Managing a Relationship in Big Law

(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.
User avatar
mr. wednesday
Posts: 406
Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 1:15 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby mr. wednesday » Mon Oct 14, 2013 9:18 pm

Hutz_and_Goodman wrote:I'm married and concerned about work/life balance. I had big law offers in secondary market where my school is and major market (160k). I accepted the major market firm (v50). Major market is where I grew up and my family is still there. Major market is better professionally for my wife. I have read only good things about the firm and loved it during my callback. Even looking it as a 2-3 year proposition (until likely midlaw or in house or biglaw outside of major market to regain some semblance of balance) I'm concerned because we want to start a family. Wife has much more stable hours but will still be working 40/50 hours a week.

It's expensive to find child care for a very young infant for 50+ hours a week. So you can decide between yourselves whether she's willing to work less hours or whether you can afford a nanny or what you want to do with that. People in biglaw have children so obviously it's doable. As long as your wife is on board for you working those hours, you'll work it out.

Realistically, it'll be tough for your wife to find a job that's okay with maternity leave right after hiring her, and she won't qualify for FMLA until she's already been working for a year. So if you are only planning on being there for 2-3 years and she'll have to wait 1 year + 9 months or so anyway, it might not be that much of an issue.

User avatar
OneMoreLawHopeful
Posts: 1191
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:21 pm

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby OneMoreLawHopeful » Mon Oct 14, 2013 11:46 pm

A. Nony Mouse wrote:But I also don't think that the statements "working in biglaw requires sacrificing time with loved ones" and "you can maintain a relationship while in big law" are mutually exclusive.


I don't think they are either, and that was the point I was trying to make two pages ago, if I was unclear I apologize. I just think something needs to be said to counterbalance the Anon posts (probably from different Anons) that seemed to be claiming biglaw = forever alone.

dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3139
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Tue Oct 15, 2013 12:03 am

NotMyRealName09 wrote:I think the COL differential is under-appreciated. Look, I know no one lacking significant ties to Michigan is going to move to beautiful suburban Detroit. And yes, if you bank $160k per year you are well off, and few things drop panties faster than a high tax bracket. But add in an apartment commensurate with your status as a big-dog in the law game, and the attendant expensive dinners and other luxuries you know you’re going to buy because your wallet is fat and you’ve earned it….I don’t know, it seems to balance out. I don’t know that higher cost of living equates to higher quality of life. This year I built a 3000 sq. ft. house and my mortgage is probably less than a decent, not amazing NYC apartment. And I’m building equity (slowly).

And 1950 hours are pretty comparable to some NYC firms, sure, but it’s the culture, it’s the (lack of) face time requirement, it’s the people around me being chill, the pace of life. In the end, what do I know? I’ve never worked in NYC Big Law. But since the thread is about love in the fast lane, maybe an alternative is to slow it down.
I mean, sure, you'll have less money if you spend it all on luxury shit, but it's pretty silly to act like that's the same as making less in the first place. Other than that... Detroit is cheaper than NYC and probably easier to live in, if you want to live in Detroit, but most people don't and most of those who do would probably still find it easier to find a job in NYC. I don't think anyone is really looking for life in the fast lane, more like trying to figure out how to have a normal speed life while working a demanding job.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273256
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Oct 15, 2013 12:25 am

Isn't it simple? The vast, vast majority of biglaw/midlaw entry-level jobs are in New York, especially if you're talking about the firms that have the most interviews at OCI at most of the top-end schools. Good grades and a pulse at a T6 school gives you extremely good odds at a biglaw job in New York, but because secondary market biglaw has so few SA slots and generally places more of an emphasis on "fit" (especially true secondary markets-- i.e., not DC/Chi/LA/SF/Boston), if you're only targeting those firms, you drastically increase the likelihood that you strike out-- thus the oft-repeated (and accurate) advice to bid NYC. Plus, many of those firms have SA offer rates much lower than 100%, which is scary as fuck.

For instance, I know that as a top 20% at a T6 with ties to Boston and Philadelphia, I failed to land an offer in either of those cities with a firm that was both doing well financially and had high offer rates, despite close to twenty screeners combined (many of which were due to mass mail/networking). Meanwhile, I landed multiple V15 NYC offers and had many more at firms in the next couple tiers.

It's just a numbers game. There are several thousand biglaw jobs in NYC, and several thousand more in DC/Chi/LA/SF/Boston (at least according to this thread). There are maybe a couple hundred in true secondary markets, many of which are nothing near the utopia you're describing (i.e., significant salary differences, poor job security (including SA offer rates), etc).

Anonymous User
Posts: 273256
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Oct 15, 2013 7:03 am

Anonymous User wrote:There are maybe a couple hundred in true secondary markets, many of which are nothing near the utopia you're describing (i.e., significant salary differences, poor job security (including SA offer rates), etc).


how would you know?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273256
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Oct 15, 2013 9:03 am

Anonymous User wrote:Isn't it simple? The vast, vast majority of biglaw/midlaw entry-level jobs are in New York, especially if you're talking about the firms that have the most interviews at OCI at most of the top-end schools. Good grades and a pulse at a T6 school gives you extremely good odds at a biglaw job in New York, but because secondary market biglaw has so few SA slots and generally places more of an emphasis on "fit" (especially true secondary markets-- i.e., not DC/Chi/LA/SF/Boston), if you're only targeting those firms, you drastically increase the likelihood that you strike out-- thus the oft-repeated (and accurate) advice to bid NYC. Plus, many of those firms have SA offer rates much lower than 100%, which is scary as fuck.

For instance, I know that as a top 20% at a T6 with ties to Boston and Philadelphia, I failed to land an offer in either of those cities with a firm that was both doing well financially and had high offer rates, despite close to twenty screeners combined (many of which were due to mass mail/networking). Meanwhile, I landed multiple V15 NYC offers and had many more at firms in the next couple tiers.

It's just a numbers game. There are several thousand biglaw jobs in NYC, and several thousand more in DC/Chi/LA/SF/Boston (at least according to this thread). There are maybe a couple hundred in true secondary markets, many of which are nothing near the utopia you're describing (i.e., significant salary differences, poor job security (including SA offer rates), etc).


This. I had a similar experience - top 20% at T6, struck out of the secondary markets I had ties to, will be heading to NYC biglaw instead.

For many of us, it's not just a matter of running off to New York to have ALL the prestige. It's a matter of "this is the only entry level job I could get that will enable me to pay back the OUTRAGEOUS cost my law degree."

Anonymous User
Posts: 273256
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:02 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:There are maybe a couple hundred in true secondary markets, many of which are nothing near the utopia you're describing (i.e., significant salary differences, poor job security (including SA offer rates), etc).

how would you know?

Because I investigated many of these markets (think Pittsburgh, Charlotte, Atlanta) and found that a number of firms (a) didn't hire SAs, (b) had a significant history of no-offers to SAs, (c) had a history of layoffs (small firms are more sensitive to things like partner defections or loss of a major client or general economic downturn), or (d) had significant compensation differences (in the order of roughly $200K over your first three years).

Also, nice use of anon.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273256
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:09 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:There are maybe a couple hundred in true secondary markets, many of which are nothing near the utopia you're describing (i.e., significant salary differences, poor job security (including SA offer rates), etc).

how would you know?

Because I investigated many of these markets (think Pittsburgh, Charlotte, Atlanta) and found that a number of firms (a) didn't hire SAs, (b) had a significant history of no-offers to SAs, (c) had a history of layoffs (small firms are more sensitive to things like partner defections or loss of a major client or general economic downturn), or (d) had significant compensation differences (in the order of roughly $200K over your first three years).

Also, nice use of anon.

Just because a market doesn't hire SAs, that doesn't mean there aren't any jobs. It just means they don't follow the major market biglaw hiring patterns, which, IMO are completely ridiculous. I've looked into a number of secondary markets and found them to be a mixed bag. Some pay near market with low cost of living, done pay pennies, even in a COL adjusted basis. Some require a fuckton of hours, while others are a bit more relaxed. Some had a fairly large number of jobs, others just a few. Generalized statements do not apply.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273256
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:23 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:There are maybe a couple hundred in true secondary markets, many of which are nothing near the utopia you're describing (i.e., significant salary differences, poor job security (including SA offer rates), etc).

how would you know?

Because I investigated many of these markets (think Pittsburgh, Charlotte, Atlanta) and found that a number of firms (a) didn't hire SAs, (b) had a significant history of no-offers to SAs, (c) had a history of layoffs (small firms are more sensitive to things like partner defections or loss of a major client or general economic downturn), or (d) had significant compensation differences (in the order of roughly $200K over your first three years).

Also, nice use of anon.

Just because a market doesn't hire SAs, that doesn't mean there aren't any jobs. It just means they don't follow the major market biglaw hiring patterns, which, IMO are completely ridiculous. I've looked into a number of secondary markets and found them to be a mixed bag. Some pay near market with low cost of living, done pay pennies, even in a COL adjusted basis. Some require a fuckton of hours, while others are a bit more relaxed. Some had a fairly large number of jobs, others just a few. Generalized statements do not apply.

Where did I make a generalized statement? My initial comment was that of the several hundred entry-level positions in small markets, many of them suffer from one flaw or another that make them far less appealing than one of the earlier posters had suggested, making the pool of actually desirable small market positions even smaller. You even agree with this point, noting that it's a mixed bag.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273256
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:43 am

Man. I feel lucky to have landed my SA gig in Seattle. 120k & 1800 billable sounds pretty good. Pretty much every partner I met had a family/kids.

Though to echo what someone else said though about secondary markets, there are maybe only 40-50 SA positions in the city.

dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3139
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Tue Oct 15, 2013 3:26 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Man. I feel lucky to have landed my SA gig in Seattle. 120k & 1800 billable sounds pretty good. Pretty much every partner I met had a family/kids.

Though to echo what someone else said though about secondary markets, there are maybe only 40-50 SA positions in the city.

Pretty much every partner everywhere has a family and kids. It's not like NYC is just full of ogres who live under their desks, emerging only to blow their paychecks at Per Se. Family life is hard to juggle no doubt, but people mostly seem to find a way (or quit, which lots do, or get divorced, which others do...).

User avatar
XxSpyKEx
Posts: 1741
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:48 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby XxSpyKEx » Tue Oct 15, 2013 10:02 pm

Anonymous User wrote:The only kind of relationships that works which I have seen with biglaw is the provider relationships where your SO is enabled to sit home all day and just have fun. You can find a girl who is happy to shop with your credit card as replacement to seeing you


NotMyRealName09 wrote:You can definately have a relationship with your SO's money that is nearly as satisfying as being with the SO him or herself. And you can always have an affair to satisfy your need for sex. Big Law seems so cool!


guano wrote:This is fucking bullshit. As long as your SO understands the requirements, things will work out. There are plenty of people who have succesful relationships.

The problem is that most people are not understanding of the life. If you have an SO who expects you to always be home for dinner, you're fucked. If you gave an SO who understands when you cancel attending your son's little league game or your daughter's dance recital half an hour before it's time, because that's what keeps the kids in private school and mommy in Louis Vuitton, then you're less likely to have problems


In other words, you need to find yourself a gold digging trophy wife who's likely cheating on you, and it'll work out great! lol

Anonymous User wrote:
NotMyRealName09 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:People really need to stop using their SA experience to tell people on the board what biglaw is like. Most firms instruct us to only give positive feedback on assignments no matter how bad your work is. We are in recruitment mode the entire summer when we tell you about our great lives. When you go out to lunch with us, we are not going to tell you the truth because we do not want to get fired for having an SA reject an offer because of us.

Wait until you get to the firm to tell people what is going on. That assignment you turned in as a summer really sucked. The wonderful boyfriend or girlfriend we said we had is threatening to leave us if we keep frequently returning home at 10:00 PM no matter what we make. After you start as a first year, go ask people how things are really going, it is a whole different story than what you were fed as a summer.


This recurring story, people tell this story as if we should feel bad, or that they system sucks. No one said you have to throw away your life to practice law. I'm sorry but if you work a job where keeping a wife is known to be difficult, what does it say about you that you CHOSE TO WORK THERE ANYWAYS. If you can land a job paying $160k, you can land one making $100k and have a family. It just doesn't make sense to me, or at least, I guess the type of people who want biglaw are the type of people for whom success in career outweighs contentment of soul.


I don't think the bolded is true. If there are $100K legal jobs with decent work/life balance I think everyone on here would like to hear about them. Please share.


The only thing I can think of like this would be federal government, but those don't pay $100k right out of law school. And federal government is insanely competitive (because most people see that fed gvt is a better deal than biglaw), so people who get biglaw, don't necessarily get federal government. Pre-financial crisis biglaw was the shit people did who couldn't get prestigious clerkships or fed gvt.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273256
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Oct 16, 2013 12:35 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:There are maybe a couple hundred in true secondary markets, many of which are nothing near the utopia you're describing (i.e., significant salary differences, poor job security (including SA offer rates), etc).

how would you know?

Because I investigated many of these markets (think Pittsburgh, Charlotte, Atlanta) and found that a number of firms (a) didn't hire SAs, (b) had a significant history of no-offers to SAs, (c) had a history of layoffs (small firms are more sensitive to things like partner defections or loss of a major client or general economic downturn), or (d) had significant compensation differences (in the order of roughly $200K over your first three years).

Also, nice use of anon.


why are you complaining of my use of anon when you are also using anon? in sum, we should listen to you, based on your "research" on Charlotte, and firms in the south? what makes you an expert on secondary markets because you investigated Charlotte, when there are people in this thread opining based on actual experience?

It's not wise to skip bidding on nyc for the chance at the 25 positions in Denver, Seattle, and Minneapolis, but there is a world out there outside New York, for those who can get it. Maybe you should actually listen to other people's perspectives. You know, people with actual experience, so you can, at least, compare.

you might even be surprised to learn there are numerous secondary market firms (as described by others above) with numerous refugees from V10's or v whatever.

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby guano » Wed Oct 16, 2013 7:31 am

XxSpyKEx wrote:
guano wrote:This is fucking bullshit. As long as your SO understands the requirements, things will work out. There are plenty of people who have succesful relationships.

The problem is that most people are not understanding of the life. If you have an SO who expects you to always be home for dinner, you're fucked. If you gave an SO who understands when you cancel attending your son's little league game or your daughter's dance recital half an hour before it's time, because that's what keeps the kids in private school and mommy in Louis Vuitton, then you're less likely to have problems


In other words, you need to find yourself a gold digging trophy wife who's likely cheating on you, and it'll work out great! lol

You're missing the point. But then, I don't think you're capable of getting it

dixiecupdrinking
Posts: 3139
Joined: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:39 pm

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby dixiecupdrinking » Wed Oct 16, 2013 8:28 am

guano wrote:
XxSpyKEx wrote:
guano wrote:This is fucking bullshit. As long as your SO understands the requirements, things will work out. There are plenty of people who have succesful relationships.

The problem is that most people are not understanding of the life. If you have an SO who expects you to always be home for dinner, you're fucked. If you gave an SO who understands when you cancel attending your son's little league game or your daughter's dance recital half an hour before it's time, because that's what keeps the kids in private school and mommy in Louis Vuitton, then you're less likely to have problems


In other words, you need to find yourself a gold digging trophy wife who's likely cheating on you, and it'll work out great! lol

You're missing the point. But then, I don't think you're capable of getting it

Yeah. It's more like, you obviously can't choose a career that requires you to be absent a lot and then expect it to work out with someone who is going to be upset by you being absent a lot.

I think instead of a gold-digger, the better match is someone who is also very busy.

User avatar
XxSpyKEx
Posts: 1741
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:48 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby XxSpyKEx » Wed Oct 16, 2013 8:40 pm

guano wrote:
XxSpyKEx wrote:
guano wrote:This is fucking bullshit. As long as your SO understands the requirements, things will work out. There are plenty of people who have succesful relationships.

The problem is that most people are not understanding of the life. If you have an SO who expects you to always be home for dinner, you're fucked. If you gave an SO who understands when you cancel attending your son's little league game or your daughter's dance recital half an hour before it's time, because that's what keeps the kids in private school and mommy in Louis Vuitton, then you're less likely to have problems


In other words, you need to find yourself a gold digging trophy wife who's likely cheating on you, and it'll work out great! lol

You're missing the point. But then, I don't think you're capable of getting it


You're so cool and smart bro. I bet you have tons of friends, and are the life of every party that's worthy of being graced by your presence.

I understand the point you were getting at. The problem is that the ideal "understanding" wife you are describing is most likely going to be a gold digger who's likely going to be cheating on you. But don't take my word for it, you'll learn soon enough.

dixiecupdrinking wrote:
guano wrote:
XxSpyKEx wrote:
guano wrote:This is fucking bullshit. As long as your SO understands the requirements, things will work out. There are plenty of people who have succesful relationships.

The problem is that most people are not understanding of the life. If you have an SO who expects you to always be home for dinner, you're fucked. If you gave an SO who understands when you cancel attending your son's little league game or your daughter's dance recital half an hour before it's time, because that's what keeps the kids in private school and mommy in Louis Vuitton, then you're less likely to have problems


In other words, you need to find yourself a gold digging trophy wife who's likely cheating on you, and it'll work out great! lol

You're missing the point. But then, I don't think you're capable of getting it

Yeah. It's more like, you obviously can't choose a career that requires you to be absent a lot and then expect it to work out with someone who is going to be upset by you being absent a lot.

I think instead of a gold-digger, the better match is someone who is also very busy.


If you can make that work, yes. I think the issue you're going to run into most of the time with a situation like this is coordinating having free time at the same time. With that said, I do know people who have made that work.

User avatar
captainwasabi09
Posts: 161
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2011 12:18 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby captainwasabi09 » Fri Oct 18, 2013 1:14 am

Anonymous User wrote:
NotMyRealName09 wrote:
BarbellDreams wrote:
NotMyRealName09 wrote:
This recurring story, people tell this story as if we should feel bad, or that they system sucks. No one said you have to throw away your life to practice law. I'm sorry but if you work a job where keeping a wife is known to be difficult, what does it say about you that you CHOSE TO WORK THERE ANYWAYS. If you can land a job paying $160k, you can land one making $100k and have a family. It just doesn't make sense to me, or at least, I guess the type of people who want biglaw are the type of people for whom success in career outweighs contentment of soul.


Literally laughed out loud at this. You truly are clueless about the state of the legal market friend.


I live it bro. 1950 per year is not insane. That's 39 billable hours per week with two weeks off. You stack up some huge weeks or bill on the occassional weekend, you can take even more time off, or go home at a normal time. And culturally - if you need to leave early to go to Timmy's baseball game, thats ok, makeup the time later (so long as you're not blowing a deadline or something). No one here, at least at my firm, will bust your chops for that.

One clarification though - I didn't suggest these jobs were plentiful. I merely said that if you have the credentials to land a $160k biglaw job, you also have the credentials to land a $100k mid-west style big/mid-law job if you really wanted. I know we're seeing, for example, tons more UofMich applicants, because they aren't focusing on NYC anymore. Great for us. But I never said you WILL get one of these jobs, just that you could.

If your only option in life is to either take biglaw at $160k or nothing, of course you take the job. If students were to get savvy and realize it's not only biglaw or bust, and send an app or two to the large firms in mid-west markets, you might be surprised at the interest you'd recieve, especially if your resume is good enough to get you that $160k NYC biglaw position. Good enough for them? Good enough for us.

And I'll conclude by just saying good luck everyone - I'm aware it's difficult out there. I'm just saying that in a buyer's market like this, where there are too many law students and not enough jobs, the top students can enter markets they might otherwise not have considered and push out the regional students who normally get those jobs.

And love, it's a motherfucker, eh?


For me, I would have to assume that you have longevity at these firms. Is that true? There would have to be some real expectations I would make partner or otherwise I wouldn't do it.

Over the course of 4-5 years, you would be talking substantial pay differences. Sure, the hours tremendously suck. But if your career at either place (midwest or NYC) is 4 years tops, and the pay difference can be as high as $240K, why not live hell on earth for 4 years (before you turn 30) and get out?

Associates at the midwestern firms I met with didn't seem any happier than the NYC ones. Instead, they were making less money.


FWIW, a firm in Michigan told me there was an expectation of longevity at the firm, especially if you come from a top-ranked school. With the cost of living in suburban Detroit/Grand Rapids, you could easily buy a house in your early-mid twenties. (And personal opinion -- I think the men are better there too.) Turning that type of life down is a decision I rethink every other day.

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby guano » Fri Oct 18, 2013 8:49 am

XxSpyKEx wrote:
guano wrote:
XxSpyKEx wrote:
guano wrote:This is fucking bullshit. As long as your SO understands the requirements, things will work out. There are plenty of people who have succesful relationships.

The problem is that most people are not understanding of the life. If you have an SO who expects you to always be home for dinner, you're fucked. If you gave an SO who understands when you cancel attending your son's little league game or your daughter's dance recital half an hour before it's time, because that's what keeps the kids in private school and mommy in Louis Vuitton, then you're less likely to have problems


In other words, you need to find yourself a gold digging trophy wife who's likely cheating on you, and it'll work out great! lol

You're missing the point. But then, I don't think you're capable of getting it


You're so cool and smart bro. I bet you have tons of friends, and are the life of every party that's worthy of being graced by your presence.

I understand the point you were getting at. The problem is that the ideal "understanding" wife you are describing is most likely going to be a gold digger who's likely going to be cheating on you. But don't take my word for it, you'll learn soon enough.


Like I said, you don't get it. There are plenty of non-gold differs who understand. Some have high demand careers themselves, others are happy to be a stay-at-home mom (or dad) and appreciate the sacrifices you make to be able to give her that. Believe it or not, not everyone on this planet is motivated by money.

User avatar
XxSpyKEx
Posts: 1741
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 5:48 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby XxSpyKEx » Sun Oct 27, 2013 10:22 pm

guano wrote:
XxSpyKEx wrote:
XxSpyKEx wrote:
guano wrote:This is fucking bullshit. As long as your SO understands the requirements, things will work out. There are plenty of people who have succesful relationships.

The problem is that most people are not understanding of the life. If you have an SO who expects you to always be home for dinner, you're fucked. If you gave an SO who understands when you cancel attending your son's little league game or your daughter's dance recital half an hour before it's time, because that's what keeps the kids in private school and mommy in Louis Vuitton, then you're less likely to have problems


In other words, you need to find yourself a gold digging trophy wife who's likely cheating on you, and it'll work out great! lol


You're so cool and smart bro. I bet you have tons of friends, and are the life of every party that's worthy of being graced by your presence.

I understand the point you were getting at. The problem is that the ideal "understanding" wife you are describing is most likely going to be a gold digger who's likely going to be cheating on you. But don't take my word for it, you'll learn soon enough.


Like I said, you don't get it. There are plenty of non-gold differs who understand. Some have high demand careers themselves, others are happy to be a stay-at-home mom (or dad) and appreciate the sacrifices you make to be able to give her that. Believe it or not, not everyone on this planet is motivated by money.


I don't believe it. I think, for the most part, those stay-at-home moms get bored, sooner or later, and start cheating. The ones who aren't motivated by money are going to want you to be there. I don't think you're going to find very many women who are down with effectively being single, dealing with everything on their own, but would love you just the same if you were completely broke. But don't take my word on it, you'll learn it for yourself when you catch your wife cheating on you.

The ones with highly demanding careers themselves are a completely different situation that the mother you described in your other post. I do think that situation can work, but it's a difficult one to coordinate initially (i.e. it's difficult to have free time at the same times).

User avatar
kalvano
Posts: 11723
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:24 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby kalvano » Sun Oct 27, 2013 10:36 pm

Late to this thread, but just started working at a firm with a 1950 requirement with a wife and a brand-new baby. It's tough but it's doable. Set a schedule and stick to it, get your hours in at work so you can get home and have family time. I think it heavily depends on the type of firm you are at. Mine has very little face time requirement, and is very good about not caring when you get you work done so long as it gets done.

Shockingly, the key to making it work is good communication.

User avatar
guano
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2013 9:49 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby guano » Mon Oct 28, 2013 7:56 am

kalvano wrote:Shockingly, the key to making it work is good communication.

Spreading the gospel

User avatar
hyakku
Posts: 604
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 9:35 pm

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby hyakku » Mon Oct 28, 2013 11:34 am

kalvano wrote:Late to this thread, but just started working at a firm with a 1950 requirement with a wife and a brand-new baby. It's tough but it's doable. Set a schedule and stick to it, get your hours in at work so you can get home and have family time. I think it heavily depends on the type of firm you are at. Mine has very little face time requirement, and is very good about not caring when you get you work done so long as it gets done.

Shockingly, the key to making it work is good communication.


Woah woah get out of here with that logic and optimism, there are lawyers afoot. Don't you know that nothing in the world is worst than having a job that requires you to work 1900+ hours a year?? There are Americans out there who live FOR FREE off of OBAMA while we toil away supporting the have nots. The nerve.

User avatar
homestyle28
Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:48 pm

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby homestyle28 » Mon Oct 28, 2013 12:01 pm

guano wrote:
kalvano wrote:Shockingly, the key to making it work is good communication.

Spreading the gospel


+ a shit ton of caffeine

Anonymous User
Posts: 273256
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Managing a Relationship in Big Law

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Sep 28, 2015 4:02 pm

Your spouse has to be super understanding and oftentimes people in biglaw will be married to someone who either does not work or works normal hours and has their own hobbies, etc. My spouse works normal hours and is not in biglaw and spends a lot of time doing their own hobbies.

There's a reason why there's a lot of single, unmarried folks in biglaw over 30 though - aside from personality problems (not uncommon in biglaw), it does not leave a lot of time for dating.

User avatar
chalky
Posts: 179
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 10:20 am

Post removed...

Postby chalky » Mon Sep 28, 2015 4:11 pm

Post removed...
Last edited by chalky on Tue Dec 29, 2015 9:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.