Best firms for life/work balance? Forum

[jbagelboy]

what about california offices of firms like o'melveny and orrick herrington or maybe jones day (not NY or DC)

[Johann]

Google Grand Rapids, MI law firms. apply. That's your best bet.

are you just making a general comment or do you know this to be true from someone?

[ChardPennington]

what about california offices of firms like o'melveny and orrick herrington or maybe jones day (not NY or DC)

Probably almost as bad.

If you really want to reduce the number of hours you work, you've gotta go someplace legitimately out of the way, and even then that's no guarantee. SF or LA won't get it done.

[Anonymous User]

A non-litigation boutique where you paid a percentage of your billed hours.

Any firms like this in Chicago?

[lizaregina]

http://yalelawwomen.org/top-ten-list/

[Elston Gunn]

http://yalelawwomen.org/top-ten-list/

YLW largely (though I guess not solely) asks firms their policies, rather than survey what actually happens. Parental leave policies are nice, but I doubt they tell you much about what the hours are actually like.

Edit: All right, checked the methodology and they do ask question about how often the policies are used, but there's still a big difference between these things and actually getting to spend time with your family.

[thegrayman]

work = life

it balances

[09042014]

http://yalelawwomen.org/top-ten-list/

YLW largely (though I guess not solely) asks firms their policies, rather than survey what actually happens. Parental leave policies are nice, but I doubt they tell you much about what the hours are actually like.

Edit: All right, checked the methodology and they do ask question about how often the policies are used, but there's still a big difference between these things and actually getting to spend time with your family.

K&E made the list. Here is their version of work life balance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgSJUzYCGtc

[09042014]

http://yalelawwomen.org/top-ten-list/

YLW largely (though I guess not solely) asks firms their policies, rather than survey what actually happens. Parental leave policies are nice, but I doubt they tell you much about what the hours are actually like.

Edit: All right, checked the methodology and they do ask question about how often the policies are used, but there's still a big difference between these things and actually getting to spend time with your family.

K&E made the list. Here is their version of work life balance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgSJUzYCGtc

Reminder that woman at the end is now dead

[IAFG]

http://yalelawwomen.org/top-ten-list/

YLW largely (though I guess not solely) asks firms their policies, rather than survey what actually happens. Parental leave policies are nice, but I doubt they tell you much about what the hours are actually like.

Edit: All right, checked the methodology and they do ask question about how often the policies are used, but there's still a big difference between these things and actually getting to spend time with your family.

K&E made the list. Here is their version of work life balance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgSJUzYCGtc

the whole time i was waiting for this to be outted as a parody video, especially when the blonde kid in the middle has to pause to remind himself to keep a straight face

[wert3813]

http://yalelawwomen.org/top-ten-list/

YLW largely (though I guess not solely) asks firms their policies, rather than survey what actually happens. Parental leave policies are nice, but I doubt they tell you much about what the hours are actually like.

Edit: All right, checked the methodology and they do ask question about how often the policies are used, but there's still a big difference between these things and actually getting to spend time with your family.

K&E made the list. Here is their version of work life balance. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgSJUzYCGtc

the whole time i was waiting for this to be outted as a parody video, especially when the blonde kid in the middle has to pause to remind himself to keep a straight face

If you make the extra effort to try and balance...you can...on balance...do so.

[Anonymous User]

Perkins Coie's Chicago office has pretty great rep for having real people and a reasonable culture. I don't think they use the word "lifestyle", but they're reputed to be about as close as anything you can get here. They're based out of Seattle and supposedly a PNW culture transferred over. You might check out their California offices. It'll still be a firm but it might be worth looking at FWIW.

[ChardPennington]

Perkins Coie's Chicago office has pretty great rep for having real people and a reasonable culture. I don't think they use the word "lifestyle", but they're reputed to be about as close as anything you can get here. They're based out of Seattle and supposedly a PNW culture transferred over. You might check out their California offices. It'll still be a firm but it might be worth looking at FWIW.

For whatever it's worth I've heard the same thing about their CA offices

[Anonymous User]

Perkins Coie's Chicago office has pretty great rep for having real people and a reasonable culture. I don't think they use the word "lifestyle", but they're reputed to be about as close as anything you can get here. They're based out of Seattle and supposedly a PNW culture transferred over. You might check out their California offices. It'll still be a firm but it might be worth looking at FWIW.

The Perkins Chicago partner who interviewed me was a gigantic dick, but I have heard he is a well known outlier at the office. No idea about hours though.

[MarkRenton]

I have a hard time believing work life balance exists. I was discussing this with some friends at my firm, and at other firms, and we have no idea how to structure law firm to be both efficient and considerate of associate free time (not saying law firms are efficient but they could be less so). Consider that law firm work is largely client-driven or court deadline dictated. Clients contact the partners all the time to say that they need some sort of unreasonable amount of work by tomorrow--they really act like they're your only client. For example, I took a day of vacation and had to get another associate up to speed to help out that day. It was horribly inefficient. He had to learn the documents, we had communication gaps between us and with the partner, I had to go over his work later to figure out what he did... Ultimately things just work better when you staff things leanly and have associates work crazier hours when things get busy.

And then lots of partners are just dicks who work you to the bone for the fun of it. The point is though, I just can't see how to orchestrate a 9-5 big law gig.

[bizzike]

--LinkRemoved-- The job you desire only exists in your head.

[Nyclawyer618]

Quinn hands down.

[Anonymous User]

Headed to a firm where first year associates are only required to bill 1,200 hours. After the first year, it's 1,800.

[Nebby]

Solo practice.

[MarkRenton]

Headed to a firm where first year associates are only required to bill 1,200 hours. After the first year, it's 1,800.

This is generally a BIG red herring. Lots of firms provide a baseline, but what you end working in reality or what they expect is completely different. If you hit your 1,200 does this mean they won't fire you or let you go after a year or two? The law firm is an employment pyramid where not everyone can make partner (ok, no one does anymore). Because of this firms NEED associate attrition. So who're the partners going to keep around longer all things being equal: the person who just does the minimum required or the person billing 2500? Maybe they should just make the minimum be 37 pieces of flair and be honest, but then they wouldn't have people like you excited to work there.

[Anonymous User]

at my firm, v100, billing 2,300 is considered super star partner track status. most come in at around 2,100. i call that "lifestyle" after being at a firm where 3,000 hours was maybe enough for partnership

[spleenworship]

Government. Whether big fed or state/local you are generally better off.

I had one government employer say (for a salary position) "We'd prefer you never work over 40 hours a week. Flex time is available if you have to stay late one day."

Even my local PDs office was like "hey if you are doing more than 60 hours in a week, because of trials or whatever, we'll give you a day off when it's over so you don't get too burnt."

ETA: and at the local US Atty office they all had hobbies and such. One lady played tennis 3 times a week and was taking a cooking class at a continuing ed place. She got promoted too, so it obviously wasn't considered a bad thing.

[Anonymous User]

Headed to a firm where first year associates are only required to bill 1,200 hours. After the first year, it's 1,800.

This is generally a BIG red herring. Lots of firms provide a baseline, but what you end working in reality or what they expect is completely different. If you hit your 1,200 does this mean they won't fire you or let you go after a year or two? The law firm is an employment pyramid where not everyone can make partner (ok, no one does anymore). Because of this firms NEED associate attrition. So who're the partners going to keep around longer all things being equal: the person who just does the minimum required or the person billing 2500? Maybe they should just make the minimum be 37 pieces of flair and be honest, but then they wouldn't have people like you excited to work there.

Chill top dawg brosef. This isn't NYC biglaw. Nor LA/DC/Chicago. It's in a secondary market. You wont' find this firm on a "Vault" list. The partner to associate ratio is 3:1.

It's not a BIG red herring when they restructured their entire firm to encourage associate retention. The program is now in it's 5th year.

[IAFG]

Leverage says pretty much nothing about work/life balance. It only really speaks to the quality of the work you'll get. My firm is closer to 1.5:1.

[Anonymous User]

Leverage says pretty much nothing about work/life balance. It only really speaks to the quality of the work you'll get. My firm is closer to 1.5:1.

Agreed and to be fair I wasn't implying that it was. I was speaking more toward his longevity argument (and even that isn't conclusive).

The generalization that the poster made (1,200 equals 2,500 so GTFO) when not knowing anything about the firm or the marker is the problem.

Sorry still using anon; not trying to out the firm or myself.