My husband is getting fired again. Forum

[scissorhammers]

...

[Spot]

Getting fired from biglaw in your first year is unusual. Being fired twice is extremely unusual. It seems clear he's just not cut out for biglaw, which is fine. Many people aren't.

More concerning is that he's not being honest and communicating with you. If I were in your shoes, I'd be supportive of his search for a new job but would lay the hammer down on telling you what's really going on.

[gaddockteeg]

How long was he at job #2?

[scissorhammers]

...

[scissorhammers]

...

[TheSpanishMain]

Manali? I'm hot lately.

[grand inquisitor]

not sure manali but i think this poster was here recently

[scissorhammers]

...

[lolwat]

Sounds like there's more to this story which only you can potentially extract from him. I'd suspect either (1) he mentally checked out and stopped producing good work or (2) the firm found out he was looking for another jurb.

[scissorhammers]

...

[gaddockteeg]

I think you can give him the benefit of the doubt. 2 years at job #2 is enough that I wouldn't be particuarly concerned.

i know enough laid off juniors that I can't imagine its THAT rare/unlucky to get laid off twice. Roll with job 3 and then worry if that one doesnt stick.

[redsox550]

Sounds like there's more to this story which only you can potentially extract from him. I'd suspect either (1) he mentally checked out and stopped producing good work or (2) the firm found out he was looking for another jurb.

The second is possible. I can't reveal more because it'd potentially out him, but I'll just say yes, it's possible.

The first is possibly true, too, and sort of the only way I can reconcile good PRs with his termination. But I could just be in denial about it. I do wonder if biglaw isn't his thing. I would like him to do something slower pace, less stressful.

why would a firm fire someone at give them severance and go through a whole HR shindig if they find out someone is looking for another job and will probably quit soon?

[Anonymous User]

I think you can give him the benefit of the doubt. 2 years at job #2 is enough that I wouldn't be particuarly concerned.

i know enough laid off juniors that I can't imagine its THAT rare/unlucky to get laid off twice. Roll with job 3 and then worry if that one doesnt stick.

I agree--to a point. Job #1 could have been flukey or just a hard transition to biglaw. Your husband's experience in job #2 implies that he's cut out for a career as a lawyer in much the same way as most folks who start out in biglaw. (That is to say, he's probably cut out for a great career as a lawyer.) Two years in biglaw is a pretty standard length--and not an indication that something deeper with your husband professionally is wrong.

All of this said, 90% of biglaw associates don't ultimately become biglaw partners. It's not because they're not smart enough, pleasant enough, or don't work hard enough -- there's a lot of luck involved and also a weird set of skills not directly related to intelligence/hard work that lead to biglaw success. Your husband's job pattern so far is not a reason for concern insofar as it does not imply that he's a bad lawyer or won't go on to have a great legal career. If, however, you and your husband are dead set on him being a biglaw partner (I'm not sure why), well, then I'd be concerned. What's happened with both jobs is a pretty good indication that he doesn't have the skillset or the mindset (or maybe both) to be a biglaw partner. It seems exceedingly unlikely to me that he'll make partner at biglaw job #3. There's no shame in that. I think most folks who leave biglaw do so only semi-voluntarily, and I think few folks who leave biglaw wish that they had stayed / had the opportunity to stay. The best jobs in the law are largely the sorts of jobs that you get as a biglaw refugee--boutiques, fed agency jobs, AUSA positions, in-house, etc. This is something that you--and, more importantly, your husband--should probably come to terms with.

Accepting all of this, my big piece of advice to you is to be as supportive and empathetic as possible: being fired, even in the gentle way that biglaw firms fire folks, is a pretty big ego hit, and your husband is probably not feeling all so great about himself right now. The last thing he needs is for his partner to be telling him, even with a lot of gentleness, that he should be prepared to be fired again in a couple of years. The question about what he does longer term is something you'll ideally work through with him eventually--but right now, I'd focus on supporting him in finding whatever job #3 is right for him and in just generally making it through what is probably a pretty personally hard time.

[dixiecupdrinking]

Even if your husband was an A- biglaw associate, he'd be out on his ass in another couple of years. It isn't a stable career for the vast majority. If you want him to have a job that he can keep indefinitely, that's a separate discussion you guys need to have.

[BaiAilian2013]

Honestly, I don't see this as a huge red flag. I've never lateraled, but I've watched people go through the process, and it can take a LOT of time and energy - particularly if you're looking in another market. His performance probably did suffer - not because he's not cut out for biglaw, but because anyone's performance would suffer under those conditions. Also, firm hiring and firing decisions are not always completely rational, and there may be politics going on behind the scenes that you and maybe even he are not aware of. I wouldn't worry about his future or his career aptitude based on this evidence. I also wouldn't assume he had warning of this and kept it from you. In hindsight, of course he feels like he knew his work was suffering. But in the moment, it's easy to convince yourself that it's not, or that no one will notice. (A lot of shitty work gets done at large law firms, it's not crazy to believe yours will fly under the radar for a while.)

[bearsfan23]

divorce him

[scissorhammers]

...

[scissorhammers]

...

[scissorhammers]

...

[scissorhammers]

...

[Anonymous User]

Even if your husband was an A- biglaw associate, he'd be out on his ass in another couple of years. It isn't a stable career for the vast majority. If you want him to have a job that he can keep indefinitely, that's a separate discussion you guys need to have.

You're right, I know. Early on we talked about how he'd eventually transition out of biglaw and how unlikely it was he'd ever become partner. I knew the odds were low. I guess I just didn't anticipate his being fired from his only two jobs as a lawyer so early on his career. Long term he'll probably do something else. Right now he's determined to be in biglaw to make a bigger dent in his loans. I don't expect the next job to last very long, so at least I'm mentally braced for it this time. The last time this happened, I was naively optimistic that it'd last more than three years.

Your comments imply that even after four years, you haven't saved nearly as much as you were hoping. If you are committed to making a big dent in his loans during his biglaw stint, start saving more aggressively. It's exceedingly unlikely that he'll spend more than about six or seven years in total in biglaw, between his three jobs. So you probably shouldn't count on more than another two-to-three, even if things are going well for him. At this point, you should have probably made 70% of the dent you were hoping for in an optimistic outlook on your husband's biglaw career success. (E.g., if, in a best case career scenario, you expected to knock out $[x] of the loans over the time that your husband was in biglaw, you should be at 70% of [x] at the very least.)

Another thing to note: the fact that he's been in biglaw for four years and is in the process of trying to transfer to another biglaw firm (rather than looking at alternative exit options) implies that he's, at least on some level, seriously considering the possibility of trying to make partner. It's not necessarily a good or a bad thing--but it is something to consider. And if he gets hired as a fourth-year by a peer biglaw firm, that's a sign that he's at least in some remote running for the position. (Firms aren't going to hire a mid-level like him that they are categorically opposed to making partner.) This is not to say that he has much of a chance of making biglaw partner. But he probably is considering it.

[smokeylarue]

Your husband is more than likely a shitty associate and/or a weird personality that people can't get along with. This is not uncommon. It seems he can at least fake it during interviews so that's a good sign. It's pretty easy to extend your Biglaw run by a year or two by just lateraling since firms don't ever know why you left your previous firm and it looks like that's what your husband's path will be. In a couple years, once he's on the verge of being let go again for being mediocre, he can probably find some type of in-house position or lateral down to a midsized firm. Fake it til you make it!

[homestyle28]

Also consider the possibility that your husband is clinically depressed. It's pretty common in our field, often goes unnoticed, and dramatically impacts performance.

The truth is, by and large, being a big law associate isn't technically difficult, if he got decent grades at a t-14, he's smart enough to do the work. Actually performing though is a grind, and the job is disappointing to many grads, exacerbating depression.

[thisiswater]

OP, if you're interested in further advice I would suggest you put the timeline into the initial post. I think people are just reading that first post and getting the impression that your husband can only hold onto biglaw jobs for <12 mos. which isn't the case

[run26.2]

You might consider bringing up the question of whether the desired exit option is available out of the new firm and/or the new location. E.g., if it is in-house, are there companies in that area that area that he would like to work for?

Sorry you and he are in this spot. As has been said, it is hard to know where exactly fault lies in this. If he has anyone at the firm that can give him honest feedback, that would be helpful to include in a decision involving the propsect of continuing in biglaw.