Anonymous
03/04/2023 23:42
Subject: Re:SEC SK-17 — why would anyone be one?
Bump.
I thought OP's question had been really more.about salary compression given how being a 17 doesn't really pay more than a 16?
I thought OP's question had been really more.about salary compression given how being a 17 doesn't really pay more than a 16?
Anonymous
02/28/2023 11:37
Subject: SEC SK-17 — why would anyone be one?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Depending on your division SK-16 positions are not easy to get. Most attorney roles cap out at SK-14.
I think the SK-15 roles are actually much harder than the 17 roles because you have both production and managerial responsibilities.
Finally, if you take the SK-17 role your private sector exit options will be far greater than as a 14.
Is sk-17 assistant director? From what I've seen, you've got to be at least an assistant director to get partnership at a biglaw firm. Anything lower translates to senior associate / counsel level at best.
Law firms have no idea what they’re doing, then. The responsibilities and skill set of an AD/SK-17 (at least in Enforcement) bear zero resemblance to those of a junior or senior law-firm partner. A smart law firm should want to hire a hard-charging staff attorney (who’s actually been doing substantive legal work and running their cases) rather than a paper-pusher who does little more than approve HR requests and proofreads things.
Sk-17s have a lot of access and relationships to people in power. That's what the firm is paying for
LOL. Which I guess has some minimal value until those people themselves leave the Commission. Which is every few years or less. I suspect that many law firms seriously regret certain hiring decisions, and those former 17s will be the FIRST to go in the next recession. Unless they have a significant book, which is unlikely.
I think you are right, but the chance that you will be able to generate a book of business will be better if you had a higher title/position at the agency. It's not guarantee you will from that senior role or that you won't from a line attorney role, but it would help in pitches.
Anonymous
02/27/2023 13:16
Subject: SEC SK-17 — why would anyone be one?
OP u mad you have to go in 2x every two weeks?
Anonymous
02/27/2023 12:13
Subject: SEC SK-17 — why would anyone be one?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Depending on your division SK-16 positions are not easy to get. Most attorney roles cap out at SK-14.
I think the SK-15 roles are actually much harder than the 17 roles because you have both production and managerial responsibilities.
Finally, if you take the SK-17 role your private sector exit options will be far greater than as a 14.
Is sk-17 assistant director? From what I've seen, you've got to be at least an assistant director to get partnership at a biglaw firm. Anything lower translates to senior associate / counsel level at best.
Law firms have no idea what they’re doing, then. The responsibilities and skill set of an AD/SK-17 (at least in Enforcement) bear zero resemblance to those of a junior or senior law-firm partner. A smart law firm should want to hire a hard-charging staff attorney (who’s actually been doing substantive legal work and running their cases) rather than a paper-pusher who does little more than approve HR requests and proofreads things.
Problem is that sec staff attorneys are a dime a dozen.
Anonymous
02/27/2023 12:10
Subject: SEC SK-17 — why would anyone be one?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Depending on your division SK-16 positions are not easy to get. Most attorney roles cap out at SK-14.
I think the SK-15 roles are actually much harder than the 17 roles because you have both production and managerial responsibilities.
Finally, if you take the SK-17 role your private sector exit options will be far greater than as a 14.
Is sk-17 assistant director? From what I've seen, you've got to be at least an assistant director to get partnership at a biglaw firm. Anything lower translates to senior associate / counsel level at best.
Law firms have no idea what they’re doing, then. The responsibilities and skill set of an AD/SK-17 (at least in Enforcement) bear zero resemblance to those of a junior or senior law-firm partner. A smart law firm should want to hire a hard-charging staff attorney (who’s actually been doing substantive legal work and running their cases) rather than a paper-pusher who does little more than approve HR requests and proofreads things.
You sound bitter
Anonymous
02/27/2023 12:04
Subject: SEC SK-17 — why would anyone be one?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Depending on your division SK-16 positions are not easy to get. Most attorney roles cap out at SK-14.
I think the SK-15 roles are actually much harder than the 17 roles because you have both production and managerial responsibilities.
Finally, if you take the SK-17 role your private sector exit options will be far greater than as a 14.
Is sk-17 assistant director? From what I've seen, you've got to be at least an assistant director to get partnership at a biglaw firm. Anything lower translates to senior associate / counsel level at best.
Law firms have no idea what they’re doing, then. The responsibilities and skill set of an AD/SK-17 (at least in Enforcement) bear zero resemblance to those of a junior or senior law-firm partner. A smart law firm should want to hire a hard-charging staff attorney (who’s actually been doing substantive legal work and running their cases) rather than a paper-pusher who does little more than approve HR requests and proofreads things.
Sk-17s have a lot of access and relationships to people in power. That's what the firm is paying for
LOL. Which I guess has some minimal value until those people themselves leave the Commission. Which is every few years or less. I suspect that many law firms seriously regret certain hiring decisions, and those former 17s will be the FIRST to go in the next recession. Unless they have a significant book, which is unlikely.
Anonymous
02/27/2023 11:05
Subject: SEC SK-17 — why would anyone be one?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Depending on your division SK-16 positions are not easy to get. Most attorney roles cap out at SK-14.
I think the SK-15 roles are actually much harder than the 17 roles because you have both production and managerial responsibilities.
Finally, if you take the SK-17 role your private sector exit options will be far greater than as a 14.
Is sk-17 assistant director? From what I've seen, you've got to be at least an assistant director to get partnership at a biglaw firm. Anything lower translates to senior associate / counsel level at best.
Law firms have no idea what they’re doing, then. The responsibilities and skill set of an AD/SK-17 (at least in Enforcement) bear zero resemblance to those of a junior or senior law-firm partner. A smart law firm should want to hire a hard-charging staff attorney (who’s actually been doing substantive legal work and running their cases) rather than a paper-pusher who does little more than approve HR requests and proofreads things.
Sk-17s have a lot of access and relationships to people in power. That's what the firm is paying for
Anonymous
02/27/2023 10:57
Subject: SEC SK-17 — why would anyone be one?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Depending on your division SK-16 positions are not easy to get. Most attorney roles cap out at SK-14.
I think the SK-15 roles are actually much harder than the 17 roles because you have both production and managerial responsibilities.
Finally, if you take the SK-17 role your private sector exit options will be far greater than as a 14.
Is sk-17 assistant director? From what I've seen, you've got to be at least an assistant director to get partnership at a biglaw firm. Anything lower translates to senior associate / counsel level at best.
Law firms have no idea what they’re doing, then. The responsibilities and skill set of an AD/SK-17 (at least in Enforcement) bear zero resemblance to those of a junior or senior law-firm partner. A smart law firm should want to hire a hard-charging staff attorney (who’s actually been doing substantive legal work and running their cases) rather than a paper-pusher who does little more than approve HR requests and proofreads things.
Anonymous
02/27/2023 10:25
Subject: SEC SK-17 — why would anyone be one?
Anonymous wrote:New to the SEC and just realized that in DC, SK-17s (managers) max out at $261,400 or so. While SK-16s max out at $260,000. So why on earth would anyone choose to be an SK-17 manager, with all the additional headaches that come with it, rather than an SK-16?
Or am I misreading the pay tables?
A lot of people do choose to stay at SK-16. The people who go for the 17s are ambitious and have their eyes on senior officer or private sector jobs.
Anonymous
02/27/2023 10:17
Subject: SEC SK-17 — why would anyone be one?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Depending on your division SK-16 positions are not easy to get. Most attorney roles cap out at SK-14.
I think the SK-15 roles are actually much harder than the 17 roles because you have both production and managerial responsibilities.
Finally, if you take the SK-17 role your private sector exit options will be far greater than as a 14.
Is sk-17 assistant director? From what I've seen, you've got to be at least an assistant director to get partnership at a biglaw firm. Anything lower translates to senior associate / counsel level at best.
Yes, ADs and office chiefs are 17s. I know of at least one LBC (SK-15) that left and was hired as a partner. If you're a 14 with enough years of experience you will probably get a counsel title.
Anonymous
02/27/2023 10:04
Subject: SEC SK-17 — why would anyone be one?
Anonymous wrote:Depending on your division SK-16 positions are not easy to get. Most attorney roles cap out at SK-14.
I think the SK-15 roles are actually much harder than the 17 roles because you have both production and managerial responsibilities.
Finally, if you take the SK-17 role your private sector exit options will be far greater than as a 14.
Is sk-17 assistant director? From what I've seen, you've got to be at least an assistant director to get partnership at a biglaw firm. Anything lower translates to senior associate / counsel level at best.
Anonymous
02/27/2023 09:58
Subject: SEC SK-17 — why would anyone be one?
Depending on your division SK-16 positions are not easy to get. Most attorney roles cap out at SK-14.
I think the SK-15 roles are actually much harder than the 17 roles because you have both production and managerial responsibilities.
Finally, if you take the SK-17 role your private sector exit options will be far greater than as a 14.
I think the SK-15 roles are actually much harder than the 17 roles because you have both production and managerial responsibilities.
Finally, if you take the SK-17 role your private sector exit options will be far greater than as a 14.
Anonymous
02/27/2023 09:57
Subject: SEC SK-17 — why would anyone be one?
Being a manager in the federal government sounds like lots of fun these days. If do it for free!
Anonymous
02/27/2023 09:55
Subject: SEC SK-17 — why would anyone be one?
Anonymous wrote:New to the SEC and just realized that in DC, SK-17s (managers) max out at $261,400 or so. While SK-16s max out at $260,000. So why on earth would anyone choose to be an SK-17 manager, with all the additional headaches that come with it, rather than an SK-16?
Or am I misreading the pay tables?
Perhaps some people want to be managers and help their employees?
Anonymous
02/27/2023 09:39
Subject: SEC SK-17 — why would anyone be one?
New to the SEC and just realized that in DC, SK-17s (managers) max out at $261,400 or so. While SK-16s max out at $260,000. So why on earth would anyone choose to be an SK-17 manager, with all the additional headaches that come with it, rather than an SK-16?
Or am I misreading the pay tables?
Or am I misreading the pay tables?