BigLaw Third Year Regulatory Associate Taking Questions Forum

[Anonymous User]

Looking forward to giving back to the community. Ask away.

[Vincent]

Thanks for doing this, mysterious Anonymous User.

What ultimately steered you into Regulatory Work? Was it something you'd be looking at through school, or did it happen further down the line?

[Anonymous User]

Looking forward to giving back to the community. Ask away.

Thanks for doing this. I am going to work for a financial regulator after law school, but definitely plan to spend some time in the private sector as well.

Did you have any gov. experience before going to big law? How about your fellow regulatory associate?

What exactly do you do as a regulatory associate day-to-day? I would assume it's mostly advisory/advocacy work but I am unsure of what that actually "looks" like.

Are your exit options limited to gov. or do your firm's clients have internal positions that would make a good fit?

Are your hours similar to those working in corp./lit.?

[gulcregret]

Thanks for doing this, mysterious Anonymous User.

What ultimately steered you into Regulatory Work? Was it something you'd be looking at through school, or did it happen further down the line?

Sorry did not mean to anonymous post.

I was always into regulatory work. I worked on the Hill before LS doing financial regulatory work during the economic collapse, and was in on the early stages of Dodd-Frank. I was PT at GULC and after LS I went to OCC/FDIC for two years and just recently joined a firm with a strong banking regulatory practice.

[gulcregret]

Thanks for doing this. I am going to work for a financial regulator after law school, but definitely plan to spend some time in the private sector as well.

Did you have any gov. experience before going to big law? How about your fellow regulatory associate?

What exactly do you do as a regulatory associate day-to-day? I would assume it's mostly advisory/advocacy work but I am unsure of what that actually "looks" like.

Are your exit options limited to gov. or do your firm's clients have internal positions that would make a good fit?

Are your hours similar to those working in corp./lit.?

Had Hill experience before LS and then went to OCC/FDIC after LS. A third or so of my colleagues have government experience at some point. It is valued highly here and if you are at the OCC/FDIC/Fed/CFTC/CFPB, you will almost certainly get an interview if you are coming out of an honors program or have spent 2 years at the regulator.

I do a blend of work. No advocacy at all. Half of my day is spent advising banks or financial institutions regarding financial products and how to keep them in compliance with federal (and some state) laws. For example, if a bank wants to offer a credit card with a teaser rewards program, what are the rules. Or if a bank wants to negotiate a warehouse line or floor plan with a mortgage broker or auto lender. We also respond to regulators examination or investigation requests and do a lot of pre litigation work.

The other half of the day is spent doing transactional work but very focused on federal compliance. So bank mergers are big. Also, if a PE firm wants to buy a bank or a non-bank lender. We do the compliance diligence, reviewing contracts, policies and procedures, general business plans, etc.

Exit options are great. Could go to a wide range of client's from commercial to investment banks to PE firms, to regulators, to industry trade associations, or the Hill.

Hours are steady (9-6, every other weekend maybe). No real deadlines, except for when we are called in as an afterthought to a major transaction that is closing in a week. Mostly the regulatory diligence is done up front and does not cost that much comparatively so it's out of the way and it helps to negotiate price, I guess.

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for doing this. I am going to work for a financial regulator after law school, but definitely plan to spend some time in the private sector as well.

Did you have any gov. experience before going to big law? How about your fellow regulatory associate?

What exactly do you do as a regulatory associate day-to-day? I would assume it's mostly advisory/advocacy work but I am unsure of what that actually "looks" like.

Are your exit options limited to gov. or do your firm's clients have internal positions that would make a good fit?

Are your hours similar to those working in corp./lit.?

Had Hill experience before LS and then went to OCC/FDIC after LS. A third or so of my colleagues have government experience at some point. It is valued highly here and if you are at the OCC/FDIC/Fed/CFTC/CFPB, you will almost certainly get an interview if you are coming out of an honors program or have spent 2 years at the regulator.

I do a blend of work. No advocacy at all. Half of my day is spent advising banks or financial institutions regarding financial products and how to keep them in compliance with federal (and some state) laws. For example, if a bank wants to offer a credit card with a teaser rewards program, what are the rules. Or if a bank wants to negotiate a warehouse line or floor plan with a mortgage broker or auto lender. We also respond to regulators examination or investigation requests and do a lot of pre litigation work.

The other half of the day is spent doing transactional work but very focused on federal compliance. So bank mergers are big. Also, if a PE firm wants to buy a bank or a non-bank lender. We do the compliance diligence, reviewing contracts, policies and procedures, general business plans, etc.

Exit options are great. Could go to a wide range of client's from commercial to investment banks to PE firms, to regulators, to industry trade associations, or the Hill.

Hours are steady (9-6, every other weekend maybe). No real deadlines, except for when we are called in as an afterthought to a major transaction that is closing in a week. Mostly the regulatory diligence is done up front and does not cost that much comparatively so it's out of the way and it helps to negotiate price, I guess.

Being that you went from big gov to big law without any prior firm experience, did you feel like you had to get up to speed pretty quickly once you arrived at the firm? I would think the work you did was at the FDIC/OCC was pretty different from some of the stuff you do at the firm. As a 1st year they don't expect you to know much, but I am assuming you came in as a 2nd or 3rd year and the expectations were somewhat higher.

If you are looking to lateral from an agency, when you you think would be too early or too late? I've heard before 3 years is not ideal because you don't know enough, but longer than 5 years and you may have a problem, especially if you have no former firm experience.

[misterjames]

In terms of hiring, how is state financial regulatory work looked at from the private sector? How do federal agencies feel about it?

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for doing this! Since the conventional wisdom here is that bigfed gigs seem to be pretty good in terms of hours/benefits, I was wondering what led you to make the switch over to biglaw? Mainly the salary difference?

[gulcregret]

Being that you went from big gov to big law without any prior firm experience, did you feel like you had to get up to speed pretty quickly once you arrived at the firm? I would think the work you did was at the FDIC/OCC was pretty different from some of the stuff you do at the firm. As a 1st year they don't expect you to know much, but I am assuming you came in as a 2nd or 3rd year and the expectations were somewhat higher.

If you are looking to lateral from an agency, when you you think would be too early or too late? I've heard before 3 years is not ideal because you don't know enough, but longer than 5 years and you may have a problem, especially if you have no former firm experience.

The work is not all that different, in fact, it is much easier at the firm. Basically, being a law firm associate is more about managing your workload and delivering projects in the way that your partners prefer. The work is not hard, it's more about staying focused because it can be incredibly boring. Researching FDIC regs and guidance or OCC rules re: bank mergers and formation processes is incredibly easy. Summarizing for a client or partner is even easier. Basically for the first 5-6 years as an associate you are not given work at which you can fail, unless you try. This is my opinion and what I have seen thus far. In the regulatory and transaction space for young attorneys, there is very little mentally stimulating work that one completes. So no, I did not need to get up to speed. And as far as I can tell, they do not expect much out of me other than complete the assignments I get as quickly and completely as possible.

Spending two years at a regulator is plenty. I am not alone in my firm and other regulatory shops in that I came out after two years. If you stay longer, you have a chance to come in as a senior associate or counsel. Firms value that experience, the more the better. Firms care less about firm experience than they do a demonstrated ability to become an expert and work hard. They know if you are applying after a 5-6 years at an agency that you are looking for more money and they know that you know you will have to bill the requisite hours. I am actively attempting to recruit my old manager who has 15 years at the regulator. Our firm just pulled a lifer from another agency as a partner.

[gulcregret]

In terms of hiring, how is state financial regulatory work looked at from the private sector? How do federal agencies feel about it?

Depends on the practice. I think firms that have insurance and mortgage banking practices would like state regulatory experience. If it shows your interest and you have good grades then it could get you an interview with firms. Federal agencies like to see a commitment to government work so they will like state regulatory experience. Familiarity with the process is a plus. My firm does some state level work but not much, however, having that experience could be very helpful at a regional firm or one focused on state regulatory work (obviously).

[gulcregret]

Thanks for doing this! Since the conventional wisdom here is that bigfed gigs seem to be pretty good in terms of hours/benefits, I was wondering what led you to make the switch over to biglaw? Mainly the salary difference?

The hours are not that much different frankly. The benefits are better at my firm, except for the retirement plan that federal government jobs offer. I have cheaper and better health insurance, a good deal of fringe benefits, 401k profit sharing contribution (not common at most biglaw firms), etc.

Honestly, I was working 50 hour weeks at the regulator and sometimes a lot more if circumstances required. The difference was we got comp time so I could have extra days off entirely when it was slow. At the same time, work is cyclical here as well and some weeks if we are slow I am told that we can work from home or just take days off. There is no vacation plan at the firm so it's basically an honor system such that you can take time off whenever you want as long as it doesn't interfere with client needs.

At the end of the day, I will probably jump back to the gov after a few years. I came out to make a few bucks and see what biglaw was all about. I like it but the hours can interfere with your quality of life, especially when you have young kids. But I think the revolving door advances your career faster than putting in a block of time at one place. My next move will most likely be to a policy gig. Those jobs are 9-5, until another Dodd-Frank comes.

[Anonymous User]

Does the law school you went to or grades matter when lateral over from an agency to big law after a couple of years? Or do they focus more on the experience you have from working in government?

[gulcregret]

Does the law school you went to or grades matter when lateral over from an agency to big law after a couple of years? Or do they focus more on the experience you have from working in government?

Law school and grades probably matter until you have substantial work experience (5-6 plus years) or a book of business. I think it mattered in that I would not have been able to get the agency job without it and without the agency job I would be less attractive to the firm. However, if you can land a job at an agency and stay 2-3 years then your grades and school will matter less than if you had no experience.

[tkim129]

Dumb question, what is the average length of time between graduation and beginning your 1st year as an associate (assuming that you get an offer). I'm assuming that you get some time to study and take the bar, but what should we expect?

[wert3813]

Dumb question, what is the average length of time between graduation and beginning your 1st year as an associate (assuming that you get an offer). I'm assuming that you get some time to study and take the bar, but what should we expect?

Not sure how this is specific for him? Usually you take the bar in July and start at some point in the fall.

Most/some regulatory firms do government contracts, healthcare, etc. You have a thought on those practices? What is similar different from your experience? Hours/QoL/type of work/exit options?

[gulcregret]

Dumb question, what is the average length of time between graduation and beginning your 1st year as an associate (assuming that you get an offer). I'm assuming that you get some time to study and take the bar, but what should we expect?

You get from May to July to study and take the bar then at least a few weeks before starting your job. For government, I started in September, for firms there is a range of August to October, I guess. However long it is, enjoy it.

[gulcregret]

Most/some regulatory firms do government contracts, healthcare, etc. You have a thought on those practices? What is similar different from your experience? Hours/QoL/type of work/exit options?

I cannot really speak to the government contracts. I would assume that the fees are flat fee agreements up front or discounted rates as opposed to the full nationwide rates firms would charge private sector clients. Probably some other restrictions in the FAR that would apply to those projects. And you may get to network with folks in the government.

Similarities between government regulator and biglaw associate? First, I really have not seen that much of an increase in hours, to be honest. The only thing is at the firm it is expected that you are on call pretty much 24/7 and the government they respected your time a little more. If it was something on the weekend, it could mostly always wait until Monday. But that is not the case at at the firm. If you get a question Saturday morning, you better respond to the email by afternoon or risk hearing about it. You may not have to complete the work (but you usually do) but you have to be responsive. All the time. That part kind of kills me. I know the money is great, whatever, but 24/7 on call is kind of ridiculous. They don't pay enough, in my opinion. But that's just me, some people will disagree and they have strong arguments. Clients pay a ton of money for our services so we have to be responsive to their needs, etc.

Type of work is not all that different. Research and writing is what we do as regulatory attorneys. I now deal with clients and the government. In the government I dealt with interested parties (private sector people and lawyers). But the nitty gritty is still the same. I research a statute or regulation and analyze what it means, apply a set of facts (actions that the bank has done or is considering doing) and come to a conclusion/provide some advice. When you boil it down, it's all the same. I guess I was a little more aggressive in the government role in trying to make arguments to show non-compliance than I am now. Most of my work now is advisory, like before problems have occurred. We try to avoid problems.

I think exit options are basically the same. I discussed those in the above post so I won't rehash here.

[Anonymous User]

Did you ever come across lawyers that worked in regulatory consulting prior to working at the financial regulator or at the law firm? I came in as a senior associate at of the the top fin. reg. consulting firms and am wondering if regulators or law firms ever hire these people since they have good experience and client interaction?

[gulcregret]

Did you ever come across lawyers that worked in regulatory consulting prior to working at the financial regulator or at the law firm? I came in as a senior associate at of the the top fin. reg. consulting firms and am wondering if regulators or law firms ever hire these people since they have good experience and client interaction?

So you worked at like a Promontory or something in between college and LS and want to know if that will help in getting a job in a firm or regulator? Senior associate, so that's like at least 3-4 years experience? I am guessing you will be at a huge advantage. Both the firm and the regulator I was with will LOVE that experience. If you have even median grades at a decent school you are pretty much a lock to get an interview, assuming you don't have glaring typos or other errors on your resume.

[wert3813]

Most/some regulatory firms do government contracts, healthcare, etc. You have a thought on those practices? What is similar different from government contracts, regulatory healthcare, to regulatory banking? Hours/QoL/type of work/exit options (between different regulatory groups)?

I cannot really speak to the government contracts. I would assume that the fees are flat fee agreements up front or discounted rates as opposed to the full nationwide rates firms would charge private sector clients. Probably some other restrictions in the FAR that would apply to those projects. And you may get to network with folks in the government.

Similarities between government regulator and biglaw associate? First, I really have not seen that much of an increase in hours, to be honest. The only thing is at the firm it is expected that you are on call pretty much 24/7 and the government they respected your time a little more. If it was something on the weekend, it could mostly always wait until Monday. But that is not the case at at the firm. If you get a question Saturday morning, you better respond to the email by afternoon or risk hearing about it. You may not have to complete the work (but you usually do) but you have to be responsive. All the time. That part kind of kills me. I know the money is great, whatever, but 24/7 on call is kind of ridiculous. They don't pay enough, in my opinion. But that's just me, some people will disagree and they have strong arguments. Clients pay a ton of money for our services so we have to be responsive to their needs, etc.

Type of work is not all that different. Research and writing is what we do as regulatory attorneys. I now deal with clients and the government. In the government I dealt with interested parties (private sector people and lawyers). But the nitty gritty is still the same. I research a statute or regulation and analyze what it means, apply a set of facts (actions that the bank has done or is considering doing) and come to a conclusion/provide some advice. When you boil it down, it's all the same. I guess I was a little more aggressive in the government role in trying to make arguments to show non-compliance than I am now. Most of my work now is advisory, like before problems have occurred. We try to avoid problems.

I think exit options are basically the same. I discussed those in the above post so I won't rehash here.

Thanks. So I poorly phrased my question. I modified and bolded to make it more clear. Based off your first paragraph I'm not so much re-asking since is seems like you may not know, so much as I'm clarifying. Thanks for taking questions.

[gulcregret]

I got you now. So I can tell you some differences between other regulatory groups at my firm. We do healthcare and energy regulatory. I think between the groups, it is not much different outside of the obvious substantive areas of the law. Regulatory lawyers will get involved with litigation, transactions, and advisory work. We happen to use litigators who specialize in specific areas so our regulatory people just serve as subject matter experts when things are complicated or will sometimes manage and respond to regulatory requests for information or audit findings.

I think the hours are pretty much the same. If there is an energy transaction or hearing that is time sensitive, then the regulatory associates work 16 hour days (or more). But mostly its a 9-6ish job. We don't have a minimum billable requirement but most people will do an average of 170 hours per month. The bonus money does not really justify doing a ton more and I think the only reasons for doing more are to a) make partner or b) because you have nothing else to do that you like doing more than working. If that makes sense.

Healthcare people seem incredibly busy advising on a range of issues from privacy to ACA compliance. There is a ton of contract review and the practice seems to intertwine with insurance quite a bit. I think we mostly do litigation and advisory work in the healthcare space as transactions have dried up lately. There were a ton of transactions before ACA went into effect because PE and other owners wanted out until things cleared up. That's how it was here, anyway.

Please follow up if this did not answer directly.

[Anonymous User]

Did you ever come across lawyers that worked in regulatory consulting prior to working at the financial regulator or at the law firm? I came in as a senior associate at of the the top fin. reg. consulting firms and am wondering if regulators or law firms ever hire these people since they have good experience and client interaction?

So you worked at like a Promontory or something in between college and LS and want to know if that will help in getting a job in a firm or regulator? Senior associate, so that's like at least 3-4 years experience? I am guessing you will be at a huge advantage. Both the firm and the regulator I was with will LOVE that experience. If you have even median grades at a decent school you are pretty much a lock to get an interview, assuming you don't have glaring typos or other errors on your resume.

Actually I work at a Big 4 consulting firm in their Reg and Risk practice now having graduated from law school, came in as a senior associate. Work on a ton of of different reg issues for large financial institutions like SIFI reporting, Volcker implementation and strategy, asset management reporting, Title VII implementation, etc. Is this type of experience looked upon as valuable at a law firm or a financial regulator? A bunch of my colleagues came from law firms and regulators, but not sure if any go back.

[gulcregret]

Did you ever come across lawyers that worked in regulatory consulting prior to working at the financial regulator or at the law firm? I came in as a senior associate at of the the top fin. reg. consulting firms and am wondering if regulators or law firms ever hire these people since they have good experience and client interaction?

So you worked at like a Promontory or something in between college and LS and want to know if that will help in getting a job in a firm or regulator? Senior associate, so that's like at least 3-4 years experience? I am guessing you will be at a huge advantage. Both the firm and the regulator I was with will LOVE that experience. If you have even median grades at a decent school you are pretty much a lock to get an interview, assuming you don't have glaring typos or other errors on your resume.

Actually I work at a Big 4 consulting firm in their Reg and Risk practice now having graduated from law school, came in as a senior associate. Work on a ton of of different reg issues for large financial institutions like SIFI reporting, Volcker implementation and strategy, asset management reporting, Title VII implementation, etc. Is this type of experience looked upon as valuable at a law firm or a financial regulator? A bunch of my colleagues came from law firms and regulators, but not sure if any go back.

I think a regulator will definitely value the experience and the focus. I would attempt to network with your clients as much as possible and regulators as well, but this kind of goes without saying. You may not be able to get a counsel or attorney-advisor position with a regulator but you would get a policy or substance area expert/analyst position with the OCC/CFPB/FDIC/FED/CFTC/NCUA. All of those groups will have a need for people with your experience. Just make sure you spell it out on your resume and answer the application questions correctly. And if possible, make the right connections.

For law firms, I think it could be different because you are not practicing law. But regulatory shops will like the subject matter experience and compliance people at consulting shops do similar work as biglaw regulatory associates. I think this may be harder because of the stigma consultants carry as perceived by partners in law firms.

You should get to know a few of the people who have made lateral moves at your firm and ask them questions (if you have not already).

[Veni_Vidi_Vici]

What school did you go to?

How much money do you make?

[Anonymous User]

Thanks for doing this. I am going to work for a financial regulator after law school, but definitely plan to spend some time in the private sector as well.

Did you have any gov. experience before going to big law? How about your fellow regulatory associate?

What exactly do you do as a regulatory associate day-to-day? I would assume it's mostly advisory/advocacy work but I am unsure of what that actually "looks" like.

Are your exit options limited to gov. or do your firm's clients have internal positions that would make a good fit?

Are your hours similar to those working in corp./lit.?

Had Hill experience before LS and then went to OCC/FDIC after LS. A third or so of my colleagues have government experience at some point. It is valued highly here and if you are at the OCC/FDIC/Fed/CFTC/CFPB, you will almost certainly get an interview if you are coming out of an honors program or have spent 2 years at the regulator.

I do a blend of work. No advocacy at all. Half of my day is spent advising banks or financial institutions regarding financial products and how to keep them in compliance with federal (and some state) laws. For example, if a bank wants to offer a credit card with a teaser rewards program, what are the rules. Or if a bank wants to negotiate a warehouse line or floor plan with a mortgage broker or auto lender. We also respond to regulators examination or investigation requests and do a lot of pre litigation work.

The other half of the day is spent doing transactional work but very focused on federal compliance. So bank mergers are big. Also, if a PE firm wants to buy a bank or a non-bank lender. We do the compliance diligence, reviewing contracts, policies and procedures, general business plans, etc.

Exit options are great. Could go to a wide range of client's from commercial to investment banks to PE firms, to regulators, to industry trade associations, or the Hill.

Hours are steady (9-6, every other weekend maybe). No real deadlines, except for when we are called in as an afterthought to a major transaction that is closing in a week. Mostly the regulatory diligence is done up front and does not cost that much comparatively so it's out of the way and it helps to negotiate price, I guess.

Hey--re-opening this conversation. I am currently considering doing Financial Regulatory work at a NY firm like SullCrom, Davis Polk, Cleary, etc. Is their work different from what you describe? /Are the exit opportunities similar / is it possible to lateral from a NY financial regulatory practice to a DC one?