Should I go in-house or stay at my firm?
Posted: Sat Jun 10, 2017 7:16 pm
Hi everyone. Thanks in advance for reading this post and responding. I know this question comes up a lot on this forum. I'm currently a 4th/5th year associate at a large regional firm. In my office, I'm the only associate practicing in my particular area of law. There are two partners that never give me work (one partner is basically retired and has a foot out the door, while the other partner barely has enough work to keep himself busy). I have been told numerous times that the partners in my office are notorious for not sharing work and keep all of it for themselves and that it has nothing to do with my work performance. My reviews from partners I actually do work for have all been positive. All of my billable hours come from partners located in a different office out of state. I love working with them and they've been great mentors that genuinely care about my professional development. However, I feel lonely in my office working on matters for partners in other states and not getting an opportunity to work on matters and build client relationships with people in my own community. Not only is it isolating, but I fear that it's a detriment to me making partner in a few years if I have no book of business in the city I actually live in.
I recently received an offer to go in-house at a large publicly traded company. It's a $10K pay cut, which I realize isn't terrible, but it's not ideal either, especially when staying at my firm is much more lucrative (as it's a lock-step salary system). I would also get 3 weeks of paid vacation on top of holidays and a 401K match, which I don't get at my firm. The hours also sound better, as one of the counsels told me that they work from 8:00-5:30/6:00 and rarely works evenings or weekends. The concern is that the company is in a specialized industry and I worry that I'll be pigeonholed into this industry in the future. Additionally, it seems like there may not be much room for upward mobility in the company, as I report to the person who reports to the GC.
My questions are:
1. Given my experience at this law firm thus far, should I stay for the money and the people that I actually like working with (i.e. people not in the office in my city?)
2. Is work-life balance and no business development worth the pay-cut and future earnings?
3. If I go in-house, should I be concerned that the industry I'm going into is so specialized?
4. If I hate in-house work, how hard is it to go back to a firm?
Thank!
I recently received an offer to go in-house at a large publicly traded company. It's a $10K pay cut, which I realize isn't terrible, but it's not ideal either, especially when staying at my firm is much more lucrative (as it's a lock-step salary system). I would also get 3 weeks of paid vacation on top of holidays and a 401K match, which I don't get at my firm. The hours also sound better, as one of the counsels told me that they work from 8:00-5:30/6:00 and rarely works evenings or weekends. The concern is that the company is in a specialized industry and I worry that I'll be pigeonholed into this industry in the future. Additionally, it seems like there may not be much room for upward mobility in the company, as I report to the person who reports to the GC.
My questions are:
1. Given my experience at this law firm thus far, should I stay for the money and the people that I actually like working with (i.e. people not in the office in my city?)
2. Is work-life balance and no business development worth the pay-cut and future earnings?
3. If I go in-house, should I be concerned that the industry I'm going into is so specialized?
4. If I hate in-house work, how hard is it to go back to a firm?
Thank!