Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s harder to leave than you think.

I spent 10 years in biglaw as a litigator. I never got offered a single job in-house or in Fed gov despite applying widely. I moved firms a couple times just trying to find more peace but it was just as bad, even when I did ultimately accept a pay cut.

One reason I couldn’t get an in-house offer is I couldn’t move to where clients are because of DH’s job which pretty much only exists in DC.

This. It’s not that easy to get a job like yours.

I’d be willing to bet your nonprofits fundraising department relies heavily on donations from big law firms….so these big law lawyers are subsidizing your salary….

NP and doubtful. Corporate donors, sure, but I don't think biglaw firms are bastions of charitable giving.

Anonymous wrote:I was recently chatting with a very senior Big Law partner and he told me that he thinks if you want to practice law at a high level (so basically any AmLaw 200 firm, I think was his frame of reference) you need to expect as a partner that you will be putting in about 2500 billable hours a year. And then he said that on top of that you need to be putting in the hours on business development, plus contributing to firm or practice management as is appropriate for your level. So that would come out to an average of 60 hours a week, minimum. Plus if you want vacations or holidays, that's going to push the average up for the other weeks. Client work and BD demand ebbs and flows a bit, so you might have some weeks at 40 but you will definitely have some at 80. And this is for a partner, so you need to assume the work you're doing is not some piddling little low level memo or something -- we're talking high level, difficult work, including client management and managing demands/egos/etc., plus the management aspect of the job in terms of guiding the team that sits under you.

If that is not of interest to you, do not pursue a partnership at a Big Law firm. Don't pursue a job that operates as I just described and then spend your time whining to other people about how you don't have enough free time or whatever. Either that sounds appealing to you (presumably because you actually like work, it charges you up, you'd rather be practicing law and pursuing clients than other things), or it doesn't.

I don't understand why law attracts so many people who don't seem to want to do the job they signed up for. Are doctors like this? I am aware of downsides to practicing medicine (dealing with insurance, the time pressures that the corporatization of medicine put on practitioners, paperwork and document, etc.) but I have personally never heard any of the doctors I know complain about how miserable their jobs are the way so many lawyers do. They seem to have understood what they were getting into, I guess.

Anonymous wrote:I am in Biglaw for 30 years and agree with OP 100% if you don't like the work or work life "balance" most of the time there are other options, however on the flip - I am tired of highly credentialed gov and non-profit lawyers in this area complaining that their private school tuition should be subsidized/FA more because they chose a lifestyle job with less hours than mine. Many parents at my kids school went to ivy law schools but get FA because of their life choices so I am essentially working extra hours to pay their costs and getting lectured by them re: how virtuous their public service life style is compared to mine

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was recently chatting with a very senior Big Law partner and he told me that he thinks if you want to practice law at a high level (so basically any AmLaw 200 firm, I think was his frame of reference) you need to expect as a partner that you will be putting in about 2500 billable hours a year. And then he said that on top of that you need to be putting in the hours on business development, plus contributing to firm or practice management as is appropriate for your level. So that would come out to an average of 60 hours a week, minimum. Plus if you want vacations or holidays, that's going to push the average up for the other weeks. Client work and BD demand ebbs and flows a bit, so you might have some weeks at 40 but you will definitely have some at 80. And this is for a partner, so you need to assume the work you're doing is not some piddling little low level memo or something -- we're talking high level, difficult work, including client management and managing demands/egos/etc., plus the management aspect of the job in terms of guiding the team that sits under you.

If that is not of interest to you, do not pursue a partnership at a Big Law firm. Don't pursue a job that operates as I just described and then spend your time whining to other people about how you don't have enough free time or whatever. Either that sounds appealing to you (presumably because you actually like work, it charges you up, you'd rather be practicing law and pursuing clients than other things), or it doesn't.

I don't understand why law attracts so many people who don't seem to want to do the job they signed up for. Are doctors like this? I am aware of downsides to practicing medicine (dealing with insurance, the time pressures that the corporatization of medicine put on practitioners, paperwork and document, etc.) but I have personally never heard any of the doctors I know complain about how miserable their jobs are the way so many lawyers do. They seem to have understood what they were getting into, I guess.

My DH is a partner in an AmLaw100 firm and I would concur what you have mentioned above. He routinely puts in 3000ish hours per year between billable, non-billable, client development, pro-bono and mentoring the younger associates. An average worker works 2080 hours a year. So at that rate your average partner is putting in 23 more weeks per year than your average worker.

I realize there is a very tiny violin for people who make a lot of money but if you break it down by per hour pay lawyers definitely do not make out well!

Does he/do you complain about it though?

PP here - he only complains about the associates who want to be paid the big bucks but don't bill the hours or want to return to work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I am with you and my patience with it wears thin at times too. I'm further out than you (18 years) and no longer actually practice law, though work in consulting in a way that relies on my legal background. I've taken two left turns in my career in order to gain flexibility and work/life balance, and am at a place where I really like both my work and my lifestyle.

I have friends, colleagues, and old law school classmates who stuck out the Big Law track and for the most part are now partners. Some of them are happy. Some of them are not. The main differentiator is whether they chose their life or just let it happen. The people who were thoughtful in their choice of firm, practice area, and approach to their career generally have more satisfaction at this point and in some cases are really reaping the rewards of earlier hard work, instead of descending into the pit of working more and more hours the further into their career they go.

No one is every going to feel sorry for someone making 500k-3 million a year. I might be understanding of how sometimes life doesn't turn out as you hoped, but I don't feel sorry for you. And yes, you absolutely could decide today to change your life and make other choices. Worst case, you could be in a new job with a better lifestyle and still very financial secure and comfortable within a year. Most people could do it in less. They are afraid to. They don't know what they want in life. It's easier for them to go down their unhappy path than to make an affirmative choice about their lives.

I think you too are ignorant about how difficult the exit is. I personally know 5 (!) partners off the top of my head who exited for fedgov only after being promoted to partner because they simply never got an offer before then, despite applying and interviewing. They didn’t do it sooner because they were afraid or unstrategic or any of that. In fact the strategy/practice area is part of what it makes it hard. You have to wait for the right job at the right place for your relevant experience, and then there are good odds you’ll get passed over when you do have the opportunity to apply.

I underestimate nothing -- I am intimately aware of how these transitions occur.

The problem you are having is believing that someone working in a large law firm making a certain salary and doing a certain kind of work deserves only jobs that are at a certain level. They don't. If someone couldn't get the offer they wanted from the government or elsewhere until they made partner, that is a choice they made to pursue a certain career path that involved making partner at a law firm.

No one owes you anything. I'll repeat that: no one owes you anything. I don't care how hard it is for you to find your dream legal job or how hard it is to give up your 300k/yr income or how much the mortgage on your big house is or whatever. If you don't like your job, leave it. Don't spend years and years complaining to everyone who will listen that your super high paying job is really demanding.

Your experience is completely different than mine. No, these people were not leaving for high profile or supervisory government jobs. They were just moving to jobs relevant to their practices. As in, not the VA when their practice is securities law. It’s been very tough in the past few years, especially with all the hiring freezes.

It's tough for everyone. Do you think Big Law attorneys are uniquely burdened by the challenges of the market or the sometimes arbitrary nature of hiring? Nope.

OP's point is not "it's so easy to have a career like mine!" Her point is that it is weird and annoying to listen to people complain about how hard they have to work when they are extremely well compensated for that work and there are other options available to them. And there are always other options. If you don't see them, you are limiting yourself in ways that have everything to do your own hang ups and nothing to do with what is actually possible.

OP here. This is it exactly. I am not even saying that it's easy to transition to another job. I am saying that it is ridiculous for any attorney - heck, maybe any reasonably educated person? - to say that they have absolutely no other options available to them. It's especially ridiculous and tone-deaf to do in a group discussion with people who are definitely making less money than you and cite finances as the reason you are trapped.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was recently chatting with a very senior Big Law partner and he told me that he thinks if you want to practice law at a high level (so basically any AmLaw 200 firm, I think was his frame of reference) you need to expect as a partner that you will be putting in about 2500 billable hours a year. And then he said that on top of that you need to be putting in the hours on business development, plus contributing to firm or practice management as is appropriate for your level. So that would come out to an average of 60 hours a week, minimum. Plus if you want vacations or holidays, that's going to push the average up for the other weeks. Client work and BD demand ebbs and flows a bit, so you might have some weeks at 40 but you will definitely have some at 80. And this is for a partner, so you need to assume the work you're doing is not some piddling little low level memo or something -- we're talking high level, difficult work, including client management and managing demands/egos/etc., plus the management aspect of the job in terms of guiding the team that sits under you.

If that is not of interest to you, do not pursue a partnership at a Big Law firm. Don't pursue a job that operates as I just described and then spend your time whining to other people about how you don't have enough free time or whatever. Either that sounds appealing to you (presumably because you actually like work, it charges you up, you'd rather be practicing law and pursuing clients than other things), or it doesn't.

I don't understand why law attracts so many people who don't seem to want to do the job they signed up for. Are doctors like this? I am aware of downsides to practicing medicine (dealing with insurance, the time pressures that the corporatization of medicine put on practitioners, paperwork and document, etc.) but I have personally never heard any of the doctors I know complain about how miserable their jobs are the way so many lawyers do. They seem to have understood what they were getting into, I guess.

My DH is a partner in an AmLaw100 firm and I would concur what you have mentioned above. He routinely puts in 3000ish hours per year between billable, non-billable, client development, pro-bono and mentoring the younger associates. An average worker works 2080 hours a year. So at that rate your average partner is putting in 23 more weeks per year than your average worker.

I realize there is a very tiny violin for people who make a lot of money but if you break it down by per hour pay lawyers definitely do not make out well!

Does he/do you complain about it though?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was recently chatting with a very senior Big Law partner and he told me that he thinks if you want to practice law at a high level (so basically any AmLaw 200 firm, I think was his frame of reference) you need to expect as a partner that you will be putting in about 2500 billable hours a year. And then he said that on top of that you need to be putting in the hours on business development, plus contributing to firm or practice management as is appropriate for your level. So that would come out to an average of 60 hours a week, minimum. Plus if you want vacations or holidays, that's going to push the average up for the other weeks. Client work and BD demand ebbs and flows a bit, so you might have some weeks at 40 but you will definitely have some at 80. And this is for a partner, so you need to assume the work you're doing is not some piddling little low level memo or something -- we're talking high level, difficult work, including client management and managing demands/egos/etc., plus the management aspect of the job in terms of guiding the team that sits under you.

If that is not of interest to you, do not pursue a partnership at a Big Law firm. Don't pursue a job that operates as I just described and then spend your time whining to other people about how you don't have enough free time or whatever. Either that sounds appealing to you (presumably because you actually like work, it charges you up, you'd rather be practicing law and pursuing clients than other things), or it doesn't.

I don't understand why law attracts so many people who don't seem to want to do the job they signed up for. Are doctors like this? I am aware of downsides to practicing medicine (dealing with insurance, the time pressures that the corporatization of medicine put on practitioners, paperwork and document, etc.) but I have personally never heard any of the doctors I know complain about how miserable their jobs are the way so many lawyers do. They seem to have understood what they were getting into, I guess.

My DH is a partner in an AmLaw100 firm and I would concur what you have mentioned above. He routinely puts in 3000ish hours per year between billable, non-billable, client development, pro-bono and mentoring the younger associates. An average worker works 2080 hours a year. So at that rate your average partner is putting in 23 more weeks per year than your average worker.

I realize there is a very tiny violin for people who make a lot of money but if you break it down by per hour pay lawyers definitely do not make out well!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, I am with you and my patience with it wears thin at times too. I'm further out than you (18 years) and no longer actually practice law, though work in consulting in a way that relies on my legal background. I've taken two left turns in my career in order to gain flexibility and work/life balance, and am at a place where I really like both my work and my lifestyle.

I have friends, colleagues, and old law school classmates who stuck out the Big Law track and for the most part are now partners. Some of them are happy. Some of them are not. The main differentiator is whether they chose their life or just let it happen. The people who were thoughtful in their choice of firm, practice area, and approach to their career generally have more satisfaction at this point and in some cases are really reaping the rewards of earlier hard work, instead of descending into the pit of working more and more hours the further into their career they go.

No one is every going to feel sorry for someone making 500k-3 million a year. I might be understanding of how sometimes life doesn't turn out as you hoped, but I don't feel sorry for you. And yes, you absolutely could decide today to change your life and make other choices. Worst case, you could be in a new job with a better lifestyle and still very financial secure and comfortable within a year. Most people could do it in less. They are afraid to. They don't know what they want in life. It's easier for them to go down their unhappy path than to make an affirmative choice about their lives.

I think you too are ignorant about how difficult the exit is. I personally know 5 (!) partners off the top of my head who exited for fedgov only after being promoted to partner because they simply never got an offer before then, despite applying and interviewing. They didn’t do it sooner because they were afraid or unstrategic or any of that. In fact the strategy/practice area is part of what it makes it hard. You have to wait for the right job at the right place for your relevant experience, and then there are good odds you’ll get passed over when you do have the opportunity to apply.

I underestimate nothing -- I am intimately aware of how these transitions occur.

The problem you are having is believing that someone working in a large law firm making a certain salary and doing a certain kind of work deserves only jobs that are at a certain level. They don't. If someone couldn't get the offer they wanted from the government or elsewhere until they made partner, that is a choice they made to pursue a certain career path that involved making partner at a law firm.

No one owes you anything. I'll repeat that: no one owes you anything. I don't care how hard it is for you to find your dream legal job or how hard it is to give up your 300k/yr income or how much the mortgage on your big house is or whatever. If you don't like your job, leave it. Don't spend years and years complaining to everyone who will listen that your super high paying job is really demanding.

Your experience is completely different than mine. No, these people were not leaving for high profile or supervisory government jobs. They were just moving to jobs relevant to their practices. As in, not the VA when their practice is securities law. It’s been very tough in the past few years, especially with all the hiring freezes.

It's tough for everyone. Do you think Big Law attorneys are uniquely burdened by the challenges of the market or the sometimes arbitrary nature of hiring? Nope.

OP's point is not "it's so easy to have a career like mine!" Her point is that it is weird and annoying to listen to people complain about how hard they have to work when they are extremely well compensated for that work and there are other options available to them. And there are always other options. If you don't see them, you are limiting yourself in ways that have everything to do your own hang ups and nothing to do with what is actually possible.

Anonymous wrote:I am in big law and agree the whiners are annoying. It's a choice. Stop whining and make other choices.

Anonymous wrote:I was recently chatting with a very senior Big Law partner and he told me that he thinks if you want to practice law at a high level (so basically any AmLaw 200 firm, I think was his frame of reference) you need to expect as a partner that you will be putting in about 2500 billable hours a year. And then he said that on top of that you need to be putting in the hours on business development, plus contributing to firm or practice management as is appropriate for your level. So that would come out to an average of 60 hours a week, minimum. Plus if you want vacations or holidays, that's going to push the average up for the other weeks. Client work and BD demand ebbs and flows a bit, so you might have some weeks at 40 but you will definitely have some at 80. And this is for a partner, so you need to assume the work you're doing is not some piddling little low level memo or something -- we're talking high level, difficult work, including client management and managing demands/egos/etc., plus the management aspect of the job in terms of guiding the team that sits under you.

If that is not of interest to you, do not pursue a partnership at a Big Law firm. Don't pursue a job that operates as I just described and then spend your time whining to other people about how you don't have enough free time or whatever. Either that sounds appealing to you (presumably because you actually like work, it charges you up, you'd rather be practicing law and pursuing clients than other things), or it doesn't.

I don't understand why law attracts so many people who don't seem to want to do the job they signed up for. Are doctors like this? I am aware of downsides to practicing medicine (dealing with insurance, the time pressures that the corporatization of medicine put on practitioners, paperwork and document, etc.) but I have personally never heard any of the doctors I know complain about how miserable their jobs are the way so many lawyers do. They seem to have understood what they were getting into, I guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They may have a SAH spouse or a spouse without a lot of earning potential. If you make 20% of a biglaw salary and are slightly the breadwinner I would ballpark your salary at $150K and your spouse's salary at $125K which is a really good HHI. About the same as ours actually.

Also, I think some fields don't lend themselves as well to in-house or govt work so they may be legitimately choosing between biglaw or medium law where the workload is about the same between them.

This poster gets it.

Spouse ends up a SAHP because Big Law lawyer can’t contribute very much at home, but then lawyer has to stay in Big Law because other spouse isn’t bringing in money. Lawyer leans into career even more because they’re the sole breadwinner, which further limits SAHP’s options because lawyer isn’t going to stay home with sick kids or to let the plumber in and doesn’t have the time or energy to help with household chores. SAHP outsources some chores because, otherwise, what’s even the point of having this money? Expenses go up due to some outsourcing and Big Law sole breadwinner feels trapped by golden handcuffs.

These are all choices. Did you know that some people, after having kids, realize that their jobs are not compatible with being present in their kids' lives, and they change jobs? Did you know that some couples have frank conversations about how their careers impact their marriage and family, and make these decisions jointly so that the family functions well? Did you know that plenty of smart, talented people choose to pursue careers where they don't make super high incomes, accepting that might mean a smaller home or public school for their kids, but find it worth it because of the lifestyle benefits and the realization that having all that money might not actually be worth it if you are miserable.

Golden handcuffs are imaginary. Stop acting helpless about your own life.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They may have a SAH spouse or a spouse without a lot of earning potential. If you make 20% of a biglaw salary and are slightly the breadwinner I would ballpark your salary at $150K and your spouse's salary at $125K which is a really good HHI. About the same as ours actually.

Also, I think some fields don't lend themselves as well to in-house or govt work so they may be legitimately choosing between biglaw or medium law where the workload is about the same between them.

This poster gets it.

Spouse ends up a SAHP because Big Law lawyer can’t contribute very much at home, but then lawyer has to stay in Big Law because other spouse isn’t bringing in money. Lawyer leans into career even more because they’re the sole breadwinner, which further limits SAHP’s options because lawyer isn’t going to stay home with sick kids or to let the plumber in and doesn’t have the time or energy to help with household chores. SAHP outsources some chores because, otherwise, what’s even the point of having this money? Expenses go up due to some outsourcing and Big Law sole breadwinner feels trapped by golden handcuffs.