Hypothetical - You lateral to a firm and end up hating it, how long do you have to stay? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Assuming you misjudged and lateraled somewhere you hate, what is the shortest amount of time you should stay before looking for another job? Oh and assuming late 4th/early 5th year for the first lateral move.

[QContinuum]

If you haven't burned your bridges with your old firm, it's not unheard of to "bounce" back quickly. That should preferably be done asap before the old firm's had a chance to fill your spot.

[Anonymous User]

We recently had an associate who was hired in my group about nine months ago leave to go to another firm. Before he had lateraled to us, he'd been at his previous firm for only about six months, which he had lateraled to three years into his first biglaw firm. So... you can definitely hop around very easily, at least in the current market, though I have to imagine it's career-damaging in the long term.

[gregfootball2001]

If you haven't burned your bridges with your old firm, it's not unheard of to "bounce" back quickly. That should preferably be done asap before the old firm's had a chance to fill your spot.

I've heard it called the "grass is browner" club.

[Anonymous User]

If you haven't burned your bridges with your old firm, it's not unheard of to "bounce" back quickly. That should preferably be done asap before the old firm's had a chance to fill your spot.

I've heard it called the "grass is browner" club.

I’m considering a geographic move where my current firm doesn’t have offices. So, unfortunately, a hop back wouldn’t be in the cards.

[Anonymous User]

We’ve had a few associates in our firm stay fewer than 6 months after they lateral. One that just left was here for 4 months.

I mean, it doesn’t look good, especially since they are in the same market still.

[Anonymous User]

The short answer is “stay until you find a new job.”

The long answer is “it depends.” I had a few lateral interviews ~1.5 years after my first lateral move. The movement clearly bothered some people in the interviews, while others didn’t seem to care at all. Others dung me at the screening stage because of the movement history (according to my recruiter, who was supposedly passing along feedback from the screening partners). I ended up sticking around at my current firm because the options that panned out weren’t worth jumping for. But I could’ve joined another market-paying firm if I really just wanted to leave. The fact that you lasted so long at your first firm is good for you, because it shows you aren’t just an attorney hopping around every 18 months because you can’t stick around at a firm. But you need a better hook to move again than “I hate my new place.”

The danger is that your options will likely be restricted somewhat if you try to move fast, which may (but won’t necessarily) lead to subpar outcomes compared to if you’d stuck around for a couple years. Also, it can be a bad look to apply to a bunch of places, get dung, then try to apply again in 6-12 months. Once someone’s passed on you once, it’s easier to pass again. Though there are plenty of counter-examples to that rule. And there are plenty of people who make a second lateral move fairly quick to equal or better firms. Market conditions and your own experience will make big differences in your results compared to others.

Staying at least 2 years is probably the safe bet to minimize long term resume damage, but you have to live your life. You also have to consider that you’ll be a near 7th year by then, and lateral marketability tends to drop off sharply around then.

[Anonymous User]

The short answer is “stay until you find a new job.”

The long answer is “it depends.” I had a few lateral interviews ~1.5 years after my first lateral move. The movement clearly bothered some people in the interviews, while others didn’t seem to care at all. Others dung me at the screening stage because of the movement history (according to my recruiter, who was supposedly passing along feedback from the screening partners). I ended up sticking around at my current firm because the options that panned out weren’t worth jumping for. But I could’ve joined another market-paying firm if I really just wanted to leave. The fact that you lasted so long at your first firm is good for you, because it shows you aren’t just an attorney hopping around every 18 months because you can’t stick around at a firm. But you need a better hook to move again than “I hate my new place.”

The danger is that your options will likely be restricted somewhat if you try to move fast, which may (but won’t necessarily) lead to subpar outcomes compared to if you’d stuck around for a couple years. Also, it can be a bad look to apply to a bunch of places, get dung, then try to apply again in 6-12 months. Once someone’s passed on you once, it’s easier to pass again. Though there are plenty of counter-examples to that rule. And there are plenty of people who make a second lateral move fairly quick to equal or better firms. Market conditions and your own experience will make big differences in your results compared to others.

Staying at least 2 years is probably the safe bet to minimize long term resume damage, but you have to live your life. You also have to consider that you’ll be a near 7th year by then, and lateral marketability tends to drop off sharply around then.

This is helpful. Thank you. Are you still looking or did your current firm grow on you? Why did you want to leave when you first started your search?

[SFSpartan]

In a somewhat similar position to you, OP. I've been in my current job for about a year, and have been doing interviews for the past 6 months or so. The firms in my current market don't seem to care, but out of market firms (I'm trying to move to a midwestern market where I have ties) really do seem to care and I suspect (with corroboration from recruiter) that I've missed at least 2 offers due to same. Not sure how helpful that is to you, but just a bit of anecdata.

[Anonymous User]

In a somewhat similar position to you, OP. I've been in my current job for about a year, and have been doing interviews for the past 6 months or so. The firms in my current market don't seem to care, but out of market firms (I'm trying to move to a midwestern market where I have ties) really do seem to care and I suspect (with corroboration from recruiter) that I've missed at least 2 offers due to same. Not sure how helpful that is to you, but just a bit of anecdata.

What made you want to leave? How long were you at your first firm? And did you move to that firm from a different region? I would have thought the out of market firms would care less because the narrative behind the move would be more favorable than just trying to move firms within the same market at the 1 year mark.

[SFSpartan]

In a somewhat similar position to you, OP. I've been in my current job for about a year, and have been doing interviews for the past 6 months or so. The firms in my current market don't seem to care, but out of market firms (I'm trying to move to a midwestern market where I have ties) really do seem to care and I suspect (with corroboration from recruiter) that I've missed at least 2 offers due to same. Not sure how helpful that is to you, but just a bit of anecdata.

What made you want to leave? How long were you at your first firm? And did you move to that firm from a different region? I would have thought the out of market firms would care less because the narrative behind the move would be more favorable than just trying to move firms within the same market at the 1 year mark.

I was at the first place for 3 years. I moved from a midlaw shop to a corporate boutique - reason for moving was quality of work (the corporate boutique was started by a bunch of ex-Fenwick people and has objectively more sophisticated work than my last job). One thing I do miss about the midlaw firm is that it was big enough that I could avoid working for partners that were a pain by taking work from different partners (this wasn't true of my last job). I moved within markets previously.

I think some of firms in my current market not caring is cultural - the Bay Area tends to be really laid back, and there seem to be more job hopping attorneys here than in other markets. The midwest is also much more reserved/conservative as compared to the Bay Area - I probably couldn't go to work in jeans and a t shirt at a midwestern firm, but same is totally acceptable at my current shop (as long as no client meetings are scheduled).

Edit: To give context, I went to college and worked in the market I'm trying to move to.