Top Law Schools

Hello everyone,

I did a quick search and didn't see anything on this, so feel free to direct me to a thread if this has already been discussed.

I have no delusions of making partner at a big firm, and so I'm wondering how these options (Counsel at a big firm vs. In house at a big company) compare in terms of security, hours, pay, etc. I'm leaning towards litigation, so if you could speak specifically towards that, it would be helpful.

This article describing the counsel role makes it seem amazing to me (300k+ salary, lower hours, no real business generation pressure), but I really have no idea how viable an option it is. How long does one have to be at a firm to make counsel rather than just being shown the door? The article says 12-14 years, but is it really that long? Is this something you can negotiate with your firm early on, or will it just be taken as a sign that you aren't cut out for this?

Anyways, thanks for your input!

I can't really speak to your question because it will vary so much, but don't trust anything you read from BCG, it is a pool of garbage. every article of there's I've seen seems like it's written by a disillusioned 0L.

misterjames wrote:I can't really speak to your question because it will vary so much, but don't trust anything you read from BCG, it is a pool of garbage. every article of there's I've seen seems like it's written by a disillusioned 0L.

Really? I didn't get that vibe, though I don't really know. Figured since he's the MD at a major recruiting company, he'd at least have some insight.

And I get it's so varied, which is why it's hard to find good data on this kind of thing. Just wondering if anyone has some insight / experience into how difficult it is to land counsel, and how it compares to in house.

Anonymous User wrote:Hello everyone,

I did a quick search and didn't see anything on this, so feel free to direct me to a thread if this has already been discussed.

I have no delusions of making partner at a big firm, and so I'm wondering how these options (Counsel at a big firm vs. In house at a big company) compare in terms of security, hours, pay, etc. I'm leaning towards litigation, so if you could speak specifically towards that, it would be helpful.

This article describing the counsel role makes it seem amazing to me (300k+ salary, lower hours, no real business generation pressure), but I really have no idea how viable an option it is. How long does one have to be at a firm to make counsel rather than just being shown the door? The article says 12-14 years, but is it really that long? Is this something you can negotiate with your firm early on, or will it just be taken as a sign that you aren't cut out for this?

Anyways, thanks for your input!

http://www.bcgsearch.com/article/900042 ... Explained/#/

Being secure as In-House counsel will depend greatly on the security of the company itself... I'd say the biggest risk, job security-wise, is the company getting sold and then the purchasing company cleaning house, rather than you getting laid off. I work as in-house counsel now at a mid-sized company, in an industry where there's a lot of mergers and purchases of companies... There are companies bigger than us, but obviously, also smaller ones too. Size of the company and it's place in the market is a big factor... Your job is more secure at Apple than a startup.

Wouldn't know about a firm, since this is my first job out of school and never worked in a firm, but I would imagine it's similar there... Not in terms of getting bought out, but resource-wise. If the firm doesn't have the money to keep your dept around, the writing is kind of on the wall. Since I have no firm experience, I'm equally as useless about how one becomes Of Counsel lol... Sorry.

It really depends on the firm. Some firms automatically have a "counsel" position between associate and partner. Some firms user "counsel" as an alternative to making partner. Skadden has a pretty long partnership track. It shouldn't take 12-14 years for most firms to make counsel.

There is no point bringing this up when you are a junior. Worry about this when you are more senior.

Anonymous User wrote:

Anonymous User wrote:Hello everyone,

I did a quick search and didn't see anything on this, so feel free to direct me to a thread if this has already been discussed.

I have no delusions of making partner at a big firm, and so I'm wondering how these options (Counsel at a big firm vs. In house at a big company) compare in terms of security, hours, pay, etc. I'm leaning towards litigation, so if you could speak specifically towards that, it would be helpful.

This article describing the counsel role makes it seem amazing to me (300k+ salary, lower hours, no real business generation pressure), but I really have no idea how viable an option it is. How long does one have to be at a firm to make counsel rather than just being shown the door? The article says 12-14 years, but is it really that long? Is this something you can negotiate with your firm early on, or will it just be taken as a sign that you aren't cut out for this?

Anyways, thanks for your input!

http://www.bcgsearch.com/article/900042 ... Explained/#/

Being secure as In-House counsel will depend greatly on the security of the company itself... I'd say the biggest risk, job security-wise, is the company getting sold and then the purchasing company cleaning house, rather than you getting laid off. I work as in-house counsel now at a mid-sized company, in an industry where there's a lot of mergers and purchases of companies... There are companies bigger than us, but obviously, also smaller ones too. Size of the company and it's place in the market is a big factor... Your job is more secure at Apple than a startup.

Wouldn't know about a firm, since this is my first job out of school and never worked in a firm, but I would imagine it's similar there... Not in terms of getting bought out, but resource-wise. If the firm doesn't have the money to keep your dept around, the writing is kind of on the wall. Since I have no firm experience, I'm equally as useless about how one becomes Of Counsel lol... Sorry.

It's not terribly difficult to jump from one company to another once you've been in-house at one place though... at least no different than the usual person in any industry looking for a new job.

October25 wrote:

misterjames wrote:I can't really speak to your question because it will vary so much, but don't trust anything you read from BCG, it is a pool of garbage. every article of there's I've seen seems like it's written by a disillusioned 0L.

Really? I didn't get that vibe, though I don't really know. Figured since he's the MD at a major recruiting company, he'd at least have some insight.

He is the worst in the business, at least publicly:

http://www.bcgsearch.com/article/900045 ... -Law-Firm/
http://www.bcgsearch.com/article/900042 ... Law-Firms/

Plenty more where that came from.

h2go wrote:It really depends on the firm. Some firms automatically have a "counsel" position between associate and partner. Some firms user "counsel" as an alternative to making partner. Skadden has a pretty long partnership track. It shouldn't take 12-14 years for most firms to make counsel.

There is no point bringing this up when you are a junior. Worry about this when you are more senior.

My worry is that if I wait till I'm senior to figure this out, and it doesn't work out, I've really narrowed my exit options. Most people seem to think exiting biglaw is best done between 2-5, an presumably you'd be past that point if you were being considered for counsel. Are the exit options not as grim for senior associates who are forced out as I've come to believe?

chicagorecruiter wrote:

October25 wrote:

misterjames wrote:I can't really speak to your question because it will vary so much, but don't trust anything you read from BCG, it is a pool of garbage. every article of there's I've seen seems like it's written by a disillusioned 0L.

Really? I didn't get that vibe, though I don't really know. Figured since he's the MD at a major recruiting company, he'd at least have some insight.

He is the worst in the business, at least publicly:

http://www.bcgsearch.com/article/900045 ... -Law-Firm/
http://www.bcgsearch.com/article/900042 ... Law-Firms/

Plenty more where that came from.

Thanks for the heads up.

Out of curiosity, how the hell is BCG in business? They are universally trashed on this board, yet I have gotten daily e-mails from them for over a year. Who is using them?

BCG has a terrible reputation in the legal industry. I wouldn't put much stock in what you're reading on their website. Here is a pretty good write up on the owner of the company:

http://abovethelaw.com/2016/01/poor-bla ... iter/?rf=1

Thanks for all the info on BCG everyone. Didn't know any of this.

I don't want the thread to just derail into trashing them, though, so if anyone has insight into the original question, that would be really appreciated.

October25 wrote:

h2go wrote:It really depends on the firm. Some firms automatically have a "counsel" position between associate and partner. Some firms user "counsel" as an alternative to making partner. Skadden has a pretty long partnership track. It shouldn't take 12-14 years for most firms to make counsel.

There is no point bringing this up when you are a junior. Worry about this when you are more senior.

My worry is that if I wait till I'm senior to figure this out, and it doesn't work out, I've really narrowed my exit options. Most people seem to think exiting biglaw is best done between 2-5, an presumably you'd be past that point if you were being considered for counsel. Are the exit options not as grim for senior associates who are forced out as I've come to believe?

You sound like you are not even practicing in biglaw yet - no one in the industry would ask this. Quit worrying about this kind of 8 years down the road crap. At the firm I am at, making Counsel is difficult. But you don't ask ahead for it, you see how they feel about you after 8-9 years. The fact that you are thinking about this before you even start is crazy. People do not realize why biglaw turnover is so prevalent until they start. I used to be one of those "I will stay forever at a firm" - then I started working and realized how much of a grind it can be. I don't know how long I will/want to stay - but my perspective is completely different now that I am practicing.

Anonymous User wrote:

October25 wrote:

h2go wrote:It really depends on the firm. Some firms automatically have a "counsel" position between associate and partner. Some firms user "counsel" as an alternative to making partner. Skadden has a pretty long partnership track. It shouldn't take 12-14 years for most firms to make counsel.

There is no point bringing this up when you are a junior. Worry about this when you are more senior.

My worry is that if I wait till I'm senior to figure this out, and it doesn't work out, I've really narrowed my exit options. Most people seem to think exiting biglaw is best done between 2-5, an presumably you'd be past that point if you were being considered for counsel. Are the exit options not as grim for senior associates who are forced out as I've come to believe?

You sound like you are not even practicing in biglaw yet - no one in the industry would ask this. Quit worrying about this kind of 8 years down the road crap. At the firm I am at, making Counsel is difficult. But you don't ask ahead for it, you see how they feel about you after 8-9 years. The fact that you are thinking about this before you even start is crazy. People do not realize why biglaw turnover is so prevalent until they start. I used to be one of those "I will stay forever at a firm" - then I started working and realized how much of a grind it can be. I don't know how long I will/want to stay - but my perspective is completely different now that I am practicing.

You are right that I'm not practising yet. I know I'm not going to be one of those "I will stay forever at a firm" types, which is exactly why I'm asking about options. I get that it's very far down the road, but I really don't see how trying to gather information is all that crazy of an idea.

Anonymous User wrote:

October25 wrote:

h2go wrote:It really depends on the firm. Some firms automatically have a "counsel" position between associate and partner. Some firms user "counsel" as an alternative to making partner. Skadden has a pretty long partnership track. It shouldn't take 12-14 years for most firms to make counsel.

There is no point bringing this up when you are a junior. Worry about this when you are more senior.

My worry is that if I wait till I'm senior to figure this out, and it doesn't work out, I've really narrowed my exit options. Most people seem to think exiting biglaw is best done between 2-5, an presumably you'd be past that point if you were being considered for counsel. Are the exit options not as grim for senior associates who are forced out as I've come to believe?

You sound like you are not even practicing in biglaw yet - no one in the industry would ask this. Quit worrying about this kind of 8 years down the road crap. At the firm I am at, making Counsel is difficult. But you don't ask ahead for it, you see how they feel about you after 8-9 years. The fact that you are thinking about this before you even start is crazy. People do not realize why biglaw turnover is so prevalent until they start. I used to be one of those "I will stay forever at a firm" - then I started working and realized how much of a grind it can be. I don't know how long I will/want to stay - but my perspective is completely different now that I am practicing.

Agree 100% with above. Getting a role like that is going to be entirely dependent on whether your firm thinks you provide enough value to keep you around despite your lack of originations. Sometimes there is a counsel title, sometimes you stay an associate, sometimes a perpetual income partner. There is no way to increase your chances of this other than to be valuable. I wouldn't even recommend certain practices over others (other than not litigation) because that is going to be a moving target.