Let's talk in-house salaries Forum

[Anonymous User]

... I'm not sure where the "you should expect 400k+" is coming from. It is possible for sure, but (a) not likely, and (b) not available without materially similar hours/availably commitments as BL...

This is just totally wrong. If you go in-house to Apollo at $450k or JPM at $400k or whatever, your life will basically be 9-7 with some occasional nights/weekends. Massively different than 2400 at a v10 trying to make partner.

This is the same stupid mindset that "all law firms are the same" or that "they will only ever pay you $400k if they can work you to death."

There are absolutely in house jobs paying $400k+ with reasonable hours (and I should know, I have been offered quite a few, but prefer the higher law firm comp structure). To be competitive for those quality in-house jobs though, you need to have a strong resume, good command of your subject area, a go-getter personality, and the same depressing "all law jobs are terrible" victim mindset, where you think the only options in life are poverty or misery.

The dumbest part of all of this is I know 2nd year associates who have gone in house at $300k+ (think V5 Tax to in-house at IB, though with rough hours), so the idea that $400k for a 6th year is some sort of challenge is a joke.

As someone who recently got a mid-$400k's in-house job with substantial experience at a v10 (5-7 yrs), there is a lot in this post I disagree with.

First, saying off-handedly that it's possible to go in-house to JPM at $400k sounds like a big exaggeration to me. Before I accepted my job I had an offer from an elite bulge bracket bank with TC of $325k. Are people really getting $400k offers from banks? Would love to know what practice/background allows you to get that kind of $ at a bank.

Second, while I do agree that $400k+ jobs with reasonable hours are out there (because I was lucky enough to land one), saying "I've been offered quite a few" leaves the impression that there are dozens of those opportunities out there. That was not my experience in the job market - the job I have is the only one I encountered with that comp. Now perhaps when you say you've been offered "quite a few," you were offered all of the the 5-10 or so jobs out there right now in NYC with that comp. If so, then yes I can see how you'd think there are lots of these opportunities out there. (I'll be happy to admit I'm wrong if someone chimes in and tells me there really are a lot out there.)

Lastly, my big take away from my latest job hunt is that finding a job really is rolling the dice. So much luck plays into it. It's so easy to think you've got a crap resume and have a bad personality when you're not getting offers. It's also easy at the same time to think you're amazing and at the top of your field when you get several amazing offers. But really, so much of the job hunt is luck. Every time you send your resume out there, you're really just spinning the roulette wheel. So when that post ends with "it's a joke to think it's hard for a 6th year to get a $400k+ in-house job", I just roll my eyes.

[Anonymous User]

... I'm not sure where the "you should expect 400k+" is coming from. It is possible for sure, but (a) not likely, and (b) not available without materially similar hours/availably commitments as BL...

This is just totally wrong. If you go in-house to Apollo at $450k or JPM at $400k or whatever, your life will basically be 9-7 with some occasional nights/weekends. Massively different than 2400 at a v10 trying to make partner.

This is the same stupid mindset that "all law firms are the same" or that "they will only ever pay you $400k if they can work you to death."

There are absolutely in house jobs paying $400k+ with reasonable hours (and I should know, I have been offered quite a few, but prefer the higher law firm comp structure). To be competitive for those quality in-house jobs though, you need to have a strong resume, good command of your subject area, a go-getter personality, and the same depressing "all law jobs are terrible" victim mindset, where you think the only options in life are poverty or misery.

The dumbest part of all of this is I know 2nd year associates who have gone in house at $300k+ (think V5 Tax to in-house at IB, though with rough hours), so the idea that $400k for a 6th year is some sort of challenge is a joke.

As someone who recently got a mid-$400k's in-house job with substantial experience at a v10 (5-7 yrs), there is a lot in this post I disagree with.

First, saying off-handedly that it's possible to go in-house to JPM at $400k sounds like a big exaggeration to me. Before I accepted my job I had an offer from an elite bulge bracket bank with TC of $325k. Are people really getting $400k offers from banks? Would love to know what practice/background allows you to get that kind of $ at a bank.

Second, while I do agree that $400k+ jobs with reasonable hours are out there (because I was lucky enough to land one), saying "I've been offered quite a few" leaves the impression that there are dozens of those opportunities out there. That was not my experience in the job market - the job I have is the only one I encountered with that comp. Now perhaps when you say you've been offered "quite a few," you were offered all of the the 5-10 or so jobs out there right now in NYC with that comp. If so, then yes I can see how you'd think there are lots of these opportunities out there. (I'll be happy to admit I'm wrong if someone chimes in and tells me there really are a lot out there.)

Lastly, my big take away from my latest job hunt is that finding a job really is rolling the dice. So much luck plays into it. It's so easy to think you've got a crap resume and have a bad personality when you're not getting offers. It's also easy at the same time to think you're amazing and at the top of your field when you get several amazing offers. But really, so much of the job hunt is luck. Every time you send your resume out there, you're really just spinning the roulette wheel. So when that post ends with "it's a joke to think it's hard for a 6th year to get a $400k+ in-house job", I just roll my eyes.

This is spot on. I also recently accepted an in-house job in the mid $400K total comp range, and it was the only job over $300K I was offered and a big part of it was luck and connections/recommendations. To say it’s easy is setting people up for disappointment. With that said, I do think threads like these are helpful so folks understand what the market “can” pay at the right company.

[Grunting7]

PE Megafund (KKR, Blackstone, Carlyle)
Class of 2019
TC: $260k
Carry:Eligible in 2 years
NYC

As a fellow 2019, it's encouraging to see colleagues making these kinds of moves. Congrats to you.

Thank you!

I got extremely lucky. Was at a mid-sized firm and went in-house doing regulatory work. Saw the posting on their online portal, applied and somehow got it. While the TC is certainly not as high as others in the same class year in this thread, I'm very thankful especially being only 3 years out of law school. Most of my co-workers came from several years of big law and from top schools...and I did not. It's definitely possible to make these moves so best of luck to you and anyone else trying to do similar!

Curious what eligible for carry means. Does that mean, assuming you meet target expectations, you would participate in carry? If so, that's an awesome deal! Do you know what the value of that carry would be?

From my understanding, that is exactly what it means - hit target expectations and bps should be given after 2 years. From what I've heard, I can expect 50-65bps if I end up getting it. Vests over 5 years. Talking to others who were in my similar position at least 2 years ago, ballpark value is 400-550k, though I guess it's really dependant on size of the fund. To be honest, not 100% sure about these numbers/definitions/carry allocation, as I am still very new here and new to PE in general.

[Anonymous User]

Curious about something. I went in-house early in my career, and my salary has grown slowly (unlike biglaw). I don't mind making less than biglaw, but the discrepancy is getting unbearably large.

Curious what people's advice would be here. Should I try to go back to biglaw to get back on that scale (I may have to take a one year class cut) and then look for in-house opportunities? Or does it make sense to stay where I am and look for my next in-house role directly. I would obviously rather do the latter, but I think it would be difficult to get high offers without someone already paying me something in that range.

[Anonymous User]

Curious about something. I went in-house early in my career, and my salary has grown slowly (unlike biglaw). I don't mind making less than biglaw, but the discrepancy is getting unbearably large.

Curious what people's advice would be here. Should I try to go back to biglaw to get back on that scale (I may have to take a one year class cut) and then look for in-house opportunities? Or does it make sense to stay where I am and look for my next in-house role directly. I would obviously rather do the latter, but I think it would be difficult to get high offers without someone already paying me something in that range.

Direct is likely better if you can swing something that wants similar experience. Otherwise the biglaw reboot option may make sense, but no guarantee you will be able to get out or actually get the better job you want, so pretty risky. You may end up miserable and ragequit and be in much worse shape than before.

[lonerider]

Curious about something. I went in-house early in my career, and my salary has grown slowly (unlike biglaw). I don't mind making less than biglaw, but the discrepancy is getting unbearably large.

Curious what people's advice would be here. Should I try to go back to biglaw to get back on that scale (I may have to take a one year class cut) and then look for in-house opportunities? Or does it make sense to stay where I am and look for my next in-house role directly. I would obviously rather do the latter, but I think it would be difficult to get high offers without someone already paying me something in that range.

Hard to give advice here if you don’t specify your current comp, your class year, what comp you want, etc.

[Anonymous User]

Thought I would add a datapoint based on recent experience:

Texas market. Been in house for a while (10-15 years post graduation) and was making around $180k base, ~$300k all-in at a pretty chill 9-5 job at a F500. Was offered a position at a large privately held company for $215k plus 60% target bonus, so ~$350k (more management, not as strictly legal, but related to my practice area). F500 matched the base increase with similar contingent comp no-questions asked. The potential role is likely to be higher stress/higher hours (maybe 50 hours a week) if I were to accept, so they would need to come up substantially.

[Anonymous User]

Curious about something. I went in-house early in my career, and my salary has grown slowly (unlike biglaw). I don't mind making less than biglaw, but the discrepancy is getting unbearably large.

Curious what people's advice would be here. Should I try to go back to biglaw to get back on that scale (I may have to take a one year class cut) and then look for in-house opportunities? Or does it make sense to stay where I am and look for my next in-house role directly. I would obviously rather do the latter, but I think it would be difficult to get high offers without someone already paying me something in that range.

Hard to give advice here if you don’t specify your current comp, your class year, what comp you want, etc.

I’ll bite, though not OP - class of 2017, 175K base, 30K bonus, in-house for 2ish years after being at a V5 for 3. I assume I’m being under-compensated, but not sure by how much so would greatly appreciate some advice.

[LittleRedCorvette]

Curious about something. I went in-house early in my career, and my salary has grown slowly (unlike biglaw). I don't mind making less than biglaw, but the discrepancy is getting unbearably large.

Curious what people's advice would be here. Should I try to go back to biglaw to get back on that scale (I may have to take a one year class cut) and then look for in-house opportunities? Or does it make sense to stay where I am and look for my next in-house role directly. I would obviously rather do the latter, but I think it would be difficult to get high offers without someone already paying me something in that range.

Hard to give advice here if you don’t specify your current comp, your class year, what comp you want, etc.

I’ll bite, though not OP - class of 2017, 175K base, 30K bonus, in-house for 2ish years after being at a V5 for 3. I assume I’m being under-compensated, but not sure by how much so would greatly appreciate some advice.

Sounds like you're about $75-100k under?

[Buglaw]

Curious about something. I went in-house early in my career, and my salary has grown slowly (unlike biglaw). I don't mind making less than biglaw, but the discrepancy is getting unbearably large.

Curious what people's advice would be here. Should I try to go back to biglaw to get back on that scale (I may have to take a one year class cut) and then look for in-house opportunities? Or does it make sense to stay where I am and look for my next in-house role directly. I would obviously rather do the latter, but I think it would be difficult to get high offers without someone already paying me something in that range.

Hard to give advice here if you don’t specify your current comp, your class year, what comp you want, etc.

I’ll bite, though not OP - class of 2017, 175K base, 30K bonus, in-house for 2ish years after being at a V5 for 3. I assume I’m being under-compensated, but not sure by how much so would greatly appreciate some advice.

Sounds like you're about $75-100k under?

Who is paying 2nd years 305k all-in. You get a pay raise now to go in-house?

Seriously, comp sounds OK, but you should stay at a firm longer than 2 years and learn some more stuff.

[Anonymous User]

I’ll bite, though not OP - class of 2017, 175K base, 30K bonus, in-house for 2ish years after being at a V5 for 3. I assume I’m being under-compensated, but not sure by how much so would greatly appreciate some advice.

Sounds like you're about $75-100k under?

Who is paying 2nd years 305k all-in. You get a pay raise now to go in-house?

Seriously, comp sounds OK, but you should stay at a firm longer than 2 years and learn some more stuff.

person is effectively a 5th year, not a second year. c/o 2017

[Anonymous User]

I’ll bite, though not OP - class of 2017, 175K base, 30K bonus, in-house for 2ish years after being at a V5 for 3. I assume I’m being under-compensated, but not sure by how much so would greatly appreciate some advice.

Sounds like you're about $75-100k under?

Who is paying 2nd years 305k all-in. You get a pay raise now to go in-house?

Seriously, comp sounds OK, but you should stay at a firm longer than 2 years and learn some more stuff.

person is effectively a 5th year, not a second year. c/o 2017

First thing, the anon said 3 years at a V5, not 2. But also, I don't think this is how it works. If you jump at 3 years and work in house for 2, you will not make as much as someone who jumped at 5 years. That is, you do not keep moving up with your class year after you move in house.

[Anonymous User]

Mods plz delete

[Anonymous User]

I've done six months of looking around at 4 yoe and while sure, a largeish group of outliers do get $300k TC those numbers tend to be in NYC and SF/remote tech, and they aren't 9-5s. Also, the TC typically assumes that any equity will vest green and that they will stay the full length required, which IMO needs to be parsed out from TC lest people get the wrong idea.

Anyway, here are my takeaways as 4 yoe in a non NYC/SF market:

1. People with M&A and Funds backgrounds get the most TC (given who tends to hire folks with those backgrounds), followed by tech trans/VC. People with lit backgrounds can actually find AGC roles, but prob should apply broadly
2. The majority of salaries are concentrated in the 150-180 range - anything above that in salary is really good. Bonus almost always somewhere between 10-20 except for funds/ibanks. I get the sense that big banks pay pretty much on par with F200, which is to say see above.
3. Remote jobs are super competitive and if you are looking to bounce you should focus on jobs in your area first.
4. You should always get the salary range up front in the HR screener (they'll almost always ask), but try to punt when they ask you first or give them a giant range

[Anonymous User]

AGC at financial services firm

Base: $270k
Bonus: 155k
401(k): 5%
NYC
class of 2018
9-630

[Anonymous User]

AGC at financial services firm

Base: $270k
Bonus: 155k
401(k): 5%
NYC
class of 2018
9-630

That's materially higher than biglaw - wow. Wonder if firms will need to increase salary.

[thisismytlsuername]

AGC at financial services firm

Base: $270k
Bonus: 155k
401(k): 5%
NYC
class of 2018
9-630

That's materially higher than biglaw - wow. Wonder if firms will need to increase salary.

lmao

[Anonymous User]

AGG in a small secondary and LCOL market at a financial services company that is publicly traded but relatively modest sized (around $5bn market cap). 2017 grad.

Cash: 170,000
Bonus: 15% target
RSUs: 30K

Also comes with 6% 401K matching, health benefits that are about $750 a month cheaper than the firm, and free parking and no city wage tax.

Supposed to be closer to 9-5 with PTO that is respected and vests immediately. Much lower than some of the numbers tossed around in this tread, but overall, pretty happy with this exit.

[ladybug1989]

..

[Anonymous User]

Class of 2018, Corp. Counsel:

Base: 230k
Bonus: 20%
401k: 4%
Initial RSUs: 180k (4 yr. vest)
Long Term RSUs: $100k per year (3 yr. vest)
Industry: Life Sciences

[Anonymous User]

Left biglaw as a rising 6th year, annual TC 600k (roughly half cash half equity), company is not public but well funded and there is some secondary market activity. Too of market benefits. Hard tech.

Some night and weekend work (though partially self-inflicted), but no real fire drills.

[Anonymous User]

Class of 2018, Corp. Counsel:

Base: 230k
Bonus: 20%
401k: 4%
Initial RSUs: 180k (4 yr. vest)
Long Term RSUs: $100k per year (3 yr. vest)
Industry: Life Sciences

Wow! This is amazing. Would you mind sharing if you're in a VHCOL/HCOL city? Also, are you WFH or do you go into the office?

[Anonymous User]

Class of 2018, Corp. Counsel:

Base: 230k
Bonus: 20%
401k: 4%
Initial RSUs: 180k (4 yr. vest)
Long Term RSUs: $100k per year (3 yr. vest)
Industry: Life Sciences

Wow! This is amazing. Would you mind sharing if you're in a VHCOL/HCOL city? Also, are you WFH or do you go into the office?

I'm in a HCOL city. My job is hybrid and fairly flexible. But I did have interviews for remote positions with similar or slightly lower comp.

[Anonymous User]

Class of 2018, Corp. Counsel:

Base: 230k
Bonus: 20%
401k: 4%
Initial RSUs: 180k (4 yr. vest)
Long Term RSUs: $100k per year (3 yr. vest)
Industry: Life Sciences

Wow! This is amazing. Would you mind sharing if you're in a VHCOL/HCOL city? Also, are you WFH or do you go into the office?

I'm in a HCOL city. My job is hybrid and fairly flexible. But I did have interviews for remote positions with similar or slightly lower comp.

How did you land this role? Through a recruiter or was the company a client of your firm's? Seems like an awesome gig!

[Anonymous User]

A bit different data point from someone more established. F500 in MCOL City. LS class of 2010. Out of biglaw for more than 5 years now.

$215k base
25% target bonus (historically have received 1.2-1.4x target in most years)
30% target equity (historically have received 1.2-1.4x target in most years)
7% Cash balance pension contribution (immediate vest)
7% 401k Match

9-5 with a few times a year of weekends or last-minute travel. I'm probably more or less capped-out on an inflation adjusted basis unless I move companies or change roles significantly (like out of law into a business role). I considered a move to another company with similar comp but much bigger upside potential (and better title) but turned it down due to work/life balance being significantly worse. I've gotten recruiter nibbles for counsel or partner level law firm roles in the high six figures, but I don't think doubling my salary would be worth it if it meant going back to biglaw lifestyle.