Sanity Check for In-House Salary Forum

[Anonymous User]

Hoping for some sanity check in my in house decision and if anyone had similar experiences for me to compare with.

2017 grad, Texas market. 3+ years biglaw and went in house to investment firm in beginning of 2021. Initially 200k total comp ($160k base $40k bonus). 2022 comp will be $218k, but I've been told this was a jump and normally annual raises are ~5% (title promotions Al with 10%+ raises are rarer, roughly 5-6 years apart).

Job is secure and folks are nice, but barely beating first year associate rates and the $300k+ my class level friends are going to be pulling down is making me question things a bit (city pays market rates).

Is this roughly in range for people in house in market paying cities? Trying to see if I should put feelers out for other in-house shops in town that are hiring to see if I'm getting falling about average or not. Not trying to go back to biglaw.

[ChickenSalad]

Hoping for some sanity check in my in house decision and if anyone had similar experiences for me to compare with.

2017 grad, Texas market. 3+ years biglaw and went in house to investment firm in beginning of 2021. Initially 200k total comp ($160k base $40k bonus). 2022 comp will be $218k, but I've been told this was a jump and normally annual raises are ~5% (title promotions Al with 10%+ raises are rarer, roughly 5-6 years apart).

Job is secure and folks are nice, but barely beating first year associate rates and the $300k+ my class level friends are going to be pulling down is making me question things a bit (city pays market rates).

Is this roughly in range for people in house in market paying cities? Trying to see if I should put feelers out for other in-house shops in town that are hiring to see if I'm getting falling about average or not. Not trying to go back to biglaw.

Comparing an in house salary to the scale for big law seniors (or even juniors) doesn't make any sense. I’m not sure why you’d use that as a barometer for whether other in house jobs are paying more.

218k seems competitive for an in house gig

[Anonymous User]

Hoping for some sanity check in my in house decision and if anyone had similar experiences for me to compare with.

2017 grad, Texas market. 3+ years biglaw and went in house to investment firm in beginning of 2021. Initially 200k total comp ($160k base $40k bonus). 2022 comp will be $218k, but I've been told this was a jump and normally annual raises are ~5% (title promotions Al with 10%+ raises are rarer, roughly 5-6 years apart).

Job is secure and folks are nice, but barely beating first year associate rates and the $300k+ my class level friends are going to be pulling down is making me question things a bit (city pays market rates).

Is this roughly in range for people in house in market paying cities? Trying to see if I should put feelers out for other in-house shops in town that are hiring to see if I'm getting falling about average or not. Not trying to go back to biglaw.

Seems about right to me. I recently went in house at a similar sort of place and will make about 280-290, but I was 6-7 year and the 3 year who is below me/I supervise, is around your range.

If it makes you feel better I went from 500K to 280-290. It’s a totally different job with totally different expectations.

[dazed123]

I find it strange you're wanting to do a sanity check without mentioning the lifestyle/WLB of the in-house position.

[Anonymous User]

Hoping for some sanity check in my in house decision and if anyone had similar experiences for me to compare with.

2017 grad, Texas market. 3+ years biglaw and went in house to investment firm in beginning of 2021. Initially 200k total comp ($160k base $40k bonus). 2022 comp will be $218k, but I've been told this was a jump and normally annual raises are ~5% (title promotions Al with 10%+ raises are rarer, roughly 5-6 years apart).

Job is secure and folks are nice, but barely beating first year associate rates and the $300k+ my class level friends are going to be pulling down is making me question things a bit (city pays market rates).

Is this roughly in range for people in house in market paying cities? Trying to see if I should put feelers out for other in-house shops in town that are hiring to see if I'm getting falling about average or not. Not trying to go back to biglaw.

Seems about right to me. I recently went in house at a similar sort of place and will make about 280-290, but I was 6-7 year and the 3 year who is below me/I supervise, is around your range.

If it makes you feel better I went from 500K to 280-290. It’s a totally different job with totally different expectations.

Not OP, but any regrets in giving up the 500k? I'm assuming the change was for a regular work-life balance and not the crazy world that is Big Law?

[Anonymous User]

Hoping for some sanity check in my in house decision and if anyone had similar experiences for me to compare with.

2017 grad, Texas market. 3+ years biglaw and went in house to investment firm in beginning of 2021. Initially 200k total comp ($160k base $40k bonus). 2022 comp will be $218k, but I've been told this was a jump and normally annual raises are ~5% (title promotions Al with 10%+ raises are rarer, roughly 5-6 years apart).

Job is secure and folks are nice, but barely beating first year associate rates and the $300k+ my class level friends are going to be pulling down is making me question things a bit (city pays market rates).

Is this roughly in range for people in house in market paying cities? Trying to see if I should put feelers out for other in-house shops in town that are hiring to see if I'm getting falling about average or not. Not trying to go back to biglaw.

Seems about right to me. I recently went in house at a similar sort of place and will make about 280-290, but I was 6-7 year and the 3 year who is below me/I supervise, is around your range.

If it makes you feel better I went from 500K to 280-290. It’s a totally different job with totally different expectations.

Not OP, but any regrets in giving up the 500k? I'm assuming the change was for a regular work-life balance and not the crazy world that is Big Law?

Not OP or 500k OP, but my assumption is that people plan on this. Make biglaw money until you pay off loans, fund some investments, pay down payment, etc. Then take the in house job that's still objectively good income and be able to actually enjoy life. If you do it right, your standard of living shouldn't drop.

Alternatively, ppl get pushed out of biglaw, if which case you can't really regret something that wasn't an option anymore.

[Anonymous User]

That makes sense. So if you already have a house and either minimal loans or plan to use IBR, then suffering through Big Law may not be as worth it if you can make $200k (for example) at a more work life balanced firm or in-house? When we talk about pushed out, but how does that work? Like someone taps your shoulder and whispers you're out? Or they just can you at a performance review?

[Anonymous User]

For me personally, making 200k with good WL balance is the dream life. In order to get there, I needed to take on debt and will have to suffer a few years of bad WL balance. I just hope I don't get golden handcuffs.

I have experienced it but my understanding is that it can take different forms. Can be partners informally telling you that you're not going to make partner, or being strongly encouraged to take a secondment, or performance reviews, or one day you're out (but still usually given a soft landing).

Off topic but I have a good friend who was at a MBB, got glowing reviews and was promoted to the next step a couple of times. Then one review was just absurdly terrible. And that was that. Probably every organization that has an up or out mentality does this

[Anonymous User]

For me personally, making 200k with good WL balance is the dream life. In order to get there, I needed to take on debt and will have to suffer a few years of bad WL balance. I just hope I don't get golden handcuffs.

I have experienced it but my understanding is that it can take different forms. Can be partners informally telling you that you're not going to make partner, or being strongly encouraged to take a secondment, or performance reviews, or one day you're out (but still usually given a soft landing).

Off topic but I have a good friend who was at a MBB, got glowing reviews and was promoted to the next step a couple of times. Then one review was just absurdly terrible. And that was that. Probably every organization that has an up or out mentality does this

Yea I've heard about golden handcuffs. I think they key is not increasing our monthly obligations. What's a secondment and soft landing? So they don't just can you and give you a box and pack your things? I've heard they will just freeze you out of work and then can you on account of your low billables? Is that a thing/

I've heard the mid law firms don't have an up/out system though. Up/out seems like such a toxic environment. How long you thinking of suffering before you can get out?

[Anonymous User]

Secondment is when you're placed with a client inhouse officially for 6 months or whatever. I don't think it's common to actually make it back.

Soft landing = the culture in biglaw is such that being given a box / escorted out by security isn't common. Firms will often give several months of notice and/or allow you to be listed on the firm website for several months. They want to pretend that they don't fire, and you want to pretend that you weren't fired. Works for everyone. While I tend to agree with you that up/out is bad, there are silver linings, and one is that there's no stigma to not making the next cut.

How long I plan on sticking with it? Really depends on how bad it is and what my alternatives are. It looks like in house at about 5-6 years is the best time, you go in with decent seniority + have chance to save up serious money. But I might jump earlier if I'm miserable. Or I might stay longer if I don't mind the work and can negotiate a decent counsel gig.

[Anonymous User]

Secondment is when you're placed with a client inhouse officially for 6 months or whatever. I don't think it's common to actually make it back.

Soft landing = the culture in biglaw is such that being given a box / escorted out by security isn't common. Firms will often give several months of notice and/or allow you to be listed on the firm website for several months. They want to pretend that they don't fire, and you want to pretend that you weren't fired. Works for everyone. While I tend to agree with you that up/out is bad, there are silver linings, and one is that there's no stigma to not making the next cut.

How long I plan on sticking with it? Really depends on how bad it is and what my alternatives are. It looks like in house at about 5-6 years is the best time, you go in with decent seniority + have chance to save up serious money. But I might jump earlier if I'm miserable. Or I might stay longer if I don't mind the work and can negotiate a decent counsel gig.

Oh interesting. I didn't realize they sent people off like that. So a soft landing is "get out", but we technically don't fire you and let you try and find a job (within a few months). Interesting. And yea I agree with you on the silver lining.

What would a decent counsel gig look like? Would it be reduced hours or basically a senior associate and still the long unpredictable hours?

[Elston Gunn]

Hoping for some sanity check in my in house decision and if anyone had similar experiences for me to compare with.

2017 grad, Texas market. 3+ years biglaw and went in house to investment firm in beginning of 2021. Initially 200k total comp ($160k base $40k bonus). 2022 comp will be $218k, but I've been told this was a jump and normally annual raises are ~5% (title promotions Al with 10%+ raises are rarer, roughly 5-6 years apart).

Job is secure and folks are nice, but barely beating first year associate rates and the $300k+ my class level friends are going to be pulling down is making me question things a bit (city pays market rates).

Is this roughly in range for people in house in market paying cities? Trying to see if I should put feelers out for other in-house shops in town that are hiring to see if I'm getting falling about average or not. Not trying to go back to biglaw.

Seems about right to me. I recently went in house at a similar sort of place and will make about 280-290, but I was 6-7 year and the 3 year who is below me/I supervise, is around your range.

If it makes you feel better I went from 500K to 280-290. It’s a totally different job with totally different expectations.

Yeah, I agree this sounds like market. That doesn’t mean you shouldn’t look for another gig, though OP.

If you don’t feel like the salary cut is worth it, is that because the expectations aren’t reduced that much relative to Biglaw? In any case, I’m still in my first in house job, but without the market scale my understanding is it’s sometimes necessary to move around more often to get good raises. Doesn’t sound like you have any big equity vesting or anything else financial keeping you around, so might as well look at what’s out there.

[Elston Gunn]

Not OP, but any regrets in giving up the 500k? I'm assuming the change was for a regular work-life balance and not the crazy world that is Big Law?

For me, no regrets at all leaving after 5 years. And I definitely didn’t get my financial house in order nearly as well as I would have liked. Now almost 2 years into the gig, I make ~$300k and work a legit 9 to 5/6. Finding a good in house job is objectively by anyone’s reasonable standards.

[peoplearehungry]

Secondment is when you're placed with a client inhouse officially for 6 months or whatever. I don't think it's common to actually make it back.

Soft landing = the culture in biglaw is such that being given a box / escorted out by security isn't common. Firms will often give several months of notice and/or allow you to be listed on the firm website for several months. They want to pretend that they don't fire, and you want to pretend that you weren't fired. Works for everyone. While I tend to agree with you that up/out is bad, there are silver linings, and one is that there's no stigma to not making the next cut.

How long I plan on sticking with it? Really depends on how bad it is and what my alternatives are. It looks like in house at about 5-6 years is the best time, you go in with decent seniority + have chance to save up serious money. But I might jump earlier if I'm miserable. Or I might stay longer if I don't mind the work and can negotiate a decent counsel gig.

FWIW, this is not my experience re secondments. My firm uses them to build relationships with clients and to get a deeper knowledge of the client's business. I haven't seen anyone go for a secondment and then stay, though I don't doubt that it happens.

[Anonymous User]

Secondment is when you're placed with a client inhouse officially for 6 months or whatever. I don't think it's common to actually make it back.

Soft landing = the culture in biglaw is such that being given a box / escorted out by security isn't common. Firms will often give several months of notice and/or allow you to be listed on the firm website for several months. They want to pretend that they don't fire, and you want to pretend that you weren't fired. Works for everyone. While I tend to agree with you that up/out is bad, there are silver linings, and one is that there's no stigma to not making the next cut.

How long I plan on sticking with it? Really depends on how bad it is and what my alternatives are. It looks like in house at about 5-6 years is the best time, you go in with decent seniority + have chance to save up serious money. But I might jump earlier if I'm miserable. Or I might stay longer if I don't mind the work and can negotiate a decent counsel gig.

FWIW, this is not my experience re secondments. My firm uses them to build relationships with clients and to get a deeper knowledge of the client's business. I haven't seen anyone go for a secondment and then stay, though I don't doubt that it happens.

Yep, this definitely happens. It's happened twice at my V50 in the past 5 years.

[Anonymous User]

For another data point, 5 years out of law school, $425k total comp in house. Corporate side--PE/Hedge/VC. NYC area.

Mods, please keep my reply anonymous.

[nealric]

For another data point, 5 years out of law school, $425k total comp in house. Corporate side--PE/Hedge/VC. NYC area.

Mods, please keep my reply anonymous.

As an FYI, we always tend to err on the side of keeping anonymity. I will only out someone who is clearly abusing the policy (using it to insult other posters, start flame wars, etc.). This is squarely within the sorts of posts the anon feature was meant for.

[AJordan]

For another data point, 5 years out of law school, $425k total comp in house. Corporate side--PE/Hedge/VC. NYC area.

Mods, please keep my reply anonymous.

If you don't mind me asking, how are your hours? Mainly 24/7 still? I've heard rough things from some of the in house folks in that industry in my network.

[ajax]

For another data point, 5 years out of law school, $425k total comp in house. Corporate side--PE/Hedge/VC. NYC area.

Mods, please keep my reply anonymous.

If you don't mind me asking, how are your hours? Mainly 24/7 still? I've heard rough things from some of the in house folks in that industry in my network.

Don't mind. 8-6. Respond to emails until 10pm. Rarely work weekends, but am reasonably responsive throughout.

"Smaller" investment adviser (i.e., under $5b AUM). When looking for in house opportunities, I would not entertain phone calls from recruiters soliciting the large advisers, such as BX, KKR, etc., as my understanding is that those firms' legal departments are very similar to working in biglaw.

[Anonymous User]

Hoping for some sanity check in my in house decision and if anyone had similar experiences for me to compare with.

2017 grad, Texas market. 3+ years biglaw and went in house to investment firm in beginning of 2021. Initially 200k total comp ($160k base $40k bonus). 2022 comp will be $218k, but I've been told this was a jump and normally annual raises are ~5% (title promotions Al with 10%+ raises are rarer, roughly 5-6 years apart).

Job is secure and folks are nice, but barely beating first year associate rates and the $300k+ my class level friends are going to be pulling down is making me question things a bit (city pays market rates).

Is this roughly in range for people in house in market paying cities? Trying to see if I should put feelers out for other in-house shops in town that are hiring to see if I'm getting falling about average or not. Not trying to go back to biglaw.

Seems about right to me. I recently went in house at a similar sort of place and will make about 280-290, but I was 6-7 year and the 3 year who is below me/I supervise, is around your range.

If it makes you feel better I went from 500K to 280-290. It’s a totally different job with totally different expectations.

Not OP, but any regrets in giving up the 500k? I'm assuming the change was for a regular work-life balance and not the crazy world that is Big Law?

No regrets. I had a kid and the time with the kid is worth wayyyyy more to me than the big law money. There might be a number at which I would consider going back to big law, but it would be way more than 500k. There is no noticeable lifestyle difference to me between 280-290 and 500k. I’ve been debt free for a awhile, own my own place, etc. it was just more money in an account, slightly nicer vacations, cars and food that had a maybe 3% impact on my life, whereas the time he, so far, had a huge impact on my life.

[AJordan]

For another data point, 5 years out of law school, $425k total comp in house. Corporate side--PE/Hedge/VC. NYC area.

Mods, please keep my reply anonymous.

If you don't mind me asking, how are your hours? Mainly 24/7 still? I've heard rough things from some of the in house folks in that industry in my network.

Don't mind. 8-6. Respond to emails until 10pm. Rarely work weekends, but am reasonably responsive throughout.

"Smaller" investment adviser (i.e., under $5b AUM). When looking for in house opportunities, I would not entertain phone calls from recruiters soliciting the large advisers, such as BX, KKR, etc., as my understanding is that those firms' legal departments are very similar to working in biglaw.

Thank you. That's very generous of you.

[Anonymous User]

The numbers that get tossed around in these threads always blow my mind a little bit. I interviewed on and off for a few years and only very rarely something north of 300, and never above 400, tossed around, even as a midlevel/senior. I don't doubt that some people get that much, but I think response bias can make people think that those types of numbers are normal, when, IME, they are far from it. (IRL, my colleagues also had experiences more similar to me than what I see online.)

I think 200k all-in with strong raises is very fine for a junior associate. Lots of midlevels and above leave for less than that. In-house compensation is generally not going to budge due to biglaw bonus wars. It is more sensitive to biglaw salary raises, though even then it can often take a couple of years to be responsive. If it is a job you think you will like, and your financial house is in order (e.g., you don't have a ton of debt that needs to be financed by biglaw $$), I say go for it.

[synergy]

For another data point, 5 years out of law school, $425k total comp in house. Corporate side--PE/Hedge/VC. NYC area.

Mods, please keep my reply anonymous.

If you don't mind me asking, how are your hours? Mainly 24/7 still? I've heard rough things from some of the in house folks in that industry in my network.

Don't mind. 8-6. Respond to emails until 10pm. Rarely work weekends, but am reasonably responsive throughout.

"Smaller" investment adviser (i.e., under $5b AUM). When looking for in house opportunities, I would not entertain phone calls from recruiters soliciting the large advisers, such as BX, KKR, etc., as my understanding is that those firms' legal departments are very similar to working in biglaw.

Thank you. That's very generous of you.

Also if you don't mind, can I ask if you were in M&A or Funds in biglaw? How many lawyers are you in your department? Were you at a v10? Was this job through a recruiter or a client or networking?

[Sackboy]

The numbers that get tossed around in these threads always blow my mind a little bit. I interviewed on and off for a few years and only very rarely something north of 300, and never above 400, tossed around, even as a midlevel/senior. I don't doubt that some people get that much, but I think response bias can make people think that those types of numbers are normal, when, IME, they are far from it. (IRL, my colleagues also had experiences more similar to me than what I see online.)

I think 200k all-in with strong raises is very fine for a junior associate. Lots of midlevels and above leave for less than that. In-house compensation is generally not going to budge due to biglaw bonus wars. It is more sensitive to biglaw salary raises, though even then it can often take a couple of years to be responsive. If it is a job you think you will like, and your financial house is in order (e.g., you don't have a ton of debt that needs to be financed by biglaw $$), I say go for it.

I'd say that number is strong for a junior associate, not just fine.

There are also a ton of really big and profitable biglaw clients that are outside major cities and do not pay even first year numbers for someone with OP's experience. Walmart, Caterpillar, USAA, John Deere, Northwestern Mutual, etc. are all Fortune 100 companies that fit into this category. Folks posting here finding in-house jobs in NY, BOS, CH, SF/SV, and LA are going to have radically different compensation packages with likely the same or worse quality of living than the Fortune 100 attorney in [insert tertiary city or 100k person town].

[nealric]

The numbers that get tossed around in these threads always blow my mind a little bit. I interviewed on and off for a few years and only very rarely something north of 300, and never above 400, tossed around, even as a midlevel/senior. I don't doubt that some people get that much, but I think response bias can make people think that those types of numbers are normal, when, IME, they are far from it. (IRL, my colleagues also had experiences more similar to me than what I see online.)

I think 200k all-in with strong raises is very fine for a junior associate. Lots of midlevels and above leave for less than that. In-house compensation is generally not going to budge due to biglaw bonus wars. It is more sensitive to biglaw salary raises, though even then it can often take a couple of years to be responsive. If it is a job you think you will like, and your financial house is in order (e.g., you don't have a ton of debt that needs to be financed by biglaw $$), I say go for it.

Keep in mind there's probably some selection bias at play. Someone who received a package they are really happy with is more likely to post about it than someone with a mediocre one. I think the OP's package is probably around market, but that sort of thing can be very industry/company specific. It's very apples to oranges comparing FAANG tech to Oil & Gas (for example). Not just just total comp, but the makeup can be very different.