Junior associate at Big Law -- help!

[Anonymous]

Op you need the money. Don’t leave until you have at least two years at this firm at which point you’ll be marketable. Then, if you still need the money, switch to a firm with a lower minimum hours requirement or better yet, if you can get in, a firm without a hard billable hours requirement.

FWIW, I’ve been in biglaw 10 years and don’t know of anyone at my firm getting fired for low hours who was billing 1,800. You should be very profitable for the firm at that level even if that’s below target.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ PP here, this made it sound like I was my DH's SAHM. Gross! I was multitasking. I'm a SAHM, DH is a successful big law attorney.

It's probably accurate in a way, right? As a working mom I already manage so much for my husband. If I stayed at home I'm sure I'd be responsible for even more. I'd more or less be his mommy.

[Anonymous]

Haven't read the replies but I survived Big Law and made it to partner while having 2 babies and a DH going through residency and now working very long hours. It is really terrible and, no, your life is not going to get better. Also, there is almost zero benefit to reducing your hours unless you work in a field of law where client demands are light. Otherwise, despite the best intentions of the firm, you will end up working more than your expectations and not getting paid the difference.

If your DH isn't able to cut way back and be the primary parent, then you need an amazing nanny or close family help. Or, get out now and go to government.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to a successful big law attorney. There's lots of good advice on this thread, much better than I can give. But I do want to add that DH and I made the choice we did for our individual family, but we consider ourselves feminists and we OFTEN lament that there aren't more women with SAH husbands in big law. Or even women with husbands who work very part-time and take on the brunt of the work at home like a SAH parent would. They just don't exist. And it sucks. It sucks for women everywhere. SAHMs are not going away. What big law needs is more SAHDs.

So, without knowing anything about your personal situation, I would consider discussing it as an option with your DH, if he is so inclined. It makes a world of difference to have one spouse who takes care of everything else and one spouse who can focus on work. It makes the big law job really not so crazy.

No, what big law needs are more senior partners and decision-makers who are involved in the daily grind in their house and have actual daily responsibilities for their home and children. It's amazing how much inefficiency and self-generated crisis exist in big firms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, is your degree/clerkship recent enough that you are still eligible for PMF, honors attorney, and other government entry programs? (yes, they are competitive)

Have you looked at state and local government?
Local small firms? State bar or similar organizations who hire lawyers on staff?
Called your school's placement office?

If an honors attorney position is possible, I'd jump all over it. Have you looked at the US Postal Service? They don't advertise on USA Jobs, but they tend to hire often. I'd also call your school's placement office and see if you can get a government contact at a place you're interested in (you haven't listed your practice area?). DOJ isn't the only game in government, especially if what you're looking for is a job that is fulfilling but also gives you time to spend with your family. Having gov contacts can help you hear about possible job openings before they happen, and how to put yourself in the best position to be hired.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to a successful big law attorney. There's lots of good advice on this thread, much better than I can give. But I do want to add that DH and I made the choice we did for our individual family, but we consider ourselves feminists and we OFTEN lament that there aren't more women with SAH husbands in big law. Or even women with husbands who work very part-time and take on the brunt of the work at home like a SAH parent would. They just don't exist. And it sucks. It sucks for women everywhere. SAHMs are not going away. What big law needs is more SAHDs.

So, without knowing anything about your personal situation, I would consider discussing it as an option with your DH, if he is so inclined. It makes a world of difference to have one spouse who takes care of everything else and one spouse who can focus on work. It makes the big law job really not so crazy.

No, what big law needs are more senior partners and decision-makers who are involved in the daily grind in their house and have actual daily responsibilities for their home and children. It's amazing how much inefficiency and self-generated crisis exist in big firms.

PP here. DH is involved in the daily grind and has actual daily responsibilities. He's also at an extremely family-friendly firm. I find it so offensive when people assume you can't be a higher-up unless you sacrifice your entire family life.

BUT if a work emergency comes up, if he needs to travel, if a call runs late - not a big deal. Things run just as smoothly in that situation.

Women need husbands who support their jobs the way men have women who support their jobs.

[Anonymous]

What a horrid profession....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to a successful big law attorney. There's lots of good advice on this thread, much better than I can give. But I do want to add that DH and I made the choice we did for our individual family, but we consider ourselves feminists and we OFTEN lament that there aren't more women with SAH husbands in big law. Or even women with husbands who work very part-time and take on the brunt of the work at home like a SAH parent would. They just don't exist. And it sucks. It sucks for women everywhere. SAHMs are not going away. What big law needs is more SAHDs.

So, without knowing anything about your personal situation, I would consider discussing it as an option with your DH, if he is so inclined. It makes a world of difference to have one spouse who takes care of everything else and one spouse who can focus on work. It makes the big law job really not so crazy.

No, what big law needs are more senior partners and decision-makers who are involved in the daily grind in their house and have actual daily responsibilities for their home and children. It's amazing how much inefficiency and self-generated crisis exist in big firms.

PP here. DH is involved in the daily grind and has actual daily responsibilities. He's also at an extremely family-friendly firm. I find it so offensive when people assume you can't be a higher-up unless you sacrifice your entire family life.

BUT if a work emergency comes up, if he needs to travel, if a call runs late - not a big deal. Things run just as smoothly in that situation.

Women need husbands who support their jobs the way men have women who support their jobs.

I disagree. Women and men need to be treated as equals. I don't want my DH to have to stay home to support my career. I want him to have his own professional fulfillment. For me, the best world would be one where work women and men are both supported as parents and employees. The alternative--make a spouse stay home--will strongly favor men's careers, and again does not permit both partners professional fulfillment, and will always be a race to the bottom of who is willing to put in the longest hours and disregard their personal life the most.

While your arrangement may be the best for your family, it is not one that supports the fight of women like me that are trying to succeed in BigLaw...and your suggestion of just have your husband stay home doesn't solve the problem.

Finally, I have a bit of axe to grind with these posts of "BigLaw wives." If you aren't in the trenches day-to-day, you just don't really know what it is like. I feel a lot of sympathy for OP because I have been where OP is at.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to a successful big law attorney. There's lots of good advice on this thread, much better than I can give. But I do want to add that DH and I made the choice we did for our individual family, but we consider ourselves feminists and we OFTEN lament that there aren't more women with SAH husbands in big law. Or even women with husbands who work very part-time and take on the brunt of the work at home like a SAH parent would. They just don't exist. And it sucks. It sucks for women everywhere. SAHMs are not going away. What big law needs is more SAHDs.

So, without knowing anything about your personal situation, I would consider discussing it as an option with your DH, if he is so inclined. It makes a world of difference to have one spouse who takes care of everything else and one spouse who can focus on work. It makes the big law job really not so crazy.

No, what big law needs are more senior partners and decision-makers who are involved in the daily grind in their house and have actual daily responsibilities for their home and children. It's amazing how much inefficiency and self-generated crisis exist in big firms.

PP here. DH is involved in the daily grind and has actual daily responsibilities. He's also at an extremely family-friendly firm. I find it so offensive when people assume you can't be a higher-up unless you sacrifice your entire family life.

BUT if a work emergency comes up, if he needs to travel, if a call runs late - not a big deal. Things run just as smoothly in that situation.

Women need husbands who support their jobs the way men have women who support their jobs.

I disagree. Women and men need to be treated as equals. I don't want my DH to have to stay home to support my career. I want him to have his own professional fulfillment. For me, the best world would be one where work women and men are both supported as parents and employees. The alternative--make a spouse stay home--will strongly favor men's careers, and again does not permit both partners professional fulfillment, and will always be a race to the bottom of who is willing to put in the longest hours and disregard their personal life the most.

While your arrangement may be the best for your family, it is not one that supports the fight of women like me that are trying to succeed in BigLaw...and your suggestion of just have your husband stay home doesn't solve the problem.

Finally, I have a bit of axe to grind with these posts of "BigLaw wives." If you aren't in the trenches day-to-day, you just don't really know what it is like. I feel a lot of sympathy for OP because I have been where OP is at.

I agree. It's infuriating for an armchair quarterbacking SAHM to weigh in on the career situation of a woman who a) has pride in her career and b) needs to work financially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to a successful big law attorney. There's lots of good advice on this thread, much better than I can give. But I do want to add that DH and I made the choice we did for our individual family, but we consider ourselves feminists and we OFTEN lament that there aren't more women with SAH husbands in big law. Or even women with husbands who work very part-time and take on the brunt of the work at home like a SAH parent would. They just don't exist. And it sucks. It sucks for women everywhere. SAHMs are not going away. What big law needs is more SAHDs.

So, without knowing anything about your personal situation, I would consider discussing it as an option with your DH, if he is so inclined. It makes a world of difference to have one spouse who takes care of everything else and one spouse who can focus on work. It makes the big law job really not so crazy.

No, what big law needs are more senior partners and decision-makers who are involved in the daily grind in their house and have actual daily responsibilities for their home and children. It's amazing how much inefficiency and self-generated crisis exist in big firms.

Exactly. Please stop, PP. What Biglaw needs is to do away with the ridiculous self-imposed culture of MORE MORE MORE!

Also, what you describe is not, to me, a marriage. A partnership or business arrangement, maybe.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to a successful big law attorney. There's lots of good advice on this thread, much better than I can give. But I do want to add that DH and I made the choice we did for our individual family, but we consider ourselves feminists and we OFTEN lament that there aren't more women with SAH husbands in big law. Or even women with husbands who work very part-time and take on the brunt of the work at home like a SAH parent would. They just don't exist. And it sucks. It sucks for women everywhere. SAHMs are not going away. What big law needs is more SAHDs.

So, without knowing anything about your personal situation, I would consider discussing it as an option with your DH, if he is so inclined. It makes a world of difference to have one spouse who takes care of everything else and one spouse who can focus on work. It makes the big law job really not so crazy.

No, what big law needs are more senior partners and decision-makers who are involved in the daily grind in their house and have actual daily responsibilities for their home and children. It's amazing how much inefficiency and self-generated crisis exist in big firms.

YES. As the also-working wife of a mid-level big law associate, I couldn't agree more. Partners have stay at home spouses, which means they see no issue committing to fast (typically overnight or weekend) turnarounds of things the client doesn't even care about (especially easy since they aren't the ones actually doing the work!) The solution isn't more stay at home spouses of either gender, it's partners who understand that making everything a firedrill 1. makes any kind of work-life balance impossible and pushes out any associate who wants needs that kind of balance and 2. doesn't really buy you that much with the clients anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to a successful big law attorney. There's lots of good advice on this thread, much better than I can give. But I do want to add that DH and I made the choice we did for our individual family, but we consider ourselves feminists and we OFTEN lament that there aren't more women with SAH husbands in big law. Or even women with husbands who work very part-time and take on the brunt of the work at home like a SAH parent would. They just don't exist. And it sucks. It sucks for women everywhere. SAHMs are not going away. What big law needs is more SAHDs.

So, without knowing anything about your personal situation, I would consider discussing it as an option with your DH, if he is so inclined. It makes a world of difference to have one spouse who takes care of everything else and one spouse who can focus on work. It makes the big law job really not so crazy.

No, what big law needs are more senior partners and decision-makers who are involved in the daily grind in their house and have actual daily responsibilities for their home and children. It's amazing how much inefficiency and self-generated crisis exist in big firms.

PP here. DH is involved in the daily grind and has actual daily responsibilities. He's also at an extremely family-friendly firm. I find it so offensive when people assume you can't be a higher-up unless you sacrifice your entire family life.

BUT if a work emergency comes up, if he needs to travel, if a call runs late - not a big deal. Things run just as smoothly in that situation.

Women need husbands who support their jobs the way men have women who support their jobs.

I disagree. Women and men need to be treated as equals. I don't want my DH to have to stay home to support my career. I want him to have his own professional fulfillment. For me, the best world would be one where work women and men are both supported as parents and employees. The alternative--make a spouse stay home--will strongly favor men's careers, and again does not permit both partners professional fulfillment, and will always be a race to the bottom of who is willing to put in the longest hours and disregard their personal life the most.

While your arrangement may be the best for your family, it is not one that supports the fight of women like me that are trying to succeed in BigLaw...and your suggestion of just have your husband stay home doesn't solve the problem.

Finally, I have a bit of axe to grind with these posts of "BigLaw wives." If you aren't in the trenches day-to-day, you just don't really know what it is like. I feel a lot of sympathy for OP because I have been where OP is at.

I was a big law attorney, dh is a surgeon. I have seen zero people successfully juggle two hours intensive careers without one spouse downsizing their career or the parents outsourcing tbe childcare almost entirely. I have seen many men take the less demanding job or stay home. Having two parents work 60 hours plus a week is not compatible with a positive environment for kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What a horrid profession....

It's really not as dire as many on here make it sound.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a SAHM to a successful big law attorney. There's lots of good advice on this thread, much better than I can give. But I do want to add that DH and I made the choice we did for our individual family, but we consider ourselves feminists and we OFTEN lament that there aren't more women with SAH husbands in big law. Or even women with husbands who work very part-time and take on the brunt of the work at home like a SAH parent would. They just don't exist. And it sucks. It sucks for women everywhere. SAHMs are not going away. What big law needs is more SAHDs.

So, without knowing anything about your personal situation, I would consider discussing it as an option with your DH, if he is so inclined. It makes a world of difference to have one spouse who takes care of everything else and one spouse who can focus on work. It makes the big law job really not so crazy.

No, what big law needs are more senior partners and decision-makers who are involved in the daily grind in their house and have actual daily responsibilities for their home and children. It's amazing how much inefficiency and self-generated crisis exist in big firms.

PP here. DH is involved in the daily grind and has actual daily responsibilities. He's also at an extremely family-friendly firm. I find it so offensive when people assume you can't be a higher-up unless you sacrifice your entire family life.

BUT if a work emergency comes up, if he needs to travel, if a call runs late - not a big deal. Things run just as smoothly in that situation.

Women need husbands who support their jobs the way men have women who support their jobs.

I disagree. Women and men need to be treated as equals. I don't want my DH to have to stay home to support my career. I want him to have his own professional fulfillment. For me, the best world would be one where work women and men are both supported as parents and employees. The alternative--make a spouse stay home--will strongly favor men's careers, and again does not permit both partners professional fulfillment, and will always be a race to the bottom of who is willing to put in the longest hours and disregard their personal life the most.

While your arrangement may be the best for your family, it is not one that supports the fight of women like me that are trying to succeed in BigLaw...and your suggestion of just have your husband stay home doesn't solve the problem.

Finally, I have a bit of axe to grind with these posts of "BigLaw wives." If you aren't in the trenches day-to-day, you just don't really know what it is like. I feel a lot of sympathy for OP because I have been where OP is at.

I was a big law attorney, dh is a surgeon. I have seen zero people successfully juggle two hours intensive careers without one spouse downsizing their career or the parents outsourcing tbe childcare almost entirely. I have seen many men take the less demanding job or stay home. Having two parents work 60 hours plus a week is not compatible with a positive environment for kids.

I am the PP above. Yes I agree it is not compatible with a positive environment for kids. But what I think would be ideal is a work culture that supports 2 parents working more manageable schedules. It may not happen but that is where I think our culture should aspire, not forcing one person--male or female--to stay home. My dream is not for my husband to have to put his career aspirations aside so I can survive professionally (although ultimately we have to do that, but I wouldn't call that what women should aspire to).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:YES. As the also-working wife of a mid-level big law associate, I couldn't agree more. Partners have stay at home spouses, which means they see no issue committing to fast (typically overnight or weekend) turnarounds of things the client doesn't even care about (especially easy since they aren't the ones actually doing the work!) The solution isn't more stay at home spouses of either gender, it's partners who understand that making everything a firedrill 1. makes any kind of work-life balance impossible and pushes out any associate who wants needs that kind of balance and 2. doesn't really buy you that much with the clients anyway.

I'm a mid-level too, and maybe I'm just extremely fortunate based on practice areas and colleagues, but I virtually never encounter unnecessary fire drills. There have been a few that turned out to be unnecessary after-the-fact, but there was no way to know in advance and the work had to be done to be prepared. Just the regular old necessary work, managed reasonably, is more than enough to keep unexpected things coming up and to require a spouse who is available to step up on a moment's notice. My husband fills that role, with backup from a network of extended family and a bench of babysitters, even though he works full time.