F500 In-House Attorney. AMA. Forum

[RalphMacchio]

TLS was a valuable resource for me before and during law school, so I figured I might (finally!) attempt to give something back to the community.

About me: I've been practicing for ~10 years. The first half of that was spent in the Midwestern office of a V100 and the second half has been spent at a F500 headquartered in the same city. My practice is largely centered around M&A, venture capital and general corporate matters. I had a positive experience at my law firm but left to go in-house for the typical reasons (i.e., having a life, family, etc.) - and I have not been disappointed. I'm regularly involved in the interviewing/hiring process at my company, and was occasionally involved in the interviewing process at my old firm. Graduated from a (non-Midwestern) T14.

Feel free to ask me anything and I'll answer as best I can.

[Anonymous User]

Does your company hire litigators and if so, what roles do they typically serve?

Thanks for this!

[Anonymous User]

5 years into your in-house role, current pay / hours / job security?

[RalphMacchio]

Does your company hire litigators and if so, what roles do they typically serve?

Thanks for this!

Yes, but very rarely. (I would estimate that a hair over 5% of our US-based attorneys are litigators.) Other than the odd arbitration from time to time, my company almost never sees any litigation/disputes - so our litigators are largely tasked with keeping us out of trouble rather than resolving disputes. In my observation, this means everything from providing guidance on specific contractual language to revising internal processes / best practices.

[RalphMacchio]

5 years into your in-house role, current pay / hours / job security?

Base salary of ~$200k and total comp of ~$300k. Also have a generous 401(k) match and a pension. I don't receive any equity, which seems off-market but is fine so long as the bottom line makes sense.

Hours are ~8-5. I'll occasionally work outside of business hours if a deal is heating up or to accommodate international time zones, but I'm very happy with work-life balance (particularly compared to the hours I was putting in at my old firm).

Based on a number of factors (company's results, my performance evals, etc.), I like to think I have a lot of job security. I also don't believe my company has ever fired an attorney. But, then, who knows what the future holds.

[Anonymous User]

What does growth look like in this role? Can you expect any major comp increases or promotions?

How many roles did you apply to before landing this one?

[Anonymous User]

Can you comment on your company’s compliance attorney’s and whether you have seen, or predict, F500 companies hiring more sanctions, export controls, international trade attorneys?

[RalphMacchio]

What does growth look like in this role? Can you expect any major comp increases or promotions?

How many roles did you apply to before landing this one?

I was recently promoted and expect another promotion within the next ~2 years. Our legal department has a relatively flat structure, so I'm not sure what the end goal might look like if I stay here. But I figure I'll stick around so long as I'm happy with my role (and comp!) and have a clearly-defined "next step" in my career progression.

With that said, comp has been a hot button issue within the department over the last year or so, and we've lost a handful of good people to other companies as a result. (I credit this swing to the increasing number of remote opportunities. Earning NYC comp while working in a low COL city is a hell of a deal.) However, my company has been aggressive in reassessing comp to ensure no further departures. I have benefited from this reassessment and expect to continue to do so.

This was the second in-house job to which I applied. (The first was with a pro sports team. That would've been a lot of fun, but it probably would've been for less pay - and I would've been scared shitless for my job during COVID.) I wasn't desperate to leave my firm when I applied to this position and figured I would only apply to (and leave for) the right fit. And this turned out to be the right one.

[RalphMacchio]

Can you comment on your company’s compliance attorney’s and whether you have seen, or predict, F500 companies hiring more sanctions, export controls, international trade attorneys?

From my vantage point, the only "compliance" position that's poised for (continued! explosive!) growth is data privacy compliance. We don't have a need for international trade attorneys, though I suppose the situation could be different depending on your company / industry. Still, that practice area seems like a risky bet if you're looking to go in-house.

[Anonymous User]

Can you comment on your company’s compliance attorney’s and whether you have seen, or predict, F500 companies hiring more sanctions, export controls, international trade attorneys?

I'm also in-house. IMO now is a great time to go in-house for sanctions/export controls/trade. So much activity with the Russia stuff. I know Adobe is hiring for a cool role in this area right now. More applicable to companies that operate worldwide.

[Anonymous User]

Question for you in-house folks. Currently a partner. Comp is approx 800k/year. Have an offer to go in-house (comp would be in the 300k range total including bonus). Do I do it? I've always seen people who go in house do it earlier, prior to partnership, or because they are non-equity partners.

[jhett]

Question for you in-house folks. Currently a partner. Comp is approx 800k/year. Have an offer to go in-house (comp would be in the 300k range total including bonus). Do I do it? I've always seen people who go in house do it earlier, prior to partnership, or because they are non-equity partners.

Are you non-equity or equity? And what position are you moving into? Why are you considering going in-house?

Absent this information, I'd say generally if you are moving into an AGC or random in-house peon position, I don't think it's worth it. You should be aiming for GC level.

[Anonymous User]

Are you non-equity or equity? And what position are you moving into? Why are you considering going in-house?

Absent this information, I'd say generally if you are moving into an AGC or random in-house peon position, I don't think it's worth it. You should be aiming for GC level.

Am equity partner. Moving into 2 levels below GC with the understanding that I would be the successor to the AGC and then GC. Timeline not certain though.

[jhett]

Are you non-equity or equity? And what position are you moving into? Why are you considering going in-house?

Absent this information, I'd say generally if you are moving into an AGC or random in-house peon position, I don't think it's worth it. You should be aiming for GC level.

Am equity partner. Moving into 2 levels below GC with the understanding that I would be the successor to the AGC and then GC. Timeline not certain though.

I would aim higher than that. It usually takes a very long time to climb the in-house ladder. I was in that position in my prior company - two levels below GC and told by my boss that I was next in line to succeed him. I estimated it would take me probably 15+ years before I could be GC (and that's not even considering competitors for that position), and in the meantime I would just be biding my time with a 2-3% annual raise each year. Wasn't worth it to me to stick around, so I became GC for a start-up.

[BigLawer]

Are you non-equity or equity? And what position are you moving into? Why are you considering going in-house?

Absent this information, I'd say generally if you are moving into an AGC or random in-house peon position, I don't think it's worth it. You should be aiming for GC level.

Am equity partner. Moving into 2 levels below GC with the understanding that I would be the successor to the AGC and then GC. Timeline not certain though.

Not often an equity partner would think about this - especially while pulling in almost a $mil/year. I would be curious to hear your reasons for considering this with a 50%+ paycut.

[Anonymous User]

Not often an equity partner would think about this - especially while pulling in almost a $mil/year. I would be curious to hear your reasons for considering this with a 50%+ paycut.

I don't think I want to be a partner forever. Like many people, COVID has changed how I view work/life balance and what I want to do with my time. I've accepted that any move away from my current role is likely going to be a (significant) pay cut. I'm not in a major market nor am I on the west coast, so in-house opportunities are rare without having to relocate. Just not sure if this is the right time to do it or if I should grind it out for a few more years before jumping ship to something else.

[Lawman1865]

Not often an equity partner would think about this - especially while pulling in almost a $mil/year. I would be curious to hear your reasons for considering this with a 50%+ paycut.

I don't think I want to be a partner forever. Like many people, COVID has changed how I view work/life balance and what I want to do with my time. I've accepted that any move away from my current role is likely going to be a (significant) pay cut. I'm not in a major market nor am I on the west coast, so in-house opportunities are rare without having to relocate. Just not sure if this is the right time to do it or if I should grind it out for a few more years before jumping ship to something else.

I am not at the partner level nor have I gone in-house, but having known my mentor and a few others that have gone in-house, I would agree with the previous posters and you should probably search for a role that offers a bit more. Obviously your comp comfort is your own choice, but while there will likely be a steep pay cut, this seems pretty overly excessive for a role probably under your experience level. It might just involve speaking with some more recruiters and finding the right fit (rather than sticking it out for a few more years at your firm).

[nealric]

Are you non-equity or equity? And what position are you moving into? Why are you considering going in-house?

Absent this information, I'd say generally if you are moving into an AGC or random in-house peon position, I don't think it's worth it. You should be aiming for GC level.

Am equity partner. Moving into 2 levels below GC with the understanding that I would be the successor to the AGC and then GC. Timeline not certain though.

I wouldn’t be worried about the comp per-se, but what the comp is indicative of. This seems like a pretty rank and file gig, and that AGC promise is pretty ephemeral. Not a bad option for a 6-8th year associate with dubious partnership prospects, but I have to believe and equity partner can do better.

[RalphMacchio]

Are you non-equity or equity? And what position are you moving into? Why are you considering going in-house?

Absent this information, I'd say generally if you are moving into an AGC or random in-house peon position, I don't think it's worth it. You should be aiming for GC level.

Am equity partner. Moving into 2 levels below GC with the understanding that I would be the successor to the AGC and then GC. Timeline not certain though.

I wouldn’t be worried about the comp per-se, but what the comp is indicative role. This seems like a pretty rank and file gig, and that AGC promise is pretty ephemeral. Not a bad option for a 6-8th year associate with dubious partnership prospects, but I have to believe and equity partner can do better.

Completely agree. As a general matter, I'm not a fan of taking a position under the assumption that you'll have a clear progression to [GC][more desirable position]. A lot can change (for both you and the company) between now and then.