Corporate In-House Pay

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
motiontodismiss
Posts: 870
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 8:36 pm

Re: Corporate In-House Pay

Postby motiontodismiss » Sun May 02, 2010 10:10 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
motiontodismiss wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Kochel wrote:
Hours are very reasonable. Offices are uniformly dark by 7, nobody comes in on the weekends, and most don't even have to do much work at nights from home. And we all take our vacations. :)

All of the lawyers at my company are ex-Biglaw. We all put in at least 4-6 years before making the move. I'd say that you start looking "portable" to in-house employers with about 3 years of experience, particularly if you've been working in a specialized field. A generalist will probably want an extra 1-2 years experience before making the move.

why do people bother staying in biglaw (did they mess up to prevent themselves from an inhouse option)? bad choice of practice group? bad firm/law school? or do they just like it so they stay?

im curious


Guess the money's good? How many employers do you know that offer lawyers $300k+ in cash comp?

kochel has already said he pretty much makes what his biglaw counterpart makes


Half stock, half cash. Very different from 100% cash comp. I'd much rather get the cash bonus.

Well maybe they like it there and they're happy with their comp.

Kochel
Posts: 182
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 2:36 pm

Re: Corporate In-House Pay

Postby Kochel » Sun May 02, 2010 10:19 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
motiontodismiss wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Kochel wrote:
Hours are very reasonable. Offices are uniformly dark by 7, nobody comes in on the weekends, and most don't even have to do much work at nights from home. And we all take our vacations. :)

All of the lawyers at my company are ex-Biglaw. We all put in at least 4-6 years before making the move. I'd say that you start looking "portable" to in-house employers with about 3 years of experience, particularly if you've been working in a specialized field. A generalist will probably want an extra 1-2 years experience before making the move.

why do people bother staying in biglaw (did they mess up to prevent themselves from an inhouse option)? bad choice of practice group? bad firm/law school? or do they just like it so they stay?

im curious


Guess the money's good? How many employers do you know that offer lawyers $300k+ in cash comp?

kochel has already said he pretty much makes what his biglaw counterpart makes


Actually, my Biglaw counterparts are now partners (yes, I'm that old), and I do make less than they do. But I work about half as hard.

imchuckbass58
Posts: 1245
Joined: Mon Mar 16, 2009 3:24 pm

Re: Corporate In-House Pay

Postby imchuckbass58 » Sun May 02, 2010 10:21 pm

Anonymous User wrote:kochel has already said he pretty much makes what his biglaw counterpart makes


Financial services also probably pays better than other industries.

Not sure how accurate this is, but this blog basically cites roughly a 50% cut in pay:

--LinkRemoved--

Kochel
Posts: 182
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 2:36 pm

Re: Corporate In-House Pay

Postby Kochel » Sun May 02, 2010 10:26 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Kochel wrote:
Hours are very reasonable. Offices are uniformly dark by 7, nobody comes in on the weekends, and most don't even have to do much work at nights from home. And we all take our vacations. :)

All of the lawyers at my company are ex-Biglaw. We all put in at least 4-6 years before making the move. I'd say that you start looking "portable" to in-house employers with about 3 years of experience, particularly if you've been working in a specialized field. A generalist will probably want an extra 1-2 years experience before making the move.

why do people bother staying in biglaw (did they mess up to prevent themselves from an inhouse option)? bad choice of practice group? bad firm/law school? or do they just like it so they stay?

im curious


Some people are just born to be law firm partners. They like the pseudo-entrepreneurial freedom. They like working for numerous clients simultaneously. They like the relatively greater intellectual challenge of their work compared to in-house work. They like the purity and detachment of the counselor role. Finally, they like the pay, which is better than that of most GCs.

Others are not born to be law firm partners but become partners through inertia or because they've painted themselves into a corner by being too specialized in a field that doesn't attract in-house offers.

User avatar
DoubleChecks
Posts: 2333
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 4:35 pm

Re: Corporate In-House Pay

Postby DoubleChecks » Sun May 02, 2010 10:30 pm

whoah this thread has gotten very informative -- thx for all the comments

motiontodismiss
Posts: 870
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 8:36 pm

Re: Corporate In-House Pay

Postby motiontodismiss » Sun May 02, 2010 10:31 pm

Kochel wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Kochel wrote:
Hours are very reasonable. Offices are uniformly dark by 7, nobody comes in on the weekends, and most don't even have to do much work at nights from home. And we all take our vacations. :)

All of the lawyers at my company are ex-Biglaw. We all put in at least 4-6 years before making the move. I'd say that you start looking "portable" to in-house employers with about 3 years of experience, particularly if you've been working in a specialized field. A generalist will probably want an extra 1-2 years experience before making the move.

why do people bother staying in biglaw (did they mess up to prevent themselves from an inhouse option)? bad choice of practice group? bad firm/law school? or do they just like it so they stay?

im curious


Some people are just born to be law firm partners. They like the pseudo-entrepreneurial freedom. They like working for numerous clients simultaneously. They like the relatively greater intellectual challenge of their work compared to in-house work. They like the purity and detachment of the counselor role. Finally, they like the pay, which is better than that of most GCs.

Others are not born to be law firm partners but become partners through inertia or because they've painted themselves into a corner by being too specialized in a field that doesn't attract in-house offers.


I thought the guys that specialized themselves out of the market or stick around long enough end up becoming counsels.

User avatar
dlac
Posts: 45
Joined: Tue Feb 09, 2010 3:33 pm

Re: Corporate In-House Pay

Postby dlac » Sun May 02, 2010 10:42 pm

Here's what I use.

--LinkRemoved--

Anonymous User
Posts: 273572
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Corporate In-House Pay

Postby Anonymous User » Sun May 02, 2010 10:59 pm

I worked for a medium sized insurance company in Ugrad and the SVP was pulling in well over 300k including all the stock benefits and bonuses, and the GC was netting 1.6million plus. (These figures have to be disclosed because of SEC rules) The AVP I worked with who wasn't even a JD was making over 60k a year. My boss always said in house was the way to go. He worked at a V10 firm before that. He'd work about 8-6 and it wasn't overly stressful most of the time.

Kochel
Posts: 182
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2010 2:36 pm

Re: Corporate In-House Pay

Postby Kochel » Sun May 02, 2010 11:04 pm

motiontodismiss wrote:
Kochel wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Kochel wrote:
Hours are very reasonable. Offices are uniformly dark by 7, nobody comes in on the weekends, and most don't even have to do much work at nights from home. And we all take our vacations. :)

All of the lawyers at my company are ex-Biglaw. We all put in at least 4-6 years before making the move. I'd say that you start looking "portable" to in-house employers with about 3 years of experience, particularly if you've been working in a specialized field. A generalist will probably want an extra 1-2 years experience before making the move.

why do people bother staying in biglaw (did they mess up to prevent themselves from an inhouse option)? bad choice of practice group? bad firm/law school? or do they just like it so they stay?

im curious


Some people are just born to be law firm partners. They like the pseudo-entrepreneurial freedom. They like working for numerous clients simultaneously. They like the relatively greater intellectual challenge of their work compared to in-house work. They like the purity and detachment of the counselor role. Finally, they like the pay, which is better than that of most GCs.

Others are not born to be law firm partners but become partners through inertia or because they've painted themselves into a corner by being too specialized in a field that doesn't attract in-house offers.


I thought the guys that specialized themselves out of the market or stick around long enough end up becoming counsels.


I was thinking about service partners. (Tax, ERISA, labor, environmental, etc.) They're the ones the main departments look to for reinforcement on specific client matters. They may or may not deal directly with the client. Most companies are too small to require an in-house tax lawyer, so tax lawyers end up staying around at the firm. But they still become partners at the end of the day.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273572
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Corporate In-House Pay

Postby Anonymous User » Sun May 02, 2010 11:27 pm

I'm working this summer at an in house place.
They pay the starters 1700/week. They give out annual bonuses that is based upon stock. It's also in a particular industry, so after 30+ years with the company you get full retirement benefits.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.