whom have young kids. apparently there's some flexibility there, but the salary is still higher than government. (salary depends on how many hours you bill.) it might be worth staying in the private sector if you can find a gig like that.

[Anonymous]

Yes and Yes!

I left BigLaw after only 4 yrs, have been with the gov't for 10 yrs, and could not be happier. I had my first child after about 14 months on the job, returned to work part-time, and have been part-time ever since. I have taken long stretches of maternity leave 3 times and they kept my job for me.

It depends on the type of law you practice, but I moved from employment law to a financial regulatory agency because I hated litigation. Now I do exclusively regulatory and legislative work, no litigation at all, which works for me! And I find the deadlines/scheduling to be very manageable since it is not driven by a court and I usually have a pretty long lead time on things. In the current environment of the financial crisis, we find ourselves being asked for quicker turnarounds on proposals, etc., but that is not the normal pace for me and it's ok every once in a while.

It also depends on your agency and the culture. Mine is small so somewhat less bureaucratic, and there were a few part-timers in my group before me, so there was precedent for it. I find that if you are a good performer, they want to keep you and therefore want to accomodate your needs to the extent they can.

I have no idea what your financial situation is or what level you would be entering federal service (maybe GS 13/14, but the fed job market is tight now so you might have to be willing to come in lower than your credentials merit, just to get in the door), so I can't speak to whether your particular pay cut would be "worth it" for you. I took my big pay cut before kids, and Dh remained in a law firm, we had no debt and were just renting an apt at the time, so we did not have many expenses. So the pay cut was very easy to absorb and we knew it was part of our long-term plan for our future family. It would be harder if you have a big mortgage, home and childcare expenses, etc. But to me there's no question it has been worth it. My personality is such that I could not have handled my law firm stress level AND been a mom and dealt with all of the non-work family things I deal with on a daily basis. When I was at my firm, that pretty much consumed me, but it was ok b/c I had nothing else going on. Now I have a LOT going on and I want to leave work AT work, not bring it home with me (unless I'm teleworking, of course!). I really do not work outside of my scheduled hours.

There are non-salary benefits in the government that also affect the financial picture so don't forget about those. The health benefits are excellent and affordable. There is a traditional pension (retirement annuity) - you won't find that anywhere in the private sector anymore! It's not a lot, but it's something. Retirement is a long way away, but if you have federal health benefits when you retire (and meet certain requirements), you can remain in the federal health plan for life, along with your spouse. That is a big deal. So take a look at the full benefits package when making your comparisons.

Telework is a government-wide initiative. Some agencies are dragging their feet and some older managers are very resistant to it, but it is coming to every agency eventually. The telework legislation requires every agency to have a telework policy and a telework coordinator. (Of course they can get around this the way my agency did the first time - by drafting such a crappy telework policy that you could only use it on a day you had to stay home and wait for the cable guy. But our current policy allows "regular recurring telework.") Some jobs aren't suited to telework, but for rank & file attorneys (non-managers) it should be a workable arrangement in most cases. Check OPM's website for more on telework.

[Anonymous]

"Government" is a very broad category. There are lawyers with no flexibility and excessive hours. There are lawyers with dependable hours and flexibility. Some have interesting work, some don't. Be forewarned that any job that you are allowed to completely toss aside one day a week is likely to be less interesting overall.

[Anonymous]

I was in your shoes several years ago -- doing employment law at a big firm -- making $265K, with two young kids at home that I never saw. I, too, would like to go part-time at some point in the future.

I took the pay cut (basically 50%), and I have NEVER EVER regretted it. But I have had two jobs with flexible/professional supervisors. Quite honestly, when I started working ONLY 40 hours a week (instead of 60-70 at the firm), I FELT like I was part-time!

I think you will find that supervisors in federal gov't run the gamut. Some treat you like professionals (with a lot of flexibility), and some treat you like hourly workers. You won't know for sure until you interview (or maybe even until you accept the job). But its worth looking. I love government work. Its all the legal stuff I like without any of the billable hour/business crap.

Its worth looking into.

[Anonymous]

Be forewarned that any job that you are allowed to completely toss aside one day a week is likely to be less interesting overall.

I don't agree with this at all. It's really condescending toward part-timers. I have the exact same job I've always had. I used to do it full-time, and now I do slightly less of it on a part-time basis.

IMO, part-timers (and we're almost all working mothers, so how about some solidarity here?) already have to struggle to prove that we are just as professional and competent as our full-time peers, and it's attitudes like yours, that treat part-time employees like second-class citizens, that hurt all of us who are trying so hard to find a balance for our families while still remaining in our profession in interesting, challenging jobs, where we continue making valuable contributions.

[Anonymous]

Before you go off on me...

I stand by my statement. I'm not saying anyone is second class, and you have NO IDEA what my attitudes are or how I have solved my own "balance" challenges.

The truth is, OP, interesting jobs that you can "turn off" during much of the work week are rare. You have more success finding one if you are willing to compromise on the off-time. What I mean by compromise is to still log in and handle time sensitive things. I'm glad the angry PP has a job she likes. That's great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Before you go off on me...
<snip snip snip> I'm glad the angry PP has a job she likes. That's great.

NP here, and I gotta say 11:13 didn't sound angry at all. Perhaps you're just projecting.

[Anonymous]

Before you go off on me...

I stand by my statement. I'm not saying anyone is second class, and you have NO IDEA what my attitudes are or how I have solved my own "balance" challenges.

The truth is, OP, interesting jobs that you can "turn off" during much of the work week are rare. You have more success finding one if you are willing to compromise on the off-time. What I mean by compromise is to still log in and handle time sensitive things. I'm glad the angry PP has a job she likes. That's great.

I'm not "angry" and didn't mean to come across as such. I am, however, a part-time attorney. Your post states that people who work part-time "toss aside" their jobs on non-work days and to me, that is a negative assumption about how part-time employees treat their jobs. Personally, I check my e-mail multiple times throughout the day on my days off and I do respond to messages that are time-sensitive, call in to the office if I need to speak to someone, etc.

So I'm not "going off on you" nor presuming to know how you've solved your own "balance challenges." But I wanted to be clear that being off one day per week is not "turning off your job for much of the work week" or "tossing the job aside" on the day off. When full-time employees perceive part-timers as being totally unavailable and disconnected from the workplace on days off, it makes being part-time that much more difficult for those who are doing it and for those who may want to do it in the future.

And in fact, many government jobs allow flextime or flexible scheduling in which employees work slightly longer days in exchange for one day off per week or per pay period - and those are full-time jobs.