Which in-house job? Torn between comp vs. hours.. Forum

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Sun Oct 31, 2021 8:03 pm

Also posted this in the legal salary datapoints thread, which has been very useful fo me. I'm a 6th year corp associate at a V10, completely burned out with the grind and weighing two current offers. Obviously it comes down to a personal value judgment, but curious if anyone else has faced a similar decision, and if so how it worked out.

Option 1:
Location: NYC
Position: Counsel, finance industry
Hours: Unclear. I've been told "better than biglaw and with more control, but definitely not a 9-5". I expect frequent night and weekend work, and to be monitoring emails all day.
Comp: 300k base, 50% bonus, all-in = 450k

Option 2:
Location: Full remote
Position: Counsel for startup
Hours: 9-5, no weekends (verified by current legal team).
Comp: 180k base, 15% bonus, all-in = 207k

I have to make a decision in the next few days, and am very torn. The comp difference is massive, but that might be offset by the cost of living and taxes in NYC (for the full remote I would probably relocate to Miami), and also a true 9-5 seems like a rare lifestyle opportunity. For what it's worth I have no family, no debt, and about 500k saved up.

jagpaw · Post by **jagpaw** » Sun Oct 31, 2021 8:45 pm

If purchasing power ends up being close after looking at COL calculators the startup might be the way to go. Probably more opportunity to branch out to the business side as well if you have that interest

Elston Gunn · Post by **Elston Gunn** » Sun Oct 31, 2021 8:49 pm

I don’t really see the point of leaving Biglaw for a different job where you’ll be working nights and weekends and monitoring email all day. Based on your description and personal circumstances, I wouldn’t even consider the first offer, but I understand it’s very personal. The comp is objectively great for an in-house job, and it’s possible it’s more like 9-7ish with very occasional nights and weekends.

The startup offer seems okay, but I do think you can probably do better (think an F100 with 9-6 hours and comp more in the $250k all-in range). But the fully remote aspect may be a little harder, though not impossible, to replicate. They’re really not offering you any equity? The offer would look better with some real (if uncertain) upside on top of it. In any case, you don’t need the money, so if you just need to get out of biglaw, it wouldn’t be a bad call to take the offer. Getting generalist experience at a startup on top of BL can also be a great springboard to other in house jobs with reasonable hours.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Sun Oct 31, 2021 9:46 pm

To take the other side on this, there is a risk you might be overestimating the workload at the finance firm or wrongly equating it your current experience at a V10. If the finance firm can offer you 15% better lifestyle than what you currently have, that might go a long way. It would be the difference between a year you bill 2100 hours vs 2500 hours.

I would also consider the financial health of the startup. That said even if it goes bust, I think your experience in big law will still get you to another the good gig.

Res Ipsa Loquitter · Post by **Res Ipsa Loquitter** » Mon Nov 01, 2021 10:34 am

It depends if you like NYC and the type of people who work at the financial firm. If you don't I'd take the 200K and GTFO to somewhere cheaper than Miami.

attorney589753 · Post by **attorney589753** » Mon Nov 01, 2021 10:53 am

Zoom out — both offers are a win and improvement given how you currently feel. I don't think you can go wrong. I do agree with the other poster in that I think there's at least 80% chance you are overstating the work at the finance firm and that 10-15% better lifestyle on the margin is pretty clutch. Even working one weekend a month instead of every weekend, or being able to block certain weekends without guilt, is an important lifestyle point.

I think you should view it through the lens of which job will you enjoy the substantive work more and which one sets you up better for your next career opportunity. The first one sounds like the career path of dialing it back one step, moving from firm to big finance company, sticking in the same substantive area. Second one is more of a move to something different?

Lesion of Doom · Post by **Lesion of Doom** » Mon Nov 01, 2021 4:58 pm

I'd be all over No. 2 like a pig in shit. But it's personal and agreed that No. 1's night and weekend work still almost definitely would not be as brutal as biglaw.

Anonymous User · Post by **Anonymous User** » Tue Nov 02, 2021 7:09 am

I spent some time in an i-bank in a fairly busy group. My colleagues would regularly stay up til 10-11 on calls and took a couple of hours of calls each weekend too. Not really working in the sense of churning work product, but there to provide legal counsel and for when bankers needed internal legal to opine on a time-sensitive matter. Not as tiring as biglaw imo but still an obligation on your time.

Had a colleague there who would regularly stay up til 1-2 AM producing work product but I think they were an outlier.

So for option #1 I guess it'll depend on how busy your group is and how unpredictable the deal flow is and whether you're expected to produce work product or just reviewing/opining on matters from a legal perspective.

Which in-house job? Torn between comp vs. hours.. Forum

Which in-house job? Torn between comp vs. hours..

Re: Which in-house job? Torn between comp vs. hours..

Re: Which in-house job? Torn between comp vs. hours..

Re: Which in-house job? Torn between comp vs. hours..

Re: Which in-house job? Torn between comp vs. hours..

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Re: Which in-house job? Torn between comp vs. hours..

Re: Which in-house job? Torn between comp vs. hours..

Re: Which in-house job? Torn between comp vs. hours..

Register for access!