Reply to Go inhouse or stay at firm?

Forum Index » Jobs and Careers

Reply to "Go inhouse or stay at firm?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I'm interviewing for an in house gig and stumbled upon this thread. It's creepily similar to my situation of choosing between reduced hours big law and in house, including the change from walking and metro to driving. However, the salary difference is not quite so bad, more like 80% of what I'm making now. If OP is still around, are you happy you stayed with biglaw? My concern about staying is that I don't think I'll make equity partner and I think non equity partner and counsel positions are very vulnerable. I'm leaning toward taking the in house gig.[/quote]

This is an excellent article on this subject.

http://www.bcgsearch.com/article/60637/The-dark-Side-Of-Going-In-House/[/quote]

Actually, that article sucks.  That guy is crazy - look at some of his other columns. He clearly is biased in favor of firms, and on some points, he's just wrong.  Once you've gone in-house, it's easier to get other in-house jobs.  Your skills don't deteriorate, you just build different skills.[/quote]

The article is brutally honest but true on many points if you are at the highest levels of big law.   When you are in-house, the most interesting and challenging cases will be farmed out to outside counsel.    It might be a "different" skill set but not necessarily one that you even want to build if you are used to being in the thick of things.   It's like being a baseball player as opposed to working as a scout for a baseball team.    [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics