Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Several SLC in my DOJ office left (before DOGE) to be partners in Biglaw firms. Both failed spectacularly. Less recently a friend left to be the workhorse partner to a big-gov-name partner; they worked very hard and became quite successful. I know another lawyer who succeeded beautifully as a big law partner post-DOJ, but they were in an high profile appointed position, and had been a partner in a different firm before that.
This is excellent info. Some attorneys can pull in business because they had a huge title in govt (e.g. head of DOJ white collar crime, head of an agency).
But most government attorneys affected by Project 2025 and Trump don’t fall into that category.
All of those attorneys are now trying to chart a career path forward.
Anonymous wrote:Several SLC in my DOJ office left (before DOGE) to be partners in Biglaw firms. Both failed spectacularly. Less recently a friend left to be the workhorse partner to a big-gov-name partner; they worked very hard and became quite successful. I know another lawyer who succeeded beautifully as a big law partner post-DOJ, but they were in an high profile appointed position, and had been a partner in a different firm before that.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Related to this, how much mentoring or training is there for government attorneys to lead to make billable hours?
Government attorneys have the subject matter expertise but I always wonder how they can adapt to that expectation.
You don’t need that much mentoring for billables you just need to be willing and able to put in *and track* the time.
The harder skill and more important skill is developing business
Anonymous wrote:Related to this, how much mentoring or training is there for government attorneys to lead to make billable hours?
Government attorneys have the subject matter expertise but I always wonder how they can adapt to that expectation.
Anonymous wrote:Related to this, how much mentoring or training is there for government attorneys to lead to make billable hours?
Government attorneys have the subject matter expertise but I always wonder how they can adapt to that expectation.
Anonymous wrote:This is pretty common. Firms all have two tiers of partnership. NEP is just glorified senior associate, pay is very similar, only difference is title. We promote everyone at year 7 or 8, so the partners are really young and more often than not they aren't particularly experts and still need a lot of oversight and hand holding.
So when we need more bodies to get work done, we want to hire in the sweet spot of years 3-10. More senior than useless first years, but no expectation of bringing their own work. So if we hire at years 8-10, they probably get brought in as partners. But everyone knows what the deal is.