If you had to choose between two nearly identical jobs, would you go in house or fed govt at the top of the GS scale.

You have a good situation.

Are there better-paying, maybe even some with decent work-life balance? Perhaps.

I'm in-house but had to relocate out of DC for the job. Base salary is about $225K, bonus varies depending on corporate profits (has been $30-100K), plus stock options and grants that add up. Good work-life balance. biggest trade off was moving to the midwest, but even that has its perks.

Anonymous wrote:How much money does a person need?

That varies widely based on a number of factors, as does the definition of “need.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I always thought in-house salaries averaged around $150K for line attorney types.

No, it's usually higher. If someone wanted to make 150K, they could just go be a fed and not have to deal with the uncertainty of the private section. Mid market in house salaries run right around 200-225K a year. GC's usually run between 300-500K with a sizable bonus/equity package.

It really varies tremendously based on the size of the company and the industry. There are plenty of in-house jobs that are only $150-175k. Plenty pay more too, but OP's gig sounds like a pretty good one.

Anonymous wrote:I always thought in-house salaries averaged around $150K for line attorney types.

No, it's usually higher. If someone wanted to make 150K, they could just go be a fed and not have to deal with the uncertainty of the private section. Mid market in house salaries run right around 200-225K a year. GC's usually run between 300-500K with a sizable bonus/equity package.

I always thought in-house salaries averaged around $150K for line attorney types.

I think you have a skewed idea of what other in house folks are making. Where exactly are you 'seeing' these salaries?

How much money does a person need?

Thats a really good set up. I am at a fortune 500 company and 200k is pretty normal for a mid career in house person with low stress and few direct reports.

Anonymous wrote:The in-house jobs that pay 400-600k in the dc area are higher up the food chain at larger companies. AGC-type jobs in legal departments with at least 20-30 lawyers. Those do NOT have good work-life balances.

Eh, I make just above $200k as a young-ish in house attorney. I know my boss makes more than me and he still has an awesome job and a great work-life balance. I don't think he makes $600k, but I wouldn't be surprised if he makes $300-400k easy. He is a DGC at a large company with 50+ attorneys, but he only has a handful of direct reports.

The in-house jobs that pay 400-600k in the dc area are higher up the food chain at larger companies. AGC-type jobs in legal departments with at least 20-30 lawyers. Those do NOT have good work-life balances.

Um, this is a non problem. Enjoy your work life balance while making a lot of money.

Anonymous wrote:$200k is a pretty good rate for in-house, from what I can tell. You likely started at a law firm so you know that it's up or out; unless you can bring your current company's business with you it's not likely you'll have a long career ahead in BigLaw.

If you know of other in-house opportunities that pay $400-600k, you should try to network your way into getting a chance at those positions, but again: sounds pretty farfetched.

OP here. Yes, I did about 6 years in biglaw before leaving totally burned out. Those higher paying jobs also entail a lot more travel and stress than I have.

$200k is a pretty good rate for in-house, from what I can tell. You likely started at a law firm so you know that it's up or out; unless you can bring your current company's business with you it's not likely you'll have a long career ahead in BigLaw.

If you know of other in-house opportunities that pay $400-600k, you should try to network your way into getting a chance at those positions, but again: sounds pretty farfetched.

So I make about $200k in an amazing in-house position in the DC area for a financial firm. My hours are fantastic and the benefits are superb (and the company is very stable). But I see others in law firms and other in-house making double and three times that. Although i love my job and the freedom it entails, because of the company I work in it is unlikely that I will make more than I make now (maybe $30k more but that's it). Is the grass really greener or should I just be content?