Would you take this in house job post-raises? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Second year corp in major non ny market

Hate biglaw and firm life but not getting killed atm

Entry level in house at well known public company in a pretty interesting industry. Would be joining a small team that’s part of the larger legal team.

165k
401k match
2 weeks vacation + good amount of office closures
Other free shit. Benefits seem pretty good.
No equity awards
Small annual bonus

Work life balance is great, seems very chill. I’m theoretically okay with the paycut but I started interviewing before these raises so it kind of changes the calculus. But I also know I’m just a second year so what can I expect. Not sure how much negotiating leverage I have. Think I’d be okay w the base if not for the lack of equity incentives - that’s a big buzzkill.

Hard to gauge upward mobility. They have a proven track record of preferring internal promotions to outside hires. But the senior lawyers I’ve met have been with the company a LONG time, so that would impact it. Best hopes would be creation of new teams or something similar. As for raises, same as most places. A small amount every year. No real substantive raises without a promotion.

I just want to be free, but I’d be losing a good amount of financial freedom as well. I’ve almost, but not quite, hit the financial milestones I wanted. But I’m single have no intention of ever starting a family, so future salary to support kids isn’t really a consideration.

[jhett]

I think it comes down to how much you value your free time versus your income.

It takes a long time or several lateral moves to move up the corporate ladder and increase your salary once you go in-house. If you stay in a firm for a few more years, you'll skip several rungs of the ladder. And you'll make more money and get more experience in the meantime.

But the in-house life is sweet.

[Anonymous User]

I think it comes down to how much you value your free time versus your income.

It takes a long time or several lateral moves to move up the corporate ladder and increase your salary once you go in-house. If you stay in a firm for a few more years, you'll skip several rungs of the ladder. And you'll make more money and get more experience in the meantime.

But the in-house life is sweet.

That’s a pretty succinct statement of my dilemma. I have maybe another year in me for biglaw. Maybe.

[albanach]

165k
401k match
2 weeks vacation + good amount of office closures
Other free shit. Benefits seem pretty good.
No equity awards
Small annual bonus

...

I just want to be free, but I’d be losing a good amount of financial freedom as well. I’ve almost, but not quite, hit the financial milestones I wanted. But I’m single have no intention of ever starting a family, so future salary to support kids isn’t really a consideration.

On the first part, that should be a comfortable salary unless your non-major market is one that's as, or almost as, expensive as NYC. You're talking about almost $8.5k in take home pay each month assuming you max your 401k and the company matches 5%.

As for part two, I have no idea what age you are. I've seen that statement made many times and then change.

Of course this all comes down to your expectations. If you were raised by a couple of lawyers/doctors and had a household income of $750k/year, you might not be able to afford everything you're accustomed to. On the other hand, if you grew up in a house with the national median income of under $60k, you should quickly recognize that this is more than enough to live on and save with. Or maybe you're content to live frugally, but were planning on riding biglaw as long as possible so you can retire at 35? Those are things we just don't know.

In-house can be hard work - advice to anyone thinking of making the switch, don't ever say to an in-house attorney that you're looking to join them because you don't want to keep working as hard. That said, the pressures are entirely different when you have one client and no hour tracking requirements.

[Anonymous User]

I think it's a very strong offer, and you should take it and not look back. I left as a third year for a 180K offer (salary + bonus), so it seems like you're doing really well with that offer as just a second year. How much is the bonus?

[Anonymous User]

I think it's a very strong offer, and you should take it and not look back. I left as a third year for a 180K offer (salary + bonus), so it seems like you're doing really well with that offer as just a second year. How much is the bonus?

Pretty small - single digit %

[sopranorleone]

I'd try to negotiate for 3 weeks vacation

[shock259]

Compensation looks pretty good on the whole. If you only have 1 year of biglaw left you in and you like the people at the in house gig, I would seriously consider taking it. If you stay in biglaw until you rage quit, it may take months and months of searching to find something. And it may not be as good as the offer you received now.

[albanach]

I'd try to negotiate for 3 weeks vacation

At larger firms it can be very hard to negotiate vacation because it's determined by company-wide policy. You might, however, be able to negotiate a starting bank, so you don't begin with zero days.

[Anonymous User]

Take the job. You have already determined that biglaw is not for you. If you find in a couple years that comp or advancement prospects aren’t there, you can always make a lateral move. Check the 401K match policy, though, some places require you to stay a few years before it vests fully.

[Anonymous User]

I think it's a very strong offer, and you should take it and not look back. I left as a third year for a 180K offer (salary + bonus), so it seems like you're doing really well with that offer as just a second year. How much is the bonus?

Pretty small - single digit %

Same anon here. Try to negotiate a 10K sign on bonus or something. They're more likely to do that than come up on base salary. Bonus and vacation is often pre-set at big companies so not sure you'll be able to get anything there.

[Anonymous User]

That is not a bad offer at all for a second year (so 1-1.5 years experience) in a non-ny market. Even if SF/SV, the offer isn't awful. There are plenty of 3rd+ years taking offers for about that much comp all-in.

Keep in mind that, esp. depending on your specialty and location, in-house job offers can be few and far between (non-ny corp isn't enough to provide meaningful help here). You may easily be waiting a year or more to get another offer, let alone another offer for more comp at a company with equally good work/life balance. Especially as someone so junior, given that most in-house job these days seem to want 3+ years experience, minimum, it might be a while befoer you stumble on something that nice.

My reaction is say take it and don't look back, especially if you already hate biglaw. From everything I've heard, the hardest jump is firm -> in-house. Going in-house -> in-house is relatively easier, so if you find yourself stuck the next move won't be as hard.

[northwood]

If you only have one year left of biglaw in you and you believe the in house job has great work life balance... take the job. If you don’t like it, look for another