OP, could help you more with this if you can give more details about the area you practice in and the agencies you are looking at

I will say if you are in corporate/securities and looking to move to SEC - it is fine to mention looking to improve quality of life. But, don't make that your sole reason. A better reason is that you are looking to gain experience that you would otherwise not be able to do (in terms of greater specialization, or working on the front-end - not just reacting - in the rule-making process), and that you are bringing current, real-world experience to the agency.

I know there are some agencies (and some people in some agencies including SEC) who have a chip on their shoulders re BigLaw experience. You need to be sensitive to this and try to read the particular person you are interviewing with. If a person with this type of attitude would be your supervisor, the position won't be a good fit for you anyway.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can mention quality of life as an add-on. Something like:

"I want more responsibility hands-on directly in the field of Securities Law. And of course, I'm looking forward to a more regular schedule."

Honestly, I wouldn't even mention it as an add on. The better hours will come if you get the job, but I'm a federal lawyer and we interview so many people who are dying for the job even if it didn't have better hours. Hiring managers don't want to hear anything that sounds like your anything but 100% committed to getting the job done.

Yeah, I wouldn't mention the hours unless they ask directly. For one thing, some federal lawyer jobs (DOJ, AUSA) actually require very long hours. I assume you will weed those out if you don't want to work like that.

When I transitioned from Biglaw as a fourth-year associate, I talked about wanting to specialize, get more hands-on experience, and have more control over my own cases instead of being fed them piece-meal by a partner. All true. Of course I also looked forward to the more regular hours that come with appellate practice in a small agency, rather than trial practice at a big firm. But I didn't volunteer that information. At one point the interviewer said "I'm sure you know the hours here are much shorter than what you're used to, and the pay is much lower as well" and I then agreed with him that the former was good and the latter was acceptable. It wasn't an issue.

I think this PP provides a good response/talking points. Stress the experience, specialty area, common good, etc. I wouldn't touch the hours/work life balance/schedule with a ten foot pole in the interview phase.

Is this the same person (OP) posting different threads or is this a pervasive thing happening in biglaw right now? (Exodus, passed up for partner, etc.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can mention quality of life as an add-on. Something like:

"I want more responsibility hands-on directly in the field of Securities Law. And of course, I'm looking forward to a more regular schedule."

Honestly, I wouldn't even mention it as an add on. The better hours will come if you get the job, but I'm a federal lawyer and we interview so many people who are dying for the job even if it didn't have better hours. Hiring managers don't want to hear anything that sounds like your anything but 100% committed to getting the job done.

Yeah, I wouldn't mention the hours unless they ask directly. For one thing, some federal lawyer jobs (DOJ, AUSA) actually require very long hours. I assume you will weed those out if you don't want to work like that.

When I transitioned from Biglaw as a fourth-year associate, I talked about wanting to specialize, get more hands-on experience, and have more control over my own cases instead of being fed them piece-meal by a partner. All true. Of course I also looked forward to the more regular hours that come with appellate practice in a small agency, rather than trial practice at a big firm. But I didn't volunteer that information. At one point the interviewer said "I'm sure you know the hours here are much shorter than what you're used to, and the pay is much lower as well" and I then agreed with him that the former was good and the latter was acceptable. It wasn't an issue.

Anonymous wrote:You can mention quality of life as an add-on. Something like:

"I want more responsibility hands-on directly in the field of Securities Law. And of course, I'm looking forward to a more regular schedule."

Honestly, I wouldn't even mention it as an add on. The better hours will come if you get the job, but I'm a federal lawyer and we interview so many people who are dying for the job even if it didn't have better hours. Hiring managers don't want to hear anything that sounds like your anything but 100% committed to getting the job done.

You can mention quality of life as an add-on. Something like:

"I want more responsibility hands-on directly in the field of Securities Law. And of course, I'm looking forward to a more regular schedule."

Anonymous wrote:Spin the question. You're not exactly looking to leave, you just dont want to do it forever and are looking for the right opportunity. Anyone who has ever escaped a law firm will accept that a rational person might not want to stay on forever, but this is a perfect opportunity to tell them why their job is the right fit for you and vice versa.

This. Say that you're looking for a new challenge/opportunity. Talk about why you want this position in particular. They all will know that you were passed over for partner, but lots of great lawyers (some of whom will be interviewing you) understand that doesn't mean you're not an excellent. lawyer. But I would not talk about wanting better hours...that just will rub some people the wrong way.

Spin the question. You're not exactly looking to leave, you just dont want to do it forever and are looking for the right opportunity. Anyone who has ever escaped a law firm will accept that a rational person might not want to stay on forever, but this is a perfect opportunity to tell them why their job is the right fit for you and vice versa.

Think about a position you are interviewing for and what else you would like about it. it cant all be the same, you must care about the type of work you would be doing at least a little bit.

Anonymous wrote:I'd make sure you have at least two additional reasons for wanting to move to in house or an agency. Things like being part of a larger organization, wanting to work as part of an interdisciplinary team, greater responsibility/ development of a legal specialty. After you've discussed these types of reasons I think it's fine to also mention quality of life.

This. Tell them you are interested in XX area, and want to develop that specialty. For example, if you are interviewing in-house with a tech company, tell them technology has always fascinated you and you really wanted to concentrate in that area.

I'd make sure you have at least two additional reasons for wanting to move to in house or an agency. Things like being part of a larger organization, wanting to work as part of an interdisciplinary team, greater responsibility/ development of a legal specialty. After you've discussed these types of reasons I think it's fine to also mention quality of life.

Sure you can say quality of life. Everyone who works in gov knows that's why firm lawyers come to work at the gov. But, hopefully you have other reasons you want to join as well...like contributing to the agency? I hate those lawyers who come to gov and then don't do any work and abuse the system.

I think it depends on where you are looking to go. When I was leaving big law, I was pretty straight forward with potential employers that I was looking for more regular hours. But I was interviewing with places that I was 100% sure did not have huge time expectations, so I don't think anyone held it against me.

Don't talk about quality of life. How does that relate to anything that benefits them?

I am a senior BigLaw associate with young children and a difficult work schedule. I see my children during the week only for a few minutes in the morning and I usually spend one full weekend day working. I tried a reduced hours schedule years ago, but it didn't work, and I don't see any way to make this job work for my family any longer. I have some leads on government and in-house jobs with what I assume will be better hours. But I've struggled in past interviews with the "why do you want to leave?" question. I think the assumption is that I'm being forced out for not making partner and I'll take any job I can get. The truth is I have been passed over for partner, but I'm very busy and no one at the firm wants me to leave, or so I'm told. The reason I'm looking now is to have a better quality of life. I've done a fair number of informational interviews with ex-BigLaw women attorneys and everyone says they left for that same reason. But I can't say that in an interview, right?