Weighing 2L Summer Options Forum

[Anonymous User]

Hi guys,

2L here choosing between a summer position with:
- below-market-paying (140k) offer in a high COL city
- market-paying (100-120k negotiable) in-house in a tertiary, possibly quaternary market
- Interviews with BigFed

TT, top 20%, LR, STEM UG, no debt.

Gut's telling me to go in-house. I asked during the interview what the chances were of bringing me on board post-grad bc in-house normally doesn't hire straight out and the guy was pretty up front that as long as nothing catastrophic happened, the offer would be there. Their summer program is brand new (and possibly only for this year and a few more) and they're actively trying to recruit fresh blood. My biggest concerns are with respect to exit options.

[totesTheGoat]

Hi guys,

2L here choosing between a summer position with:
- below-market-paying (140k) offer in a high COL city
- market-paying (100-120k negotiable) in-house in a tertiary, possibly quaternary market
- Interviews with BigFed

TT, top 20%, LR, STEM UG, no debt.

Gut's telling me to go in-house. I asked during the interview what the chances were of bringing me on board post-grad bc in-house normally doesn't hire straight out and the guy was pretty up front that as long as nothing catastrophic happened, the offer would be there. Their summer program is brand new (and possibly only for this year and a few more) and they're actively trying to recruit fresh blood. My biggest concerns are with respect to exit options.

I'd go in-house, assuming that your in-house opportunity is a somewhat recognizable company. It doesn't need to be F50, but you don't want to go in-house with a not-well-known local company, especially straight out of school. Your exit options are going to be fine, especially if you want to stay in-house for your career.

[Anonymous User]

I had a similar situation: NYC big law or in-house in the Midwest (fortune 150).
I had interned at the in-house department during my first summer, and ended up choosing big law. It was a hard decision, but I got to talk to some of the in-house attorneys and they all advised me to go to the firm. They said that exit opportunities are really bad for someone that went straight in-house after law school, because although most companies like to hire people with in-house experience, pretty much all of them require firm experience. Specifically, one of them was indeed trying to come to NY and it took her over a year to make the move.
So if I went in-house, I would probably stick around at the same company for a while. That's not necessarily bad, but I wanted the mobility.
One other thing, from what I've heard, if you join an in-house department after having some firm experience your chances of getting better positions and compensation increase. If you go straight out of law school, you'll probably have less opportunities, even inside your company.
GL!

[Anonymous User]

I can give an F500, in-house prospective;

Your opportunities to move back to law might be limited (possible movement to whoever you work with as outside counsel). But as far as "exit," most consider in-house as the eventual destination. Depending on pay that you'd like, the hours and lifestyle could not be better. To really bump pay, you'll need to get use to the idea of moving around from company to company. The bigger the name the easier the moves.

I'd personally recommend (as stated above), going into law practice then moving to in-house. While your spot sounds like they will hire you after your summer, most programs don't. I assume that will carry on for the next 10 years or so, and that could hamper an ability to move up the F500 ladder.