Anonymous wrote:My DH is a partner at a V50 and there are definitely partners in niche practice areas that make less than senior associates in his group. Anyone who doubts this doesn't know what the hell they're talking about.

Everyone knows that some partners make less than senior associates. What I doubt is that a partner makes 300, which is less than a 3rd year associate after bonus (250 base + 57.5 bonus). A partner's comp shouldn't be so low unless the firm is trying to push him or her out. It's hard to believe a lawyer left a government job for a biglaw position paying this little, particularly one who is married to an in-house counsel who should also have some familiarity with biglaw compensation.

Most people I know who have lateralled to counsel positions get paid around the same as senior associates: 400-415 base plus a bonus of 100 or more.

My DH is a partner at a V50 and there are definitely partners in niche practice areas that make less than senior associates in his group. Anyone who doubts this doesn't know what the hell they're talking about.

The PP is right that this firm doesn’t sound like the right platform for him. He should look for a new firm.

OP I’m an associate and I’ve seen people come from agencies as partners and counsel. I work in “big law” and first year income partners can make 300-400k. My firm hasn’t upped partner/counsel pay in line with recent raises for associate pay (and I know because of grumbling). If you’re in a secondary market (I suspect you are) and/or at a law firm in the bottom half of the V100 then his salary makes total sense.

The people I’ve seen come in from agencies are usually subject matter experts on an in-demand area that the firm already works on, and get put on pitches immediately. It seems weird that the firm would hire your husband from and agency without an established need for his expertise. Has your husband done a good job internally marketing himself and what he offers to people with the right clients?

Anonymous wrote:Honestly being a “big law partner” is a lot broader than DCUM imagines. In the V50-100 it’s really not so rare for nonequity partners to make less than associates. I wouldn’t stress too much in your shoes. If he keeps working on BD and making forward strides I doubt he has a target on his back.

I’ll add—despite DH being a partner and me being a counsel, we have no beach house. Again, there’s a lot more variation than DCUM knows.

Honestly being a “big law partner” is a lot broader than DCUM imagines. In the V50-100 it’s really not so rare for nonequity partners to make less than associates. I wouldn’t stress too much in your shoes. If he keeps working on BD and making forward strides I doubt he has a target on his back.

OP here. Thanks very much to the posters who provided valuable advice. I really appreciate it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you describe is not what an “income partner” is. My DH is an income partner. He is staffed on cases brought in by others or that he helped pitch, and makes more like $750k. There is never any “runway” at his firm for a lateral income partner because they’re not looking to take off for anything else. It sounds like what your husband has going on is that the firm was hoping he would bring in so much business he would make equity in 2 years, but also with such a low base they aren’t really upset that ramping up has not gone better.

OP here. Thx for this input. I guess my DH is a glorified associate, but even an associate would get some billable work to do.

At least he gets the "partner" title, which is definitely helpful in trying to build up a book of business.

I guess his situation does not fit neatly into any category. He is paid a gross amount (and we get a schedule K instead of a W-2, creating a lot of extra tax work for me). I think he'll try to continue to build up his book of business, and then if more conflicts arise at the current firm, he'll leave for another firm or set up his own shop. DH seems content in the situation, even if he's kind of surprised and disappointed that no one has given him any billable work. He's looking on the bright side -- he likes being his own boss, and not having the hierarchy of the federal government. He's got plenty of leisure time. So it's not all bad.

And what do you do, Wife?

OP here. I am in-house counsel at a Fortune 100 company. I've been the main breadwinner for a while.

Based on your previous posts, I don't believe this (and I'm sure I'm not alone).

And if by some chance it's true, I am guessing you practice employment law?

OP here. I am disappointed in myself for responding to this, but yes, it's true what I saw about my job. I consider myself lucky to be in a niche type of law at this company. I am sure that there are people who are better qualified than I am, but I somehow got the job 8 years ago. I don't do employment law -- not sure why that's your guess. I won't state the niche because it would give away name of the the company, and I'm trying to remain vague here.

If the firm is not directing work his way it is presumably because they don’t have existing clients that need this work. In fact they seem to have existing clients that conflict with this work. This is what is known as the wrong platform and is a common reason for partners to switch firms, to one that offers a more complementary practice, more leads and referrals, and at the very least fewer conflicts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you describe is not what an “income partner” is. My DH is an income partner. He is staffed on cases brought in by others or that he helped pitch, and makes more like $750k. There is never any “runway” at his firm for a lateral income partner because they’re not looking to take off for anything else. It sounds like what your husband has going on is that the firm was hoping he would bring in so much business he would make equity in 2 years, but also with such a low base they aren’t really upset that ramping up has not gone better.

OP here. Thx for this input. I guess my DH is a glorified associate, but even an associate would get some billable work to do.

At least he gets the "partner" title, which is definitely helpful in trying to build up a book of business.

I guess his situation does not fit neatly into any category. He is paid a gross amount (and we get a schedule K instead of a W-2, creating a lot of extra tax work for me). I think he'll try to continue to build up his book of business, and then if more conflicts arise at the current firm, he'll leave for another firm or set up his own shop. DH seems content in the situation, even if he's kind of surprised and disappointed that no one has given him any billable work. He's looking on the bright side -- he likes being his own boss, and not having the hierarchy of the federal government. He's got plenty of leisure time. So it's not all bad.

And what do you do, Wife?

OP here. I am in-house counsel at a Fortune 100 company. I've been the main breadwinner for a while.

Based on your previous posts, I don't believe this (and I'm sure I'm not alone).

And if by some chance it's true, I am guessing you practice employment law?

Give it a rest. Or go pick your nose. If you don’t want to stay on topic, why reply?

OP, I’m looking at making the move as well. You husband’s situation (pay and lack of work directed to him) appear out of the norm.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What you describe is not what an “income partner” is. My DH is an income partner. He is staffed on cases brought in by others or that he helped pitch, and makes more like $750k. There is never any “runway” at his firm for a lateral income partner because they’re not looking to take off for anything else. It sounds like what your husband has going on is that the firm was hoping he would bring in so much business he would make equity in 2 years, but also with such a low base they aren’t really upset that ramping up has not gone better.

OP here. Thx for this input. I guess my DH is a glorified associate, but even an associate would get some billable work to do.

At least he gets the "partner" title, which is definitely helpful in trying to build up a book of business.

I guess his situation does not fit neatly into any category. He is paid a gross amount (and we get a schedule K instead of a W-2, creating a lot of extra tax work for me). I think he'll try to continue to build up his book of business, and then if more conflicts arise at the current firm, he'll leave for another firm or set up his own shop. DH seems content in the situation, even if he's kind of surprised and disappointed that no one has given him any billable work. He's looking on the bright side -- he likes being his own boss, and not having the hierarchy of the federal government. He's got plenty of leisure time. So it's not all bad.

And what do you do, Wife?

OP here. I am in-house counsel at a Fortune 100 company. I've been the main breadwinner for a while.

Based on your previous posts, I don't believe this (and I'm sure I'm not alone).

And if by some chance it's true, I am guessing you practice employment law?

OP, I don't know why so many people on this thread are being rude, or actually, I guess I do, since it's DCUM so that's par for the course. FWIW, I have a close friend who is about to make the jump from being a Fed attorney at a prestigious agency to biglaw (bottom half of V100, but still definitely biglaw). He was offered 350K to come in as counsel. He's trying to negotiate an income partner role and $400K, plus origination credit, but it may not work out. This is in a HCOL city on the west coast, similar to DC. This number is consistent with the number we've heard for colleagues who have made the jump recently (this is for line attorneys, not those in high up leadership positions or those who worked on super high profile cases) to similarly-ranked firms.

That said, my friend was promised that he would have plenty of billable work for him while he began to build his own book, and was told to expect a two year runway to get things going. So I do think the fact that your DH was not given any billable work is pretty unusual, especially considering they knew he wouldn't have a book coming from the gov't.

Anonymous wrote:So OP is an in-house counsel and let her husband take a "partner" job at a 500+ attorney law firm for $300k?! I find that hard to believe. It's well known that senior associates and counsel make over $500k, and that a lateral partner from the government should make at least that much.

OP here. Not sure why I'm responding to this, but here goes. DH was in the federal government, and so it seemed like it would be an increase in pay to go to a law firm. Also, DH is an independent human being, and he gets to choose his career path without me telling him what to do. So it was not a matter of my "letting" him take the job, but rather, he chose to do so, as it was something he wanted to pursue.

So OP is an in-house counsel and let her husband take a "partner" job at a 500+ attorney law firm for $300k?! I find that hard to believe. It's well known that senior associates and counsel make over $500k, and that a lateral partner from the government should make at least that much.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My takeaway here is that OP understands everything about her DH's position except that it's not at a BigLaw shop. He's an income partner that they may or may not care if he ever makes equity at a small law firm that is not on the Cravath scale. He has some kind of expertise that they use to bring in work (CLE presentations, etc.) but the equity partners keep it for themselves because the pie is not big. It doesn't sound like a terrible gig but he may want to shop his book around since so much of his work is getting conflicted out at this firm. Even coming on as counsel in a BigLaw firm would be a raise.

I tend to agree. I can't imagine any "income partner" in Biglaw getting paid so little money AND having no work sent their way. It's not the model, that's for sure. OP's husband has to be at a smaller shop.

OP, how big is your husband's law firm? How many lawyers in how many cities? You can tell us that without revealing the name of the firm.

OP here. According to the firm's web site, there are more than 500 lawyers in 10+ cities. (I am being vague here.)