Lifestyle for Corporate Work Forum

[Anonymous User]

I heard some corporate practices may be less intense than others such as the pace and intensity of work, demands of clients, and weekend and night hours. Can you describe how this plays out in the PE vs. M&A vs. ECVC space?

Slight interest in all three but I want to stick with the practice that won't burn me out the soonest.

[Anonymous User]

I’m a senior/mid-level in funds at top funds practice. Generally, I work 8/9-5 and then again from 7-9 or 9-11. Right now funds is extremely busy and most people I know are billing 10 a day and have been for 2-3 months. I almost never work weekends, though I sometimes pay for it on mondays. Generally speaking, the deadlines are longer in funds and there aren’t intense late night closings. When we work with the finance team on credit facilities, the difference in deadlines is stark. I almost never have to cancel plans for work.

That said, funds is a GRIND. The docs are long and difficult to understand. You need to know tax basics, securities regulation/advisers act, and some math to do funds work. Even though I’m not canceling plans it’s not uncommon for me to work for a few hours after seeing friends for dinner. As a senior/mid level I run all my projects by myself except for a few complex negotiations. Funds clients can be super demanding (though maybe not more than other corporate clients) and we are bombarded with emails. For me, managing client expectations and remaining responsive is the hardest part, especially when I really don’t want to open my 97th LPA of the year.

Of corporate practices, I would consider funds a lifestyle practice but I’m still looking to leave.

[Anonymous User]

I’m a senior/mid-level in funds at top funds practice. Generally, I work 8/9-5 and then again from 7-9 or 9-11. Right now funds is extremely busy and most people I know are billing 10 a day and have been for 2-3 months. I almost never work weekends, though I sometimes pay for it on mondays. Generally speaking, the deadlines are longer in funds and there aren’t intense late night closings. When we work with the finance team on credit facilities, the difference in deadlines is stark. I almost never have to cancel plans for work.

That said, funds is a GRIND. The docs are long and difficult to understand. You need to know tax basics, securities regulation/advisers act, and some math to do funds work. Even though I’m not canceling plans it’s not uncommon for me to work for a few hours after seeing friends for dinner. As a senior/mid level I run all my projects by myself except for a few complex negotiations. Funds clients can be super demanding (though maybe not more than other corporate clients) and we are bombarded with emails. For me, managing client expectations and remaining responsive is the hardest part, especially when I really don’t want to open my 97th LPA of the year.

Of corporate practices, I would consider funds a lifestyle practice but I’m still looking to leave.

I’m also in a top funds practice and I would echo this sentiment. Funds is probably one of the most lifestyle friendly practices. One result I’ve noticed is that the attrition rate seems substantially lower than other corporate practices at our firm.

This year has been very busy which probably translates to average billables across the group of low to mid 2000s. You get there though by consistently billing 50 hr weeks rather than 70-80 hr weeks in short bursts, and can probably avoid working most weekends.

Being a jr in funds isn’t great though. There is a huge volume of low skill paperwork/diligence-type work that needs to get done and it’s usually dumped on the jr associates, unless your firm is lucky to have a huge staff of paralegals/staff attorneys. Getting senior can be more tolerable if you pick up the substance (steep learning curve as the anon above says), but the practice is very project focused and so there will always be a significant project management component compared to some other more advisory practices.

[synergy]

What are these top funds practices where you're billing 50 hours a week??? I would love a PM if possible.

I'm at a relatively top funds practice and my experience this year is closer to that described in a recent funds-focused thread about hours (i.e. lots of late nights, though to the above two posters' points, more predictable and less weekends than M&A).

[Anonymous User]

It seems that exec comp is relatively lifestyle friendly compared to a CapM/M&A.

[Anonymous User]

It seems that exec comp is relatively lifestyle friendly compared to a CapM/M&A.

Firm and location dependent. They were getting killed at my Bay Area office when I left. That being said, the people in exec comp tend to be really nice.

[Anonymous User]

It seems that exec comp is relatively lifestyle friendly compared to a CapM/M&A.

Firm and location dependent. They were getting killed at my Bay Area office when I left. That being said, the people in exec comp tend to be really nice.

As an M&A associate, I get the sense that my exec comp peers can occasionally be slammed when there's a large deal volume and they have multiple overlapping obligations, but typically they're engaged in a very discreet (but often highly valued) portion of a deal. It looks like it's really a pretty good gig, since the practice area is also pretty valuable outside biglaw, so that can always remain an offramp. I've never been anything except an M&A cog, so I don't pretend to know personally, but tax and exec comp often look to me like better places to practice.

[Anonymous User]

Ec/vc seems better. Less weekend work and fire drills.

[Anonymous User]

It seems that exec comp is relatively lifestyle friendly compared to a CapM/M&A.

Firm and location dependent. They were getting killed at my Bay Area office when I left. That being said, the people in exec comp tend to be really nice.

As an M&A associate, I get the sense that my exec comp peers can occasionally be slammed when there's a large deal volume and they have multiple overlapping obligations, but typically they're engaged in a very discreet (but often highly valued) portion of a deal. It looks like it's really a pretty good gig, since the practice area is also pretty valuable outside biglaw, so that can always remain an offramp. I've never been anything except an M&A cog, so I don't pretend to know personally, but tax and exec comp often look to me like better places to practice.

Different anon here: the sheer volume of work is what can get really bad in EC, especially if you're supporting M&A of any kind. Culturally, and in terms of timing/pacing, it's relatively chill, but that means little when the whole department's inboxes brim over because multiple deals simultaneously want work product/comments.

[Anonymous User]

It seems that exec comp is relatively lifestyle friendly compared to a CapM/M&A.

Firm and location dependent. They were getting killed at my Bay Area office when I left. That being said, the people in exec comp tend to be really nice.

I like think we are really nice. Yeah the hard part is when there are a half dozen or so deals running concurrently.

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone elaborate more on EC/VC work? Rising 5th M&A in v10, and I have heard EC/VC group generally has much better hours and less fire drills, and I am seriously considering a move to either Gunderson/Cooley/Fenwick and etc. if there will be a meaningful difference in lifestyle.

[Anonymous User]

What are these top funds practices where you're billing 50 hours a week??? I would love a PM if possible.

I'm at a relatively top funds practice and my experience this year is closer to that described in a recent funds-focused thread about hours (i.e. lots of late nights, though to the above two posters' points, more predictable and less weekends than M&A).

I would also appreciate a PM. I was at a V10 funds practice, and billable hours averaged around 2400 for associates in the group, with some near 3000, others 1900-2000, but the vast majority 2200-2600.

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone elaborate more on EC/VC work? Rising 5th M&A in v10, and I have heard EC/VC group generally has much better hours and less fire drills, and I am seriously considering a move to either Gunderson/Cooley/Fenwick and etc. if there will be a meaningful difference in lifestyle.

EC/VC mid at a top SV shop. We're drowning in work but I think we get what seem to be better hours if only since stuff is generally not as big of priority -- I could flip a Board consent approving option grants in 15 minutes if I dropped everything but most clients generally don't care if it takes a few days and rare is the email that's going to blow up your weekend for some urgent task. Not to say you won't get the occasional irritating client that's more insistent on deadlines or wants a financing closed in two weeks after you communicated 50 times that it'll take at least four since we can't force investor counsel to move faster, but those types of folks are generally the minority for the most part.

So upshot is that the raw hours might be similar because of sheer volume (there's a ridiculous amount of money being put into private companies and valuations are stratospheric) but it's a lot less stressful since the day-to-day work is not as high octane. Happy to chat more via DM if helpful.

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone elaborate more on EC/VC work? Rising 5th M&A in v10, and I have heard EC/VC group generally has much better hours and less fire drills, and I am seriously considering a move to either Gunderson/Cooley/Fenwick and etc. if there will be a meaningful difference in lifestyle.

EC/VC mid at a top SV shop. We're drowning in work but I think we get what seem to be better hours if only since stuff is generally not as big of priority -- I could flip a Board consent approving option grants in 15 minutes if I dropped everything but most clients generally don't care if it takes a few days and rare is the email that's going to blow up your weekend for some urgent task. Not to say you won't get the occasional irritating client that's more insistent on deadlines or wants a financing closed in two weeks after you communicated 50 times that it'll take at least four since we can't force investor counsel to move faster, but those types of folks are generally the minority for the most part.

So upshot is that the raw hours might be similar because of sheer volume (there's a ridiculous amount of money being put into private companies and valuations are stratospheric) but it's a lot less stressful since the day-to-day work is not as high octane. Happy to chat more via DM if helpful.

This is also my experience as a junior doing ec/vc work who moved over from a more traditional m&a/capm firm. People work alot but it's not as high stress, clients less legally sophisticated so they follow our lead/tempo more often. People in my group (top tech firm) dont seem to be pulling all nighters. People seem to enjoy their weekends and I don't get much email traffic. This is very different from my previous firm where people brought their laptop on first dates.

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone elaborate more on EC/VC work? Rising 5th M&A in v10, and I have heard EC/VC group generally has much better hours and less fire drills, and I am seriously considering a move to either Gunderson/Cooley/Fenwick and etc. if there will be a meaningful difference in lifestyle.

EC/VC mid at a top SV shop. We're drowning in work but I think we get what seem to be better hours if only since stuff is generally not as big of priority -- I could flip a Board consent approving option grants in 15 minutes if I dropped everything but most clients generally don't care if it takes a few days and rare is the email that's going to blow up your weekend for some urgent task. Not to say you won't get the occasional irritating client that's more insistent on deadlines or wants a financing closed in two weeks after you communicated 50 times that it'll take at least four since we can't force investor counsel to move faster, but those types of folks are generally the minority for the most part.

So upshot is that the raw hours might be similar because of sheer volume (there's a ridiculous amount of money being put into private companies and valuations are stratospheric) but it's a lot less stressful since the day-to-day work is not as high octane. Happy to chat more via DM if helpful.

This is helpful. I might start reaching out to those recruiters for these firms..

[Anonymous User]

Can anyone elaborate more on EC/VC work? Rising 5th M&A in v10, and I have heard EC/VC group generally has much better hours and less fire drills, and I am seriously considering a move to either Gunderson/Cooley/Fenwick and etc. if there will be a meaningful difference in lifestyle.

EC/VC mid at a top SV shop. We're drowning in work but I think we get what seem to be better hours if only since stuff is generally not as big of priority -- I could flip a Board consent approving option grants in 15 minutes if I dropped everything but most clients generally don't care if it takes a few days and rare is the email that's going to blow up your weekend for some urgent task. Not to say you won't get the occasional irritating client that's more insistent on deadlines or wants a financing closed in two weeks after you communicated 50 times that it'll take at least four since we can't force investor counsel to move faster, but those types of folks are generally the minority for the most part.

So upshot is that the raw hours might be similar because of sheer volume (there's a ridiculous amount of money being put into private companies and valuations are stratospheric) but it's a lot less stressful since the day-to-day work is not as high octane. Happy to chat more via DM if helpful.

This is helpful. I might start reaching out to those recruiters for these firms..

EC/VC mid from above. If you have a throwaway account, happy to throw a referral your way...

[Anonymous User]

It seems that exec comp is relatively lifestyle friendly compared to a CapM/M&A.

Firm and location dependent. They were getting killed at my Bay Area office when I left. That being said, the people in exec comp tend to be really nice.

As an M&A associate, I get the sense that my exec comp peers can occasionally be slammed when there's a large deal volume and they have multiple overlapping obligations, but typically they're engaged in a very discreet (but often highly valued) portion of a deal. It looks like it's really a pretty good gig, since the practice area is also pretty valuable outside biglaw, so that can always remain an offramp. I've never been anything except an M&A cog, so I don't pretend to know personally, but tax and exec comp often look to me like better places to practice.

I'm the Bay Area anon you replied to. I started in tax, and then moved to exec comp. I went in house relatively junior, but I have a bit of experience with this.

Tax as a lifestyle practice is a bit of a meme with M&A/CapM lawyers, but it's sort of overblown in my opinion.

1. Hours: the hours are a little more predictable, but they are more draining and just as long (tax and exec comp had the highest average hours at my old firm). There's a lot more free drafting and research. It's also harder to bill 10 hours on 5 small matters vs 1 giant matter.

2. Team structure: It's very isolating to be a tax junior. The deal is going to be you + 1 partner almost 100% of the time. There also aren't that many partners in general. You are screwed if there's a shitty partner in your group because you will be doing a lot of work with this person. You also won't have a lot of people to bounce ideas off of.

3. Exit ops: not a strictly "lifestyle" consideration, but it's hard to move in house as a pure tax lawyer. Most tax positions want a tax accounting background because that is what most tax departments' bread and butter is. I went in house pretty early because I am also a CPA and had a lot of pre-law accounting experience.

I think corporate associates see that tax is responsible for 5 pages in a 300 page merger agreement and just assume it's really easy. They just aren't seeing how the sausage gets made on those 5 pages.

[Anonymous User]

It seems that exec comp is relatively lifestyle friendly compared to a CapM/M&A.

Firm and location dependent. They were getting killed at my Bay Area office when I left. That being said, the people in exec comp tend to be really nice.

As an M&A associate, I get the sense that my exec comp peers can occasionally be slammed when there's a large deal volume and they have multiple overlapping obligations, but typically they're engaged in a very discreet (but often highly valued) portion of a deal. It looks like it's really a pretty good gig, since the practice area is also pretty valuable outside biglaw, so that can always remain an offramp. I've never been anything except an M&A cog, so I don't pretend to know personally, but tax and exec comp often look to me like better places to practice.

I'm the Bay Area anon you replied to. I started in tax, and then moved to exec comp. I went in house relatively junior, but I have a bit of experience with this.

Tax as a lifestyle practice is a bit of a meme with M&A/CapM lawyers, but it's sort of overblown in my opinion.

1. Hours: the hours are a little more predictable, but they are more draining and just as long (tax and exec comp had the highest average hours at my old firm). There's a lot more free drafting and research. It's also harder to bill 10 hours on 5 small matters vs 1 giant matter.

2. Team structure: It's very isolating to be a tax junior. The deal is going to be you + 1 partner almost 100% of the time. There also aren't that many partners in general. You are screwed if there's a shitty partner in your group because you will be doing a lot of work with this person. You also won't have a lot of people to bounce ideas off of.

3. Exit ops: not a strictly "lifestyle" consideration, but it's hard to move in house as a pure tax lawyer. Most tax positions want a tax accounting background because that is what most tax departments' bread and butter is. I went in house pretty early because I am also a CPA and had a lot of pre-law accounting experience.

I think corporate associates see that tax is responsible for 5 pages in a 300 page merger agreement and just assume it's really easy. They just aren't seeing how the sausage gets made on those 5 pages.

Out of curiosity, in the biglaw context, do exec comp or tax teams generate any of their own matters, or is the work always part of a larger corp deal? That is, do clients come to the firm because they have a self-contained exec comp question or a tax matter, and the M&A or CapM team will just never be aware that that work ever took place? I'm the M&A associate you're responding to, and I have a general sense of how busy the office is overall, but just curious if there are whole non-deal work streams that are not downstream of M&A and CapM transactions that may be happening for the tax or exec comp teams. Would explain why all the tax seniors are incredibly salty these days, but then again we all are, so I don't know that there needs to be a special reason.

[Anonymous User]

It seems that exec comp is relatively lifestyle friendly compared to a CapM/M&A.

Firm and location dependent. They were getting killed at my Bay Area office when I left. That being said, the people in exec comp tend to be really nice.

As an M&A associate, I get the sense that my exec comp peers can occasionally be slammed when there's a large deal volume and they have multiple overlapping obligations, but typically they're engaged in a very discreet (but often highly valued) portion of a deal. It looks like it's really a pretty good gig, since the practice area is also pretty valuable outside biglaw, so that can always remain an offramp. I've never been anything except an M&A cog, so I don't pretend to know personally, but tax and exec comp often look to me like better places to practice.

I'm the Bay Area anon you replied to. I started in tax, and then moved to exec comp. I went in house relatively junior, but I have a bit of experience with this.

Tax as a lifestyle practice is a bit of a meme with M&A/CapM lawyers, but it's sort of overblown in my opinion.

1. Hours: the hours are a little more predictable, but they are more draining and just as long (tax and exec comp had the highest average hours at my old firm). There's a lot more free drafting and research. It's also harder to bill 10 hours on 5 small matters vs 1 giant matter.

2. Team structure: It's very isolating to be a tax junior. The deal is going to be you + 1 partner almost 100% of the time. There also aren't that many partners in general. You are screwed if there's a shitty partner in your group because you will be doing a lot of work with this person. You also won't have a lot of people to bounce ideas off of.

3. Exit ops: not a strictly "lifestyle" consideration, but it's hard to move in house as a pure tax lawyer. Most tax positions want a tax accounting background because that is what most tax departments' bread and butter is. I went in house pretty early because I am also a CPA and had a lot of pre-law accounting experience.

I think corporate associates see that tax is responsible for 5 pages in a 300 page merger agreement and just assume it's really easy. They just aren't seeing how the sausage gets made on those 5 pages.

Out of curiosity, in the biglaw context, do exec comp or tax teams generate any of their own matters, or is the work always part of a larger corp deal? That is, do clients come to the firm because they have a self-contained exec comp question or a tax matter, and the M&A or CapM team will just never be aware that that work ever took place? I'm the M&A associate you're responding to, and I have a general sense of how busy the office is overall, but just curious if there are whole non-deal work streams that are not downstream of M&A and CapM transactions that may be happening for the tax or exec comp teams. Would explain why all the tax seniors are incredibly salty these days, but then again we all are, so I don't know that there needs to be a special reason.

Not the original anon, but in my exec comp/benefits experience, 90% of the work is either deal related or from an already-existing client at the firm. Of all the attorneys who do pure benefits/exec comp, only 1 is an equity shareholder and his life is nuts all the other attorneys who are equity shareholders also have a footprint in dealwork. It's just really hard to bring in millions in revenue on pure benefits/exec comp matters as compared to a single deal that can bring in hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars.

[Anonymous User]

It seems that exec comp is relatively lifestyle friendly compared to a CapM/M&A.

Firm and location dependent. They were getting killed at my Bay Area office when I left. That being said, the people in exec comp tend to be really nice.

As an M&A associate, I get the sense that my exec comp peers can occasionally be slammed when there's a large deal volume and they have multiple overlapping obligations, but typically they're engaged in a very discreet (but often highly valued) portion of a deal. It looks like it's really a pretty good gig, since the practice area is also pretty valuable outside biglaw, so that can always remain an offramp. I've never been anything except an M&A cog, so I don't pretend to know personally, but tax and exec comp often look to me like better places to practice.

I'm the Bay Area anon you replied to. I started in tax, and then moved to exec comp. I went in house relatively junior, but I have a bit of experience with this.

Tax as a lifestyle practice is a bit of a meme with M&A/CapM lawyers, but it's sort of overblown in my opinion.

1. Hours: the hours are a little more predictable, but they are more draining and just as long (tax and exec comp had the highest average hours at my old firm). There's a lot more free drafting and research. It's also harder to bill 10 hours on 5 small matters vs 1 giant matter.

2. Team structure: It's very isolating to be a tax junior. The deal is going to be you + 1 partner almost 100% of the time. There also aren't that many partners in general. You are screwed if there's a shitty partner in your group because you will be doing a lot of work with this person. You also won't have a lot of people to bounce ideas off of.

3. Exit ops: not a strictly "lifestyle" consideration, but it's hard to move in house as a pure tax lawyer. Most tax positions want a tax accounting background because that is what most tax departments' bread and butter is. I went in house pretty early because I am also a CPA and had a lot of pre-law accounting experience.

I think corporate associates see that tax is responsible for 5 pages in a 300 page merger agreement and just assume it's really easy. They just aren't seeing how the sausage gets made on those 5 pages.

Out of curiosity, in the biglaw context, do exec comp or tax teams generate any of their own matters, or is the work always part of a larger corp deal? That is, do clients come to the firm because they have a self-contained exec comp question or a tax matter, and the M&A or CapM team will just never be aware that that work ever took place? I'm the M&A associate you're responding to, and I have a general sense of how busy the office is overall, but just curious if there are whole non-deal work streams that are not downstream of M&A and CapM transactions that may be happening for the tax or exec comp teams. Would explain why all the tax seniors are incredibly salty these days, but then again we all are, so I don't know that there needs to be a special reason.

Depends on your firm. My experience is that it's less likely for tax to have discrete matters and more likely for exec comp.

[nealric]

It seems that exec comp is relatively lifestyle friendly compared to a CapM/M&A.

Firm and location dependent. They were getting killed at my Bay Area office when I left. That being said, the people in exec comp tend to be really nice.

As an M&A associate, I get the sense that my exec comp peers can occasionally be slammed when there's a large deal volume and they have multiple overlapping obligations, but typically they're engaged in a very discreet (but often highly valued) portion of a deal. It looks like it's really a pretty good gig, since the practice area is also pretty valuable outside biglaw, so that can always remain an offramp. I've never been anything except an M&A cog, so I don't pretend to know personally, but tax and exec comp often look to me like better places to practice.

I'm the Bay Area anon you replied to. I started in tax, and then moved to exec comp. I went in house relatively junior, but I have a bit of experience with this.

Tax as a lifestyle practice is a bit of a meme with M&A/CapM lawyers, but it's sort of overblown in my opinion.

1. Hours: the hours are a little more predictable, but they are more draining and just as long (tax and exec comp had the highest average hours at my old firm). There's a lot more free drafting and research. It's also harder to bill 10 hours on 5 small matters vs 1 giant matter.

2. Team structure: It's very isolating to be a tax junior. The deal is going to be you + 1 partner almost 100% of the time. There also aren't that many partners in general. You are screwed if there's a shitty partner in your group because you will be doing a lot of work with this person. You also won't have a lot of people to bounce ideas off of.

3. Exit ops: not a strictly "lifestyle" consideration, but it's hard to move in house as a pure tax lawyer. Most tax positions want a tax accounting background because that is what most tax departments' bread and butter is. I went in house pretty early because I am also a CPA and had a lot of pre-law accounting experience.

I think corporate associates see that tax is responsible for 5 pages in a 300 page merger agreement and just assume it's really easy. They just aren't seeing how the sausage gets made on those 5 pages.

Out of curiosity, in the biglaw context, do exec comp or tax teams generate any of their own matters, or is the work always part of a larger corp deal? That is, do clients come to the firm because they have a self-contained exec comp question or a tax matter, and the M&A or CapM team will just never be aware that that work ever took place? I'm the M&A associate you're responding to, and I have a general sense of how busy the office is overall, but just curious if there are whole non-deal work streams that are not downstream of M&A and CapM transactions that may be happening for the tax or exec comp teams. Would explain why all the tax seniors are incredibly salty these days, but then again we all are, so I don't know that there needs to be a special reason.

Depends on your firm. My experience is that it's less likely for tax to have discrete matters and more likely for exec comp.

Speaking from the client side, we hire tax attorneys for discrete matters with some regularity. There are plenty of internal restructurings or controversy matters where a tax group would be involved independently of a deal. That said, true tax rainmakers would be the exception. The one-off tax items are rarely going to generate bills in excess of a few hundred thousand, while large deals can generate seven figure bills fairly easily.

[Anonymous User]

I’m a senior/mid-level in funds at top funds practice. Generally, I work 8/9-5 and then again from 7-9 or 9-11. Right now funds is extremely busy and most people I know are billing 10 a day and have been for 2-3 months. I almost never work weekends, though I sometimes pay for it on mondays. Generally speaking, the deadlines are longer in funds and there aren’t intense late night closings. When we work with the finance team on credit facilities, the difference in deadlines is stark. I almost never have to cancel plans for work.

That said, funds is a GRIND. The docs are long and difficult to understand. You need to know tax basics, securities regulation/advisers act, and some math to do funds work. Even though I’m not canceling plans it’s not uncommon for me to work for a few hours after seeing friends for dinner. As a senior/mid level I run all my projects by myself except for a few complex negotiations. Funds clients can be super demanding (though maybe not more than other corporate clients) and we are bombarded with emails. For me, managing client expectations and remaining responsive is the hardest part, especially when I really don’t want to open my 97th LPA of the year.

Of corporate practices, I would consider funds a lifestyle practice but I’m still looking to leave.

I’m also in a top funds practice and I would echo this sentiment. Funds is probably one of the most lifestyle friendly practices. One result I’ve noticed is that the attrition rate seems substantially lower than other corporate practices at our firm.

This year has been very busy which probably translates to average billables across the group of low to mid 2000s. You get there though by consistently billing 50 hr weeks rather than 70-80 hr weeks in short bursts, and can probably avoid working most weekends.

Being a jr in funds isn’t great though. There is a huge volume of low skill paperwork/diligence-type work that needs to get done and it’s usually dumped on the jr associates, unless your firm is lucky to have a huge staff of paralegals/staff attorneys. Getting senior can be more tolerable if you pick up the substance (steep learning curve as the anon above says), but the practice is very project focused and so there will always be a significant project management component compared to some other more advisory practices.

Also in funds at a similar place. These posts understate the billables at all three levels. Teams are staffed 5-15 to a fund and two to three people do the heavy lifting. Usually it’s a senior, a mid level and one to two eager juniors. Everyone else is intentionally parsed out work, which I suppose could make 50 hour work weeks. But funds staffing effectively encourages free riding. All bodies are profitable in funds even if they bill 1800 hours or are a paralegal.

Partnership prospects can also be very dim depending on what fund practice you are at. The beauty of funds from a partnership perspective is how levered it is. Usually 4:1 or higher.

On deadlines, there are fire drills all the time. Sometimes fire drills aren’t shared with the wider teams which can create a weird divide in client knowledge.

The deadlines can be ludicrous given how much you could be relying on a funds documents from five years ago with no one but an absent partner to help you find what the client urgently needs. This is because of turnover… and scope of the documentary needs of a fund. One email with one signed page could be critical for an SEC exam etc.

The counter parties are also generally terrible if you are doing GP work. It can quickly turn into a small world of repeat players who frequently negotiate in bad faith.

[Anonymous User]

I’m a senior/mid-level in funds at top funds practice. Generally, I work 8/9-5 and then again from 7-9 or 9-11. Right now funds is extremely busy and most people I know are billing 10 a day and have been for 2-3 months. I almost never work weekends, though I sometimes pay for it on mondays. Generally speaking, the deadlines are longer in funds and there aren’t intense late night closings. When we work with the finance team on credit facilities, the difference in deadlines is stark. I almost never have to cancel plans for work.

That said, funds is a GRIND. The docs are long and difficult to understand. You need to know tax basics, securities regulation/advisers act, and some math to do funds work. Even though I’m not canceling plans it’s not uncommon for me to work for a few hours after seeing friends for dinner. As a senior/mid level I run all my projects by myself except for a few complex negotiations. Funds clients can be super demanding (though maybe not more than other corporate clients) and we are bombarded with emails. For me, managing client expectations and remaining responsive is the hardest part, especially when I really don’t want to open my 97th LPA of the year.

Of corporate practices, I would consider funds a lifestyle practice but I’m still looking to leave.

I’m also in a top funds practice and I would echo this sentiment. Funds is probably one of the most lifestyle friendly practices. One result I’ve noticed is that the attrition rate seems substantially lower than other corporate practices at our firm.

This year has been very busy which probably translates to average billables across the group of low to mid 2000s. You get there though by consistently billing 50 hr weeks rather than 70-80 hr weeks in short bursts, and can probably avoid working most weekends.

Being a jr in funds isn’t great though. There is a huge volume of low skill paperwork/diligence-type work that needs to get done and it’s usually dumped on the jr associates, unless your firm is lucky to have a huge staff of paralegals/staff attorneys. Getting senior can be more tolerable if you pick up the substance (steep learning curve as the anon above says), but the practice is very project focused and so there will always be a significant project management component compared to some other more advisory practices.

Also in funds at a similar place. These posts understate the billables at all three levels. Teams are staffed 5-15 to a fund and two to three people do the heavy lifting. Usually it’s a senior, a mid level and one to two eager juniors. Everyone else is intentionally parsed out work, which I suppose could make 50 hour work weeks. But funds staffing effectively encourages free riding. All bodies are profitable in funds even if they bill 1800 hours or are a paralegal.

Partnership prospects can also be very dim depending on what fund practice you are at. The beauty of funds from a partnership perspective is how levered it is. Usually 4:1 or higher.

On deadlines, there are fire drills all the time. Sometimes fire drills aren’t shared with the wider teams which can create a weird divide in client knowledge.

The deadlines can be ludicrous given how much you could be relying on a funds documents from five years ago with no one but an absent partner to help you find what the client urgently needs. This is because of turnover… and scope of the documentary needs of a fund. One email with one signed page could be critical for an SEC exam etc.

The counter parties are also generally terrible if you are doing GP work. It can quickly turn into a small world of repeat players who frequently negotiate in bad faith.