Top Law Schools

Hello,

I'm a second-year associate at a large firm in DC. I have three kids, and I've basically been an absentee father since my SA. It's time for a change.

I see no future at this place. I have nothing in common with these people. Work-life balance to my childless, mostly single peers means grinding out 12 hours and then going to club or swanky restaurant. Work-life balance to the few senior-associates and counsel w/ an infant or toddler means having a part-time nanny who gives their kids rides to and from daycare. The partners (and partner-track lawyers) in my group have basically no family life, having sacrificed that for their careers.

Work-life balance to me means a predictable 9—5 that allows me to have a meaningful role in my kids' lives, helping get them ready for school and tucking them in to bed at night. I'm a man, and no men get approval for part-time status at my firm. It's a scam anyway. Women who are given part-time status get a pay cut and then have the same amount of work dumped on them.

Now I make $175 + bonus, but I only need $140k to make ends meet. Possible for a junior-level associate to make 140K+ in DC, w/ good exit options to Midwest after 2-4 years?

1. do u have a wife. 2. does your wife work

ExBiglawAssociate wrote:1. do u have a wife. 2. does your wife work

Wife doesn't work. We're waiting for youngest to enter kindergarten before she starts working. Will be 2 more years.

.

I am in a somewhat similar situation. I don't see a 2nd year associate lateraling out to a 9-5 making 140k based on all of the opportunities I've explored. That type of money (or more) is not unreasonable at an in-house job, but securing one of those jobs with so little experience is unreasonable. For reference, 2400 is an unofficial floor at my firm, with 3000-ish being what true "partner track" associates hit, so I understand how brutal certain places can be.

Rather than give up on the law completely I've decided to try lateraling to a different biglaw firm, which certainly is a possibility for second year associates. It won't necessarily work out, but I've heard and read enough stories of people trying a second (or third) firm that finally clicks and makes life bearable again. And a large part of that is fitting in with the culture just as much as dealing with the workload. Your $$ requirements are probably too high for any other option to really make sense at this point. By all means you should still try to get an in-house job with decent work-life balance, but it probably isn't out there for a second year.

i was pretty much in the same situation you were and had the exact same sentiments regarding people w/ kids in biglaw. i went in house and it was the best decision i ever made.

Are you lit or corporate?

Also, do you have to stay in DC right now? DC is great for exiting to government (where you're not going to make $140K), but it doesn't seem like a good city for exiting in-house. Not enough companies are located there.

$140k required just to make ends meet?! Is that because of students loans + three private school tuitions?

Phil Brooks wrote:$140k required just to make ends meet?! Is that because of students loans + three private school tuitions?

Also, you can't live in a shoe box when you've got a family.

Government.

if there were 140k jobs available for all second years in biglaw, 90% of 2nd years would leave tomorrow. you are being way unreasonable with your salary requirements and should broaden to 80k to 100k if you are adamant about leaving now.

lots of people take 50% paycuts to leave biglaw.

Ok so what's the best way for a corporate associate to leave for $80k-100k? That's plenty for me. How do I plan ahead for that during my (current) first year? Or do I just wait a while before thinking about this.

Probably not the answer you want, but it seems to me that toughing it out for another two years is the way to go, if you can. You're going to be much more marketable as a fourth year associate than a second year associate and with your wife starting to work again, you'll have some more flexibility with salary.

Anonymous User wrote:Ok so what's the best way for a corporate associate to leave for $80k-100k? That's plenty for me. How do I plan ahead for that during my (current) first year? Or do I just wait a while before thinking about this.

Might try using headhunters. Some are good some are bad though, so might take some searching. You'll also be much more marketable in your 3-4th year. No downsides to throwing out some applications now to see if anything sticks though.

Just seeing your salary "requirements" go from needing "140k" to "80-100k" being plenty, I think you and your wife gotta do some more calculations about the minimum salary your family is comfortable with you leaving for. I know far too many lawyers who are stuck in biglaw because their family expenses got to the point they couldn't afford leaving, aka golden handcuffs.

Is your family on board with moving cross country for a totally realistic 90k job? Can that 90k, assuming wife isn't working by that point, meet all the expenses you might have: new house (presumably), school for 3 kids, student loan payments, etc.? COL will vary widely by where in the Midwest you want to go, Chicago vs. Milwaukee, Detriot, etc., but salary offered will be adjusted too. Also companies are moving towards using inhouse depts more, so the classic "9-5" is getting a little rarer. I know several inhouse friends who often pull 50+ hour weeks, although that isn't close to biglaw hours.

Not at all trying to dissuade you from going inhouse. Inhouse rocks, I just think managing expectations is important. You guys may be totally comfortable with all of that and have already talked this through extensively, I just wanted to make sure they were pointed out.

.

jessuf wrote:if you have 4 years of experience, you can start at the highest pay grade as a govt attorney. That is somewhere around $120k and maxes out around $160k (at the final step). That's obv an estimation, but it's what I have been noticing in the job e-mails I receive related to DOJ. That would guarantee you a 40-hour work week.

That's going too far. It depends on the government job. You're unlikely to encounter anything as demanding as big law (though trial-focused AUSAs come close), but I think there's more variation in government-job hours than folks realize.

OP, hope you don't mind me asking a question in your thread.

Is there any way for someone working at a Big Law firm to carve out a work-life balance if that person is just trying to stick around for a few years and move on, and thus doesn't care about clawing their way onto the partner track?

Going to be doing a SA at a DC firm with 100% offer rate. Long term goal would be lateraling to government or a smaller firm (not in DC hopefully) with a more sustainable lifestyle. No debt because of veteran's benefits so I don't need to stick around BigLaw for financial reasons, it's more about using it as a springboard.

Anonymous User wrote:OP, hope you don't mind me asking a question in your thread.

Is there any way for someone working at a Big Law firm to carve out a work-life balance if that person is just trying to stick around for a few years and move on, and thus doesn't care about clawing their way onto the partner track?

Going to be doing a SA at a DC firm with 100% offer rate. Long term goal would be lateraling to government or a smaller firm (not in DC hopefully) with a more sustainable lifestyle. No debt because of veteran's benefits so I don't need to stick around BigLaw for financial reasons, it's more about using it as a springboard.

Depends on your personal capacity for shame and screwing over your peers when you make them pick up your slack.

OP: I'm afraid if anyone has a tip on a 9-5 $140k job for a second year associate, they're too busy writing their cover letter to post about it here.

As another PP said, another option is to look at other biglaw firms, but REALLY research them and find out about the culture. I work in DC biglaw, I have 2 kids and I don't have the kind of life you're talking about. It's not 9-5 but it's not 12 hour days either, and I do get my kids ready for school each morning and give them bath and do bedtime every night. It's about finding the right people to work with, setting the boundaries, and being prepared to work flexibly outside the childcare hours (i.e. I will continue working from home after bedtime).

dixiecupdrinking wrote:OP: I'm afraid if anyone has a tip on a 9-5 $140k job for a second year associate, they're too busy writing their cover letter to post about it here.

GS Pay Scale for Chicago Area, including generous locality pay (you indicated interest in the Midwest): https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversig ... 16/CHI.pdf

With your two years of experience - you may be able to come in as a GS-12 in most agencies, perhaps a 13, but that is unlikely. There is some discretion for coming in at an advanced step - but I don't think you would crack 100k in your first year. The plus side is that initially you would progress through the grades and step quite quickly. Feds do match thrift savings plan (government 401k) up to 5% too.

As others have said though, I doubt you will find a 40 hour a week, 140k job for someone who has been practicing for 2 years. I can tell you that at least in my position, non-litigation, I do work 40 hour weeks the vast majority of the time.

Anonymous User wrote:OP, hope you don't mind me asking a question in your thread.

Is there any way for someone working at a Big Law firm to carve out a work-life balance if that person is just trying to stick around for a few years and move on, and thus doesn't care about clawing their way onto the partner track?

Going to be doing a SA at a DC firm with 100% offer rate. Long term goal would be lateraling to government or a smaller firm (not in DC hopefully) with a more sustainable lifestyle. No debt because of veteran's benefits so I don't need to stick around BigLaw for financial reasons, it's more about using it as a springboard.

You can be a partner track associate and have work-life balance, if you have realistic expectations of what work-life balance means. OP thinking he should be able to provide a family of 5 with nearly 3 times the median household income by working less than 40 hours a week 2 years after graduation is some serious special snowflake nonsense. That's not work-life balance, that's a fairy tale.

If you're doing lit or regulatory practices, it's not at all uncommon in D.C. to be a well-regarded associate who works 9:30-6:30 most days with some occasional late nights and occasional weekend work. Also, you're not likely to do much better at a small firm with respect to predictable schedules. I don't know where that belief started, but everyone I know at smaller firms works hours that are just as random and imbalanced as mine are in BigLaw; and many are much, much worse because their compensation and job security is directly tied to hours much more so than in lockstep BigLaw.

rpupkin wrote:

jessuf wrote:if you have 4 years of experience, you can start at the highest pay grade as a govt attorney. That is somewhere around $120k and maxes out around $160k (at the final step). That's obv an estimation, but it's what I have been noticing in the job e-mails I receive related to DOJ. That would guarantee you a 40-hour work week.

That's going too far. It depends on the government job. You're unlikely to encounter anything as demanding as big law (though trial-focused AUSAs come close), but I think there's more variation in government-job hours than folks realize.

This. You have to realize there are varying jobs/hours in government. My gf is an attorney with a party in the state senate... 9 months out of the year, she's 9-5; 3 months out of the year, she routinely has to decide whether she's going to sleep on the couch in her office or risk falling asleep at the wheel coming home. At least that time is pretty much a constant (budget time and start of session), which I guess makes it easier to plan for/brace yourself for, but those 3 months are hell.

Anonymous User wrote:Now I make $175 + bonus, but I only need $140k to make ends meet. Possible for a junior-level associate to make 140K+ in DC, w/ good exit options to Midwest after 2-4 years?

Skimmed the replies and didn't see anyone address this. I would be very skeptical of finding a career path that is going to send you to the Midwest with a good work-life balance job and still pay you anywhere near $140k. I don't know if places like Faegre, Dorsey, Sidley Austin (Chi), etc. pay lockstep for laterals, but even if they do, the pay is not that great at all. I think third years at Faegre in MN make 125k? And it's NOT a place with good work-life balance, as far as I've heard. In fact, I know people at all three firms and I don't think any of them--or any market-paying firms like them in Chicago, St. Louis, Minneapolis, etc.--are anything near "lifestyle" firms. And there's always Jones-Day Cleveland! (LOL)

I know plenty of small firm partners who clear $150k - $275k per year with 40 hours per week (gratuitous brag: like me), but you're not going to lateral into that. You can try to get on as an associate at one of those firms making $40k - $55k and build a book to make partner within 4-7 years, but (1) coming from biglaw, those firms will see you as damaged goods, and (2) you probably don't want to do that / can't afford to do that anyway.

Fed gov't might be your only bet, and there are all sorts of problems with fed gov't jobs. I would never want another one. But check it out, you might not mind going that route.

You have to understand that there are very few jobs that allow you to work an easy work week and still pay you $140k. That applies to the legal field and to other fields as well. It's just very uncommon because most people don't have that type of economic value or efficiency. Those that do have usually built up to it over time. Basically have invested in their advertising, image, reputation, etc. for several years.

KidStuddi wrote:
If you're doing lit or regulatory practices, it's not at all uncommon in D.C. to be a well-regarded associate who works 9:30-6:30 most days with some occasional late nights and occasional weekend work. Also, you're not likely to do much better at a small firm with respect to predictable schedules. I don't know where that belief started, but everyone I know at smaller firms works hours that are just as random and imbalanced as mine are in BigLaw; and many are much, much worse because their compensation and job security is directly tied to hours much more so than in lockstep BigLaw.

I agree with the general thrust of your post but I think you're setting unrealistic expectations here as far as working 9:30-6:30 with "occasional" nights and weekends.