Big4 M&A to BigLaw Exec Comp? Forum

[Anonymous User]

Is it possible for a NYC Big4 M&A associate to lateral to biglaw executive compensation? Assume I’d be happy with a v50 firm like Morgan Lewis.

It seems like the overal opinion of TLS is that NYC Big4 M&A is more desirable than biglaw exec comp (especially at a lower tiered firm), but how does that effect the possibility of lateraling?

[Anonymous User]

It’s definitely possible. I’m applying for these roles, so I’m anon.

You would probably have a decent to good shot at a firm like Fenwick that really wants someone with deal work.

You’ll be competing against exec comp/benefits associates with deal experience and a background in ERISA, so it’ll still be a challenge (especially if the firm is looking for someone with a baseline knowledge of ERISA - such as Morgan Lewis).

My friend was a 3rd year M&A associate at a big4 in NY and applied to Latham in LA(?) and was rejected within hours and the recruiter told him that it’s because he had no ERISA experience.

So, if you’re looking to move, focus on firms that are looking for more deal experience. Probably Fenwick and maybe Kirkland if you have the credentials.

As for the other point, I don’t think big4 m&a is necessarily better than Exec Comp. I just think if you’re someone who likes doing tax work and tax structuring, you will get extremely bored doing exec comp at a firm (mostly exec comp due diligence and disclosure work, and drafting reps and warranties and the agreements that go along with transactions).

Edit: also, you will have to sell the firm in why you want to go from tax to exec comp. a lot of exec comp attorneys I know/have met are very skeptical of people saying they want to go into the field (especially if they’re transitioning from tax).

[Anonymous User]

It’s definitely possible. I’m applying for these roles, so I’m anon.

You would probably have a decent to good shot at a firm like Fenwick that really wants someone with deal work.

You’ll be competing against exec comp/benefits associates with deal experience and a background in ERISA, so it’ll still be a challenge (especially if the firm is looking for someone with a baseline knowledge of ERISA - such as Morgan Lewis).

My friend was a 3rd year M&A associate at a big4 in NY and applied to Latham in LA(?) and was rejected within hours and the recruiter told him that it’s because he had no ERISA experience.

So, if you’re looking to move, focus on firms that are looking for more deal experience. Probably Fenwick and maybe Kirkland if you have the credentials.

As for the other point, I don’t think big4 m&a is necessarily better than Exec Comp. I just think if you’re someone who likes doing tax work and tax structuring, you will get extremely bored doing exec comp at a firm (mostly exec comp due diligence and disclosure work, and drafting reps and warranties and the agreements that go along with transactions).

Edit: also, you will have to sell the firm in why you want to go from tax to exec comp. a lot of exec comp attorneys I know/have met are very skeptical of people saying they want to go into the field (especially if they’re transitioning from tax).

Thanks for this. I actually took an ERISA class in law school from Morgan Lewis’ Employee Benefits and Exec Compensation chair. He wrote my tax court clerkship recommendation saying I “mastered both the tax and labor side of his course.” Since that class, I’ve been torn between deal work (M&A/int Tax) at the Big4 and exec comp at a firm like ML. I ultimately went Big4 but wondering if that shut the door on going to a firm later. I don’t want to ask my contact until I’m more certain that I want to make the move. That’s why I’m posting as an anon here.

[Anonymous User]

I'm at a V100 firm doing ERISA/executive comp, and when we hire laterals, we want them to have significant executive comp/ERISA experience - we wouldn't hire someone with NO exec comp or ERISA experience. I think our view is that it's easier to teach the M&A stuff than the exec comp stuff - plus almost none of our attorneys do solely exec comp - they're doing general benefits work too. In fact, it may be easier to go from M&A to exec comp at a firm that has a bunch of attorneys who only do exec comp (but I'm not at a firm like that, so who knows). Of course, if you have a contact at a specific firm who already likes you, then you need to just sell HIM on why you should make the switch - because if he's the chair of the group and wants you to join, you're good to go.

[Anonymous User]

It’s definitely possible. I’m applying for these roles, so I’m anon.

You would probably have a decent to good shot at a firm like Fenwick that really wants someone with deal work.

You’ll be competing against exec comp/benefits associates with deal experience and a background in ERISA, so it’ll still be a challenge (especially if the firm is looking for someone with a baseline knowledge of ERISA - such as Morgan Lewis).

My friend was a 3rd year M&A associate at a big4 in NY and applied to Latham in LA(?) and was rejected within hours and the recruiter told him that it’s because he had no ERISA experience.

So, if you’re looking to move, focus on firms that are looking for more deal experience. Probably Fenwick and maybe Kirkland if you have the credentials.

As for the other point, I don’t think big4 m&a is necessarily better than Exec Comp. I just think if you’re someone who likes doing tax work and tax structuring, you will get extremely bored doing exec comp at a firm (mostly exec comp due diligence and disclosure work, and drafting reps and warranties and the agreements that go along with transactions).

Edit: also, you will have to sell the firm in why you want to go from tax to exec comp. a lot of exec comp attorneys I know/have met are very skeptical of people saying they want to go into the field (especially if they’re transitioning from tax).

Thanks for this. I actually took an ERISA class in law school from Morgan Lewis’ Employee Benefits and Exec Compensation chair. He wrote my tax court clerkship recommendation saying I “mastered both the tax and labor side of his course.” Since that class, I’ve been torn between deal work (M&A/int Tax) at the Big4 and exec comp at a firm like ML. I ultimately went Big4 but wondering if that shut the door on going to a firm later. I don’t want to ask my contact until I’m more certain that I want to make the move. That’s why I’m posting as an anon here.

How long have you been at the Big4? If you’ve only been there a few months, it shouldn’t matter. But if you’ve been there for two or three years and are looking to lateral go ML because you saw that there was an opening and the chair liked you, it may look disingenuous.

As I said above and others have said, I think it’s going to be a bit more difficult to lateral to a firm that has an expansive benefits practice because a lot of the work isn’t deal work. You’ll be competing with people who have coursework and experience in ERISA, which is very dense.

It’s not impossible and if you still have a good relationship with the chair, you should try. You don’t have to take the offer if offered.