V40 vs. slightly under-market lifestyle firm Forum

[Anonymous User]

I'm stuck on a decision between A) a V40 firm with about a 2000 billable expectation and B) a firm that's AmLaw 200 with and 1850 expectation. I have spoken to many people about B and it seems like a great place to work, and that the 1850 expectation is real. I really liked the people at A and B.

My issue is, I'd rather start at a firm and stay. I think partnership is realistic, from everyone I've talked to, at B. The hours aren't totally insane and it pays $160k with small jumps and bonuses. But A, while I'd likely leave as a midlevel because of the intense life pressure, would have more cache. A is also $190k. I THINK I want to work in an area of the law that's a good mix of litigation and counseling/compliance work. Both firms have expertise in areas like that. A is one of the best in the country for Labor and Employment, while B has L&E and higher education expertise.

Do I choose a firm that I really believe I might want to be at long term, or do I choose a firm that might burn me out earlier on but has more pay and cache?

[Anonymous User]

I know exactly what two firms you're talking about.

If you're interested in higher ed, the higher education practice at B is great and probably the best in the market and one of the best in the nation. I'd recommend reaching out to a partner in the practice with the initials S.L.W. (very easy to find on the group's page). He is fantastic. In-house counsel jobs at universities are, imo, very cool, and they would be a real option coming out from this group. There are always postings. Of course, you have to be interested in higher ed subjects. I think you're right in that partnership could be realistic. Their PPP is in the six digits, so I think that's decent evidence of not needing a massive book to get in the door.

I have no real opinions about the V40. It's, imo, a very generic firm. I could be wrong, but I' also beware of the L&E group, because I'm pretty sure they do a shit ton of ERISA work, which is very technical, dry, an oft-unfulfilling work. This could have changed in recent years, but last time I checked they did quite a bit of it.

IMO, if I had a reasonable amount of debt, I'd choose B.You're in a very affordable market, so your buck will go far and loan repayment won't be too insane if you have <150k.

Anon, because I have obvious connections at one of the firms that could make me fairly identifiable in the small world that is my practice area.

[objctnyrhnr]

Probably not the answer you’re expecting and of course the am200 firm you’re describing could be an anomaly.

However, on its face, the “lifestyle” firm you’re talking about is classic make you work 95% of biglaw hours but pay you way less than 95% pay, particularly as you advance. Honestly it sounds like a good place to lateral to as a 2-3 to make a run at partner if that’s what you want, but yeah I’d do biglaw hands down in this scenario.

[Anonymous User]

Probably not the answer you’re expecting and of course the am200 firm you’re describing could be an anomaly.

However, on its face, the “lifestyle” firm you’re talking about is classic make you work 95% of biglaw hours but pay you way less than 95% pay, particularly as you advance. Honestly it sounds like a good place to lateral to as a 2-3 to make a run at partner if that’s what you want, but yeah I’d do biglaw hands down in this scenario.

Previous anon. It's truly a lifestyle firm. You won't be vacationing 24/7, and you'll work hard, but billable hours in the 1700s are not uncommon. Only hard thing can be getting your bonus, and the comp is compressed. Still, 1700 billable hours for 160K-250K (or whatever the top is on the compressed scale) and realistic partnership prospects for 500K+ isn't too bad. Still, I will double down on what I said earlier and if OP has a lot of debt, 100% go 190K biglaw and lateral in 2-3 years if OP feels like it. Otherwise, I think both options are very defensible.

[Anonymous User]

I know exactly what two firms you're talking about.

If you're interested in higher ed, the higher education practice at B is great and probably the best in the market and one of the best in the nation. I'd recommend reaching out to a partner in the practice with the initials S.L.W. (very easy to find on the group's page). He is fantastic. In-house counsel jobs at universities are, imo, very cool, and they would be a real option coming out from this group. There are always postings. Of course, you have to be interested in higher ed subjects. I think you're right in that partnership could be realistic. Their PPP is in the six digits, so I think that's decent evidence of not needing a massive book to get in the door.

I have no real opinions about the V40. It's, imo, a very generic firm. I could be wrong, but I' also beware of the L&E group, because I'm pretty sure they do a shit ton of ERISA work, which is very technical, dry, an oft-unfulfilling work. This could have changed in recent years, but last time I checked they did quite a bit of it.

IMO, if I had a reasonable amount of debt, I'd choose B.You're in a very affordable market, so your buck will go far and loan repayment won't be too insane if you have <150k.

Anon, because I have obvious connections at one of the firms that could make me fairly identifiable in the small world that is my practice area.

I thought there was a chance someone might know the firms. I'm not sure how you figured out my market, but good on you. I have about $110k in loans.

I guess here's the real question-- is there anything to be gained by starting at B, vs. starting at A and lateraling? And I checked-- A has about 7 people of 18 doing ERISA in the L&E group in that office.

[Anonymous User]

I thought there was a chance someone might know the firms. I'm not sure how you figured out my market, but good on you. I have about $110k in loans.

I guess here's the real question-- is there anything to be gained by starting at B, vs. starting at A and lateraling? And I checked-- A has about 7 people of 18 doing ERISA in the L&E group in that office.

The higher ed/L&E/ECB world is small.

110k in loans isn't bad at all. Congrats on the great options with a reasonable loan amount. I can't think of any major advantages of starting at B over A. The two minor advantages of starting at B that I can think of is (1) you'll avoid ERISA work, if that's not your cup of tea (7 of 18 is a very substantial ERISA practice), and (2) you'll be homegrown talent at B, which could be a helpful intangible in terms of layoffs/partnership (ymmv). Of course, if you really want to do higher ed work, B is the way to go. But, if you're generally just content to land anywhere in the L&E realm and don't care about B's minor advantages, then it's hard down to turn down the $30k/yr.+ extra dough at A.

[Anonymous User]

I thought there was a chance someone might know the firms. I'm not sure how you figured out my market, but good on you. I have about $110k in loans.

I guess here's the real question-- is there anything to be gained by starting at B, vs. starting at A and lateraling? And I checked-- A has about 7 people of 18 doing ERISA in the L&E group in that office.

The higher ed/L&E/ECB world is small.

110k in loans isn't bad at all. Congrats on the great options with a reasonable loan amount. I can't think of any major advantages of starting at B over A. The two minor advantages of starting at B that I can think of is (1) you'll avoid ERISA work, if that's not your cup of tea (7 of 18 is a very substantial ERISA practice), and (2) you'll be homegrown talent at B, which could be a helpful intangible in terms of layoffs/partnership (ymmv). Of course, if you really want to do higher ed work, B is the way to go. But, if you're generally just content to land anywhere in the L&E realm and don't care about B's minor advantages, then it's hard down to turn down the $30k/yr.+ extra dough at A.

I don’t know the first thing about higher ed work, EXCEPT it checks my boxes of 1) part litigation, part compliance counseling and 2) more human-interest focused. I feel like I should really go with A.... but—

Not sure if this changes the calculus at all, but I do have an anxiety disorder and “everything is all on fire at once” moments tend to really hit my mental health. So I wonder if I shouldn’t be somewhere that asks a little less hours wise.

[Anonymous User]

I don’t know the first thing about higher ed work, EXCEPT it checks my boxes of 1) part litigation, part compliance counseling and 2) more human-interest focused. I feel like I should really go with A.... but—

Not sure if this changes the calculus at all, but I do have an anxiety disorder and “everything is all on fire at once” moments tend to really hit my mental health. So I wonder if I shouldn’t be somewhere that asks a little less hours wise.

Same anon.

Without a burning passion to do higher ed work, I'd take A. It's a great firm in the L&E space, even if it has more ERISA work than I'd care to deal with. In this space, there really just are not many "everything is all on fire at once" type of moment, so you'll probably work more hours at A due to it having more work to go around/bigger projects/higher expectations than due to fire drills.

[Anonymous User]

I don’t know the first thing about higher ed work, EXCEPT it checks my boxes of 1) part litigation, part compliance counseling and 2) more human-interest focused. I feel like I should really go with A.... but—

Not sure if this changes the calculus at all, but I do have an anxiety disorder and “everything is all on fire at once” moments tend to really hit my mental health. So I wonder if I shouldn’t be somewhere that asks a little less hours wise.

Same anon.

Without a burning passion to do higher ed work, I'd take A. It's a great firm in the L&E space, even if it has more ERISA work than I'd care to deal with. In this space, there really just are not many "everything is all on fire at once" type of moment, so you'll probably work more hours at A due to it having more work to go around/bigger projects/higher expectations than due to fire drills.

OP here. Thank you so much for taking the time here. It's a really tough decision because I do think there's a chance that I could be really happy at B, much happier than my peers billing 2100 a year. But it's also a big risk, and it'll be tough to lateral to a V50 firm later on. In a weird way, I felt happier when I only had the offer from B left after eliminating two others. But I think I do need to take A. I honestly feel like I might like ERISA, anyway-- I did some healthcare regulations work this summer and kind of enjoyed digging into the weird and complex world of those laws. And if I don't, I hope B might still be interested a few years down the line if things go that way.

That said, I have a couple phone calls early next week I want to take before I finalize the decision. I only got B's offer a week ago and A's offer three days ago.