How Many of You Are Planning to Quit After You Get This Bonus? Forum

[Anonymous User]

I find 1800 hours a year to be awful and totally incompatible with healthy personal habits and maintaining durable relationships with friends and family, but 1800 isn't even high hours! Is it that some people just have a higher pain tolerance, but we all hate the work more or less the same? I suppose if you're really in debt or money-motivated, that would make a big difference. I made the deal with myself that once my students loans were paid and I had a house down payment, I was out, but my in-house salary is a 25% pay cut, and that will just widen compared to my biglaw peer group over time, and it seems like a no brainer to me, but I guess a lot of people on here would say that's exactly the wrong moment to get off the gravy train. At the margins I'm sure there are people who find biglaw work perfectly fine and have no complaints, but I can't believe that's more than a very small minority.

It's just so amazing that everyone can have similar experiences in the profession and have such completely different reactions.

I agree that 1800 hours is still a miserable experience. The months where I bill on that kind of pace still suck and for me wouldn't be a sustainable lifestyle, but they're just not as bad as a typical month (which is even more miserable). I think about how many hours my non-lawyer friends would actually "bill" in a week, and it quickly puts things into perspective.

I will probably stick it out another 12-18 months because I'm still too junior to go in-house, but the moment I can get a job that pays at least $200K for something resembling a 9-5 I'm out of here. I wonder how many people are worried about taking a sizable pay cut just to end up working the same hours, and haven't taken the leap for that reason.

If I billed between 7-9 hours a day Monday through Friday - I could do this job forever. The amount of flexibility and freedom the job gives is unparalleled. No pressure to come into the office, or make yourself look busy when you have no work going on. You get to basically be on vacation when you're slow. (This has been my experience at my firm - understand that's not the case for everyone). I just can't imagine going to a 9-5 and making chit-chat at the water cooler with Bill from accounting every Monday morning at 9am, or being in pointless meetings where people talk at length about everything except the work at hand. My philosophy is simple - I'll work if I have to work, but I want none of your other bullshit (happy hours, team building, etc.), unless it's 100% up to me to attend.

On the flip side, being on call all the time and several weeks/months in a row of 12-15 hours a day are what drive me insane. I'm about to be a 4th year, and I'd say I have another 2-3 years in me before I get out.

I was a bit embarrassed with the available time issue during my interviews to go in-house. Speaking with my future boss, I said something along the lines of "I don't want to seem uncommitted, but except for when something really exceptional is happening, I basically expect to be offline evenings and weekends, and it'll be an issue for me if that's not the case." She actually laughed at me and said something along the lines of "this isn't a firm - weeks and weeks go by where we don't get a single work e-mail over the weekend. I've worked passed 6:00 once or twice in the last two months." I came off like a recovering trauma victim. The spectrum of reasonable/acceptable professional behavior you become accustomed to in a firm doesn't map on to almost any other workplace.

[Anonymous User]

I would without question quit the day after my bonus is paid but I have nowhere to go (yet). I already lateraled so switching firms again doesn’t seem like a viable option. And while I was historically very marketable with private firms (e.g., had plenty of options at EIP and in post-clerkship recruiting), nothing else has worked out. I thought with my background there would be more options open to me, but as hot as the biglaw market is, the opportunities outside of biglaw (for litigators at least) seem extremely sparse. Either that, or I just suck.

I am tempted to quit after bonus payouts with no job, but too scared and professionally risk averse to take that leap without knowing when and where I would land.

[Joachim2017]

I would without question quit the day after my bonus is paid but I have nowhere to go (yet). I already lateraled so switching firms again doesn’t seem like a viable option. And while I was historically very marketable with private firms (e.g., had plenty of options at EIP and in post-clerkship recruiting), nothing else has worked out. I thought with my background there would be more options open to me, but as hot as the biglaw market is, the opportunities outside of biglaw (for litigators at least) seem extremely sparse. Either that, or I just suck.

I am tempted to quit after bonus payouts with no job, but too scared and professionally risk averse to take that leap without knowing when and where I would land.

That is surprising to hear. Do you think you just interview badly? Or were you not able to secure initial lateral interviews at all? Another possibility is that you're too senior now, as that will cause some firms to hesitate because you'd need to be up for partner soon.

[Anonymous User]

Younger associates are not driven by money in the same way as older staff are, argues Natasha Harrison, outgoing managing partner at Boies Schiller Flexner. “Throwing money at [associates] is a short-term fix — they just burn out and leave anyway. The pay rates are unsustainable. I don’t think it’s the solution.”

-- From:
https://www.ft.com/content/e4c29c47-64c ... a3c65866d6 [Article title: "The Pay Rates for Lawyers Are Unsustainable"]


Welp, we solved Boies Schiller's problem...

[Elston Gunn]

If I billed between 7-9 hours a day Monday through Friday - I could do this job forever. The amount of flexibility and freedom the job gives is unparalleled. No pressure to come into the office, or make yourself look busy when you have no work going on. You get to basically be on vacation when you're slow. (This has been my experience at my firm - understand that's not the case for everyone). I just can't imagine going to a 9-5 and making chit-chat at the water cooler with Bill from accounting every Monday morning at 9am, or being in pointless meetings where people talk at length about everything except the work at hand. My philosophy is simple - I'll work if I have to work, but I want none of your other bullshit (happy hours, team building, etc.), unless it's 100% up to me to attend.

Fwiw, I was a bit worried about this too going in-house, but haven’t found it to be the case at all. I went to a tech company where a large portion of us will probably never go back to the office more than occasionally, and if anything I have more flexibility than I did in Biglaw.

[Anonymous User]

I would without question quit the day after my bonus is paid but I have nowhere to go (yet). I already lateraled so switching firms again doesn’t seem like a viable option. And while I was historically very marketable with private firms (e.g., had plenty of options at EIP and in post-clerkship recruiting), nothing else has worked out. I thought with my background there would be more options open to me, but as hot as the biglaw market is, the opportunities outside of biglaw (for litigators at least) seem extremely sparse. Either that, or I just suck.

I am tempted to quit after bonus payouts with no job, but too scared and professionally risk averse to take that leap without knowing when and where I would land.

That is surprising to hear. Do you think you just interview badly? Or were you not able to secure initial lateral interviews at all? Another possibility is that you're too senior now, as that will cause some firms to hesitate because you'd need to be up for partner soon.

Anon quoted here. I could definitely lateral to another firm, even at my current seniority; that’s not really the point. As I said, I’ve already done that once (within the past year), and I feel like it would do resume damage to do so again. Lateraling to a third firm within several years could burn bridges whereas everyone would understand moving on to other things. It also wouldn’t serve any real purpose to make another lateral move as I want out of biglaw altogether. I don’t think another firm would be a materially better experience than the ones I’ve already had.

The point is that I haven’t been able to land any non-firm opportunities despite trying for a long time. The vast majority of the jobs I’ve applied to (on USAJobs, agency direct postings and resume drops, some in house) have been radio silence. I’ve had two interviews this year (both gov’t) and was ghosted both times, so interview quality could be an issue but I’ve never failed to convert callbacks to offers with private firms, so my interviewing has never been a hindrance in the past.

[Anonymous User]

I’m contemplating it heavily. Would move to Europe to get an LLM in a country that gives lifetime residence cards to masters grads there. Would use foreign earned income exclusion to basically ignore student loans forever.

As bad as biglaw is, pulling the trigger on giving up this kind of money is hard. Still on the fence.

[Anonymous User]

I would without question quit the day after my bonus is paid but I have nowhere to go (yet). I already lateraled so switching firms again doesn’t seem like a viable option. And while I was historically very marketable with private firms (e.g., had plenty of options at EIP and in post-clerkship recruiting), nothing else has worked out. I thought with my background there would be more options open to me, but as hot as the biglaw market is, the opportunities outside of biglaw (for litigators at least) seem extremely sparse. Either that, or I just suck.

I am tempted to quit after bonus payouts with no job, but too scared and professionally risk averse to take that leap without knowing when and where I would land.

That is surprising to hear. Do you think you just interview badly? Or were you not able to secure initial lateral interviews at all? Another possibility is that you're too senior now, as that will cause some firms to hesitate because you'd need to be up for partner soon.

Anon quoted here. I could definitely lateral to another firm, even at my current seniority; that’s not really the point. As I said, I’ve already done that once (within the past year), and I feel like it would do resume damage to do so again. Lateraling to a third firm within several years could burn bridges whereas everyone would understand moving on to other things. It also wouldn’t serve any real purpose to make another lateral move as I want out of biglaw altogether. I don’t think another firm would be a materially better experience than the ones I’ve already had.

The point is that I haven’t been able to land any non-firm opportunities despite trying for a long time. The vast majority of the jobs I’ve applied to (on USAJobs, agency direct postings and resume drops, some in house) have been radio silence. I’ve had two interviews this year (both gov’t) and was ghosted both times, so interview quality could be an issue but I’ve never failed to convert callbacks to offers with private firms, so my interviewing has never been a hindrance in the past.

I got a job in house from litigation this year, and all I’ll add is it took a lot more than a few applications. Tons, lots of interviews, leading to just two offers.

[Anonymous User]

If I billed between 7-9 hours a day Monday through Friday - I could do this job forever. The amount of flexibility and freedom the job gives is unparalleled. No pressure to come into the office, or make yourself look busy when you have no work going on. You get to basically be on vacation when you're slow. (This has been my experience at my firm - understand that's not the case for everyone). I just can't imagine going to a 9-5 and making chit-chat at the water cooler with Bill from accounting every Monday morning at 9am, or being in pointless meetings where people talk at length about everything except the work at hand. My philosophy is simple - I'll work if I have to work, but I want none of your other bullshit (happy hours, team building, etc.), unless it's 100% up to me to attend.

Fwiw, I was a bit worried about this too going in-house, but haven’t found it to be the case at all. I went to a tech company where a large portion of us will probably never go back to the office more than occasionally, and if anything I have more flexibility than I did in Biglaw.

Would like to hear more about your tech in-house role. Did you have a M&A background in big law prior to going in-house? Would you mind sharing comp details? Tech is interesting but (1) I have a M&A background and little to no IP background and (2) I don't want to make less than $250k/yr.

[Anonymous User]

Was really thinking that this would be my last year in BL, but as a soon to be 8th year, am reaching the point where the carrot dangle of counsel/partnership is making it hard to look for in house jobs. Have a great reputation/feedback from partners, and with the industry trend of huge partnership classes, I honestly think I may have a good shot soon-ish. Obviously the issue is that this job sucks-- being partner seems like it would be hellish and I'm not sure I want that despite $$. Would maybe want to hang around as counsel for as long as possible for the paycheck, but it does feel like SO MANY PEOPLE are making partner nowadays and so why not me too? Heh.

[VentureMBA]

Was really thinking that this would be my last year in BL, but as a soon to be 8th year, am reaching the point where the carrot dangle of counsel/partnership is making it hard to look for in house jobs. Have a great reputation/feedback from partners, and with the industry trend of huge partnership classes, I honestly think I may have a good shot soon-ish. Obviously the issue is that this job sucks-- being partner seems like it would be hellish and I'm not sure I want that despite $$. Would maybe want to hang around as counsel for as long as possible for the paycheck, but it does feel like SO MANY PEOPLE are making partner nowadays and so why not me too? Heh.

There's something to be said for getting the partner title on your resume even if you don't intend to do it for more than a couple years. If you can bring yourself to break the golden handcuffs, a lot of doors open for you.

[Anonymous User]

Was really thinking that this would be my last year in BL, but as a soon to be 8th year, am reaching the point where the carrot dangle of counsel/partnership is making it hard to look for in house jobs. Have a great reputation/feedback from partners, and with the industry trend of huge partnership classes, I honestly think I may have a good shot soon-ish. Obviously the issue is that this job sucks-- being partner seems like it would be hellish and I'm not sure I want that despite $$. Would maybe want to hang around as counsel for as long as possible for the paycheck, but it does feel like SO MANY PEOPLE are making partner nowadays and so why not me too? Heh.

If you think you're on track to make it, it feels a little crazy to not ride it out and then, if you make partner, see how it is for a bit before making a call one way or the other (a banking a year or two of partner cash in the meantime). That's a ton of money to leave on the table. That's basically what I'm doing. But, of course, it's kind of easy to say "just throw a few more years at it." Depends in part on what your exit options are and how set you are financially, too.

[Bramwell]

Was really thinking that this would be my last year in BL, but as a soon to be 8th year, am reaching the point where the carrot dangle of counsel/partnership is making it hard to look for in house jobs. Have a great reputation/feedback from partners, and with the industry trend of huge partnership classes, I honestly think I may have a good shot soon-ish. Obviously the issue is that this job sucks-- being partner seems like it would be hellish and I'm not sure I want that despite $$. Would maybe want to hang around as counsel for as long as possible for the paycheck, but it does feel like SO MANY PEOPLE are making partner nowadays and so why not me too? Heh.

go for it if you’d like, but keep in mind that most of the large partnership classes we’re seeing lately are not to equity partnership. The compensation may not be as high as you think for a non-equity partner. So to those saying to “bank” the $$$ for a couple years as a newly minted partner, your ability to do so may not be greater by orders of magnitude than it is now as counsel or senior associate.

[Elston Gunn]

Would like to hear more about your tech in-house role. Did you have a M&A background in big law prior to going in-house? Would you mind sharing comp details? Tech is interesting but (1) I have a M&A background and little to no IP background and (2) I don't want to make less than $250k/yr.

Specialist background, but we hire plenty of people with M&A backgrounds (for Corporate Counsel mostly, but can certainly be in the running for other roles). Comp when I started (off of 5th year BL) was almost exactly $250k, with a good chunk of that in restricted stock (which has gone up a ton). Have had one review cycle since then and got about a 10% bump. I’m also not sure, but I believe Corporate Counsel pays a bit more (and works a bit more).

[Anonymous User]

Was really thinking that this would be my last year in BL, but as a soon to be 8th year, am reaching the point where the carrot dangle of counsel/partnership is making it hard to look for in house jobs. Have a great reputation/feedback from partners, and with the industry trend of huge partnership classes, I honestly think I may have a good shot soon-ish. Obviously the issue is that this job sucks-- being partner seems like it would be hellish and I'm not sure I want that despite $$. Would maybe want to hang around as counsel for as long as possible for the paycheck, but it does feel like SO MANY PEOPLE are making partner nowadays and so why not me too? Heh.

go for it if you’d like, but keep in mind that most of the large partnership classes we’re seeing lately are not to equity partnership. The compensation may not be as high as you think for a non-equity partner. So to those saying to “bank” the $$$ for a couple years as a newly minted partner, your ability to do so may not be greater by orders of magnitude than it is now as counsel or senior associate.

While I agree with the general premise here, OP said "as a soon to be 8th year." Kirkland is the poster child of the large NSP classes but they also just shortened their share partner track to being considered in year 9 (and they make NSP before year . So it seems like OP is talking about share/equity partner, not non-share partner.

[Anonymous User]

Would like to hear more about your tech in-house role. Did you have a M&A background in big law prior to going in-house? Would you mind sharing comp details? Tech is interesting but (1) I have a M&A background and little to no IP background and (2) I don't want to make less than $250k/yr.

Specialist background, but we hire plenty of people with M&A backgrounds (for Corporate Counsel mostly, but can certainly be in the running for other roles). Comp when I started (off of 5th year BL) was almost exactly $250k, with a good chunk of that in restricted stock (which has gone up a ton). Have had one review cycle since then and got about a 10% bump. I’m also not sure, but I believe Corporate Counsel pays a bit more (and works a bit more).

Is it common at all for specialist backgrounds to shift into non-specialist roles, e.g., a tax person going general corporate? Tax people at firms seem really screwed in terms of in-house options because tax lawyers at firms don't do any of the accounting or number crunching but that's a huge part of the in-house role of a tax person, which is as much about accounting as the kind of tax work that tax lawyers do at firms.

[Elston Gunn]

Would like to hear more about your tech in-house role. Did you have a M&A background in big law prior to going in-house? Would you mind sharing comp details? Tech is interesting but (1) I have a M&A background and little to no IP background and (2) I don't want to make less than $250k/yr.

Specialist background, but we hire plenty of people with M&A backgrounds (for Corporate Counsel mostly, but can certainly be in the running for other roles). Comp when I started (off of 5th year BL) was almost exactly $250k, with a good chunk of that in restricted stock (which has gone up a ton). Have had one review cycle since then and got about a 10% bump. I’m also not sure, but I believe Corporate Counsel pays a bit more (and works a bit more).

Is it common at all for specialist backgrounds to shift into non-specialist roles, e.g., a tax person going general corporate? Tax people at firms seem really screwed in terms of in-house options because tax lawyers at firms don't do any of the accounting or number crunching but that's a huge part of the in-house role of a tax person, which is as much about accounting as the kind of tax work that tax lawyers do at firms.

I still work in the area I specialized in. There’s a poster around here (I think his handle is nealric) who works in house in tax. If you search his posts there should be some helpful info there. At my company, it’s reasonably common for someone in some kind of specialist role to get hired as product counsel (a generalist role), usually when the product the person will cover has a nexus with that person’s specialty.

[nahumya]

If you're at a firm that works you so much that you decide to quit, why not try to just work less? Drop the ball on a few projects and blame the other projects. Worse thing that could happen is you'll get fired with severance and will have 2-3 months to find a new gig. At least you'll see what it feels like to set boundaries.

[Anonymous User]

If you're at a firm that works you so much that you decide to quit, why not try to just work less? Drop the ball on a few projects and blame the other projects. Worse thing that could happen is you'll get fired with severance and will have 2-3 months to find a new gig. At least you'll see what it feels like to set boundaries.

Respectfully, I think this is bad advice. For some of us, the firms are our most significant professional network, and the legal world is always smaller than we think. Doing shitty work is a tough bridge to un-burn. That and unprofessional workplace conduct (e.g. sexual harassment) are usually places of no return. If you're going to adopt this approach, better to continue to straight up decline work (instead of accepting it and dropping the ball) until someone forces your hand, and then take as much leave as you can. Obviously, the best strategy is to continue working while applying for and finding a new position, but as others have intimated, that isn't always feasible either due to the job market or mental health.

[Anonymous User]

I would without question quit the day after my bonus is paid but I have nowhere to go (yet). I already lateraled so switching firms again doesn’t seem like a viable option. And while I was historically very marketable with private firms (e.g., had plenty of options at EIP and in post-clerkship recruiting), nothing else has worked out. I thought with my background there would be more options open to me, but as hot as the biglaw market is, the opportunities outside of biglaw (for litigators at least) seem extremely sparse. Either that, or I just suck.

I am tempted to quit after bonus payouts with no job, but too scared and professionally risk averse to take that leap without knowing when and where I would land.

That is surprising to hear. Do you think you just interview badly? Or were you not able to secure initial lateral interviews at all? Another possibility is that you're too senior now, as that will cause some firms to hesitate because you'd need to be up for partner soon.

Anon quoted here. I could definitely lateral to another firm, even at my current seniority; that’s not really the point. As I said, I’ve already done that once (within the past year), and I feel like it would do resume damage to do so again. Lateraling to a third firm within several years could burn bridges whereas everyone would understand moving on to other things. It also wouldn’t serve any real purpose to make another lateral move as I want out of biglaw altogether. I don’t think another firm would be a materially better experience than the ones I’ve already had.

The point is that I haven’t been able to land any non-firm opportunities despite trying for a long time. The vast majority of the jobs I’ve applied to (on USAJobs, agency direct postings and resume drops, some in house) have been radio silence. I’ve had two interviews this year (both gov’t) and was ghosted both times, so interview quality could be an issue but I’ve never failed to convert callbacks to offers with private firms, so my interviewing has never been a hindrance in the past.

I got a job in house from litigation this year, and all I’ll add is it took a lot more than a few applications. Tons, lots of interviews, leading to just two offers.

Senior associate in commercial litigation. I started applying for in house jobs a few months ago. I've sent about 45 applications. No offers yet. I reached the final 4th round interview at a public tech company several weeks ago, but didn't get the job; trying to recover mentally.

[Anonymous User]

If you're at a firm that works you so much that you decide to quit, why not try to just work less? Drop the ball on a few projects and blame the other projects. Worse thing that could happen is you'll get fired with severance and will have 2-3 months to find a new gig. At least you'll see what it feels like to set boundaries.

Respectfully, I think this is bad advice. For some of us, the firms are our most significant professional network, and the legal world is always smaller than we think. Doing shitty work is a tough bridge to un-burn. That and unprofessional workplace conduct (e.g. sexual harassment) are usually places of no return. If you're going to adopt this approach, better to continue to straight up decline work (instead of accepting it and dropping the ball) until someone forces your hand, and then take as much leave as you can. Obviously, the best strategy is to continue working while applying for and finding a new position, but as others have intimated, that isn't always feasible either due to the job market or mental health.

As a mid-level who feels overworked but is simultaneously applying to new jobs, I agree with anon above. Regardless of how bitter you are about being crushed (trust me, I am), it is not cool to throw teammates under the bus by "dropping the ball" on work you agreed to take on. Much better to be proactive in setting boundaries ahead of time, not saying yes to everything or tempering expectations about how quickly things realistically can get done given what you have on your plate, including personal time off in order to defend one's own mental health. For example, you could say yes to a project on Friday with a Monday deadline, but if that is signing up for weekend work and you feel you need a break, one could respond Monday is undoable and propose a deadline later in the week. That seems much better than saying yes and then come Monday saying oops sorry I didn't do it.

[Anonymous User]

I got a job in house from litigation this year, and all I’ll add is it took a lot more than a few applications. Tons, lots of interviews, leading to just two offers.

Senior associate in commercial litigation. I started applying for in house jobs a few months ago. I've sent about 45 applications. No offers yet. I reached the final 4th round interview at a public tech company several weeks ago, but didn't get the job; trying to recover mentally.

Fellow commercial lit senior associate also applying. Have sent nearly 100 applications. Still no offers after making it to final rounds with a handful of orgs. 40% of apps = no response; 40% of apps = reject without interview; remaining 20% = rejections somewhere after second and final rounds (always make it past initial screener).

[Anonymous User]

I got a job in house from litigation this year, and all I’ll add is it took a lot more than a few applications. Tons, lots of interviews, leading to just two offers.

Senior associate in commercial litigation. I started applying for in house jobs a few months ago. I've sent about 45 applications. No offers yet. I reached the final 4th round interview at a public tech company several weeks ago, but didn't get the job; trying to recover mentally.

Fellow commercial lit senior associate also applying. Have sent nearly 100 applications. Still no offers after making it to final rounds with a handful of orgs. 40% of apps = no response; 40% of apps = reject without interview; remaining 20% = rejections somewhere after second and final rounds (always make it past initial screener).

All it takes is one. Were those 100 applications mostly remote or on-site?

[Anonymous User]

I got a job in house from litigation this year, and all I’ll add is it took a lot more than a few applications. Tons, lots of interviews, leading to just two offers.

Senior associate in commercial litigation. I started applying for in house jobs a few months ago. I've sent about 45 applications. No offers yet. I reached the final 4th round interview at a public tech company several weeks ago, but didn't get the job; trying to recover mentally.

Fellow commercial lit senior associate also applying. Have sent nearly 100 applications. Still no offers after making it to final rounds with a handful of orgs. 40% of apps = no response; 40% of apps = reject without interview; remaining 20% = rejections somewhere after second and final rounds (always make it past initial screener).

It's f****** brutal out there unless you're trying to go to firms

[Anonymous User]

I got a job in house from litigation this year, and all I’ll add is it took a lot more than a few applications. Tons, lots of interviews, leading to just two offers.

Senior associate in commercial litigation. I started applying for in house jobs a few months ago. I've sent about 45 applications. No offers yet. I reached the final 4th round interview at a public tech company several weeks ago, but didn't get the job; trying to recover mentally.

Fellow commercial lit senior associate also applying. Have sent nearly 100 applications. Still no offers after making it to final rounds with a handful of orgs. 40% of apps = no response; 40% of apps = reject without interview; remaining 20% = rejections somewhere after second and final rounds (always make it past initial screener).

All it takes is one. Were those 100 applications mostly remote or on-site?

Both, 50/50 split I'd say