Inhouse Attorneys: How Secure Do You Feel @ Your Job Forum

[Anonymous User]

v10, c/o 2017, recently got an offer for a small cap public company. Considering taking it, but am curious how real are the concerns regarding:

1) Job safety - do you feel like you are a cost center and if things go south you could be on the chopping block?

2) Portability - if you were to lose your job, how hard or easy do you feel like it would be to get another inhouse job, or go back to a firm? I could see the latter being difficult after you have spent 5+ years inhouse and are now a 10-year attorney with no clients.

I really life the job and offer, I guess my worry is that I feel like at a firm (at least where I am at), there will always be a job for me, even if I am miserable the whole time. But not as sure about inhouse.

[Anonymous User]

(1) Depends on the relationship with your manager. I've worked in a few inhouse departments now and all are simply slammed with work. Too much work, not enough bodies. If you're worried about being a cost center, make sure your manager knows you enjoy working for the company and are continuously looking for ways to add value (helping out other colleagues in legal, etc).

(2) As a 10+ year attorney with 5+ years in-house, I switched jobs during the pandemic. It's much easier to land an inhouse job when you're already inhouse counsel.

Feel free to ask any other questions!

[Anonymous User]

(1) Depends on the relationship with your manager. I've worked in a few inhouse departments now and all are simply slammed with work. Too much work, not enough bodies. If you're worried about being a cost center, make sure your manager knows you enjoy working for the company and are continuously looking for ways to add value (helping out other colleagues in legal, etc).

(2) As a 10+ year attorney with 5+ years in-house, I switched jobs during the pandemic. It's much easier to land an inhouse job when you're already inhouse counsel.

Feel free to ask any other questions!

Not the op but as someone who is looking to go inhouse soon, from your experience, are inhouse jobs you have been at jobs for life (ie where you can stay till retirement in 50/60s)? Thanks.

[Anonymous User]

Sure, thanks for the question.

It really depends on the legal department culture. Have worked at places where turnover is much more than I anticipated, and other places where people settle in place/remain for many decades/and work there until they are in their 60's.

When you interview, look at the Directory of Corporate Counsel -- it'll list out all the members of a company's legal department, where all they've worked, and how long they've worked at that specific company.

[jhett]

1. I'm in-house at a start-up. I have job security as long as the company is funded. So as long as the start-up is doing well, I have a job. If it starts to go south, I'll be bailing.

2. It's pretty easy for me to jump around in-house or even back to a firm (e.g., a partner I know offered to find me a place if I ever decide to go back to a firm). In-house likes to hire from in-house. The firm -> in-house transition is the hardest step to take.

[Anonymous User]

v10, c/o 2017, recently got an offer for a small cap public company. Considering taking it, but am curious how real are the concerns regarding:

1) Job safety - do you feel like you are a cost center and if things go south you could be on the chopping block?

2) Portability - if you were to lose your job, how hard or easy do you feel like it would be to get another inhouse job, or go back to a firm? I could see the latter being difficult after you have spent 5+ years inhouse and are now a 10-year attorney with no clients.

I really life the job and offer, I guess my worry is that I feel like at a firm (at least where I am at), there will always be a job for me, even if I am miserable the whole time. But not as sure about inhouse.

1) I feel fairly secure given that I am a sole subject matter expert, and the company would likely spend just as much with outside counsel if they were to let me go. That said, I have survived 3 major rounds of layoffs since I started 8.5 years ago. Layoffs are often done pretty across the board- every department (including law) gets told they have to let 10% of their people go, so the two people perceived as most dispensable get let go.

2) I think going back to a firm would actually be easier (especially in this legal hiring market). I get plenty of recruiter pings about it, although my seniority is probably starting to become a problem. I'd have to come it at a counsel level since I'm a bit too senior to be an associate but don't have a book or track record for a partner title. But getting another in-house job would certainly be doable. As someone else said, it's easier to get an in-house job if you are in house. Hardest thing with going elsewhere in-house is that most in-house jobs are at F500 headquarter locations. If you are in a market that doesn't have a ton of those, you may need to be geographically mobile if you lose your job.

I wouldn't think too literally about being a "cost center." Every employee at a major company is a cost center (for the vast majority of companies) because most large public companies aren't directly billing for specific people's time. Even if you are, for example, a sales person, you are a cost for getting the product out the door. The biggest obstacle in-house is that it can be difficult to show your value quantitatively- you can't just point to your billings. You have to convince the business that what you do is valuable- there can be a decent bit of politics to it.

[Anonymous User]

v10, c/o 2017, recently got an offer for a small cap public company. Considering taking it, but am curious how real are the concerns regarding:

1) Job safety - do you feel like you are a cost center and if things go south you could be on the chopping block?

2) Portability - if you were to lose your job, how hard or easy do you feel like it would be to get another inhouse job, or go back to a firm? I could see the latter being difficult after you have spent 5+ years inhouse and are now a 10-year attorney with no clients.

I really life the job and offer, I guess my worry is that I feel like at a firm (at least where I am at), there will always be a job for me, even if I am miserable the whole time. But not as sure about inhouse.

1) I feel fairly secure given that I am a sole subject matter expert, and the company would likely spend just as much with outside counsel if they were to let me go. That said, I have survived 3 major rounds of layoffs since I started 8.5 years ago. Layoffs are often done pretty across the board- every department (including law) gets told they have to let 10% of their people go, so the two people perceived as most dispensable get let go.

2) I think going back to a firm would actually be easier (especially in this legal hiring market). I get plenty of recruiter pings about it, although my seniority is probably starting to become a problem. I'd have to come it at a counsel level since I'm a bit too senior to be an associate but don't have a book or track record for a partner title. But getting another in-house job would certainly be doable. As someone else said, it's easier to get an in-house job if you are in house. Hardest thing with going elsewhere in-house is that most in-house jobs are at F500 headquarter locations. If you are in a market that doesn't have a ton of those, you may need to be geographically mobile if you lose your job.

I wouldn't think too literally about being a "cost center." Every employee at a major company is a cost center (for the vast majority of companies) because most large public companies aren't directly billing for specific people's time. Even if you are, for example, a sales person, you are a cost for getting the product out the door. The biggest obstacle in-house is that it can be difficult to show your value quantitatively- you can't just point to your billings. You have to convince the business that what you do is valuable- there can be a decent bit of politics to it.

Any advice for how to "convince the business that what you do is valuable- there can be a decent bit of politics to it"? What political moves are persuasive?

[Anonymous User]

v10, c/o 2017, recently got an offer for a small cap public company. Considering taking it, but am curious how real are the concerns regarding:

1) Job safety - do you feel like you are a cost center and if things go south you could be on the chopping block?

2) Portability - if you were to lose your job, how hard or easy do you feel like it would be to get another inhouse job, or go back to a firm? I could see the latter being difficult after you have spent 5+ years inhouse and are now a 10-year attorney with no clients.

I really life the job and offer, I guess my worry is that I feel like at a firm (at least where I am at), there will always be a job for me, even if I am miserable the whole time. But not as sure about inhouse.

1) I feel fairly secure given that I am a sole subject matter expert, and the company would likely spend just as much with outside counsel if they were to let me go. That said, I have survived 3 major rounds of layoffs since I started 8.5 years ago. Layoffs are often done pretty across the board- every department (including law) gets told they have to let 10% of their people go, so the two people perceived as most dispensable get let go.

2) I think going back to a firm would actually be easier (especially in this legal hiring market). I get plenty of recruiter pings about it, although my seniority is probably starting to become a problem. I'd have to come it at a counsel level since I'm a bit too senior to be an associate but don't have a book or track record for a partner title. But getting another in-house job would certainly be doable. As someone else said, it's easier to get an in-house job if you are in house. Hardest thing with going elsewhere in-house is that most in-house jobs are at F500 headquarter locations. If you are in a market that doesn't have a ton of those, you may need to be geographically mobile if you lose your job.

I wouldn't think too literally about being a "cost center." Every employee at a major company is a cost center (for the vast majority of companies) because most large public companies aren't directly billing for specific people's time. Even if you are, for example, a sales person, you are a cost for getting the product out the door. The biggest obstacle in-house is that it can be difficult to show your value quantitatively- you can't just point to your billings. You have to convince the business that what you do is valuable- there can be a decent bit of politics to it.

Any advice for how to "convince the business that what you do is valuable- there can be a decent bit of politics to it"? What political moves are persuasive?

I wouldn't say it's "political moves" per-se. No skullduggery required. It's mostly a matter of identifying people in the business who have power to influence things and making sure they think well of you and what you do for the business. It's mostly a matter of show, not tell. When they come to you for input, do they feel like the interaction was helpful to what they were trying to do? Are you the type of person they'd want to go out to lunch or take a cross-country flight with?

These are often key internal clients. For example, if you are an M&A person, you had better make sure the key business development folks like you and think you add value. If you do ERISA, become best friends with the senior HR folks. I've seen in-house lawyers fail because they clashed with their internal clients, and those internal clients had more influence than they did. Of course, you have to do the same with your immediate boss, but a lot of making them look good is keeping internal clients happy.

It's as much an interpersonal play as anything else. People have to want to work with you. Beyond that, trying to get on visible projects is important, although getting on those projects is often a matter of the above.

[21190319damien]

I never got the whole "in-house attorney's are cost centers" argument. The company is going to need certain legal services no matter what, and they can either pay expensive law firms ridiculous amounts of money to do the work, or build out a lean but competent in house team do either the same work or to vastly reduce the cost of legal services on the open market (all while reaping the benefits of the legal team being way more familiar with the business). When the business folk see the outrageous bills for commodity corporate work, they quickly understand the value.

[The Lsat Airbender]

I never got the whole "in-house attorney's are cost centers" argument. The company is going to need certain legal services no matter what, and they can either pay expensive law firms ridiculous amounts of money to do the work, or build out a lean but competent in house team do either the same work or to vastly reduce the cost of legal services on the open market (all while reaping the benefits of the legal team being way more familiar with the business). When the business folk see the outrageous bills for commodity corporate work, they quickly understand the value.

All you're arguing is that lawyers are a justifiable cost. Still a cost center, and when times get tight you're going to at least attempt to trim your 10-person legal department down to 6 or 7, which may or may not be a prudent long-term business decision but will help you hit your EPS numbers for the current year.