Psychology of leaving big law Forum

[Anonymous User]

I'm considering leaving and wondering what people's experiences have been going in house. For some background, I'm a 6/7th year in a transactional practice group at a NY V5. Hours and predictability are terrible which is why I'm considering a move. On the plus side, I like my colleagues, (most) clients and the substantive work. As in, if I could do my current V5 job with a 9pm cut off and every other weekend off or sth like that, I would stay.

I'm currently doing a 3-month secondment with a client and thought this would be a good way to see what in house life is like and to make connections that might lead to an exit opportunity. I've struggled much more with the in house role than I had expected from a psychological point of view and now can't decide if this is sth you get used to after a longer time period or if going in house is just not the right fit for me.

Specifically:

1) The in house job is incredibly boring. It's mostly pushing paper, making sure we got the right approvals from the right people to move forward with a document. The substantive work and complexity of the contracts we're negotiating is significantly less challenging than what I do at my firm. I guess that's why they need law firms (duh), but I hadn't expected the difference to be this huge - like on a scale from "NY V5" to "a monkey could do this", a lot of what I do right now feels closer to the monkey.

2) I feel like I'm wasting a lot of my time on a daily basis which is pretty depressing. Of course, at a law firm, lawyers are the profit generating part of the business so we get support accordingly. In house, I spend a lot of time proof reading and formatting the contracts I'm working on, chasing down signatories etc. (i.e. junior / paralegal / secretarial work at a law firm). I also very much feel the effects of not being billed out at $1,600+ an hour, e.g. people constantly being late to calls, my supervisor calling me to listen to him google the answer to a question for 20 minutes which in no way requires my input or time on the phone, spending about 5 hours a week in pointless team meetings etc. At the end of the day, I often come home and feel like there would have been about as much progress on my projects if I hadn't gone to work today.

3) There are a lot of lawyers in my in house team who have been here for 10+ years (usually after 1-2 years of big law) so they know the organization and all it's intricate rules and procedures better. I'm trying to learn their procedures as fast as I can but there are a lot of rules that appear arbitrary to me (X type of document needs to be approved by persons 1, 2 and 3 and signed by person 4, Y type of document needs to be approved by person 5 and signed by persons 6 and 7). Since I've only been here for a bit over 2 months, I'm still learning all of this which I guess is normal but I very much feel like I went from being a pretty competent senior associate doing challenging legal work (who was valued and respected accordingly) to being a somewhat mediocre junior in house.

On the plus side, at my secondment, I like my colleagues and the work life balance is pretty great (almost guaranteed 9-5). If I worked here full time (i.e. non-secondment), the salary would be a good amount less than big law but I feel like the work life balance compensates for that.

I've been feeling pretty depressed about the secondment and glad it'll be over soon. So I'm wondering if I just got unlucky with my secondment and how other people have experienced the change from big law to in house. Is it really a choice between getting burned out in big law vs giving up on any career ambition (or just any kind of interest / enthusiasm in going to work)?

[Anonymous User]

I am guessing your secondment is at a large public company. I think your experience in that regard is probably pretty accurate. I moved from a V50 to a mid sized public company. WLB was great and had more autonomy than ppl I knew at big public companies. But I got tired of the same contracts over and over again and dealing with sales ppl all the time. Now in-house at a Fund and the work is much more interesting. Pay is also better and WLB is still decent. I have no desire to go back to a firm, but if you want to still have interesting work, I'd say look at PE/VC Funds. If that's not available and you care more about the work than WLB, then stay at a firm.

[Anonymous User]

Most people go to in house because they either are senior associates (7/8th year) and have no hope making partner, or they just can't stand the hours at biglaws. The transactional work at biglaw, however tedious and meaningless, is still more fun than inhouse work.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. Sigh ... thanks both for the response!

[Moneytrees]

OP here. Sigh ... thanks both for the response!

6th year transactional attorney in NYC - OP, your experience in-house is unfortunately why I've been hesitant to leave BigLaw. I'd hate to get stuck doing basic work for mediocre managers, even if the hours are better. I think people overly glamorize in-house positions on this forum.

[4lg2lb]

I went in-house as an 8th year. I enjoyed working as an attorney at my v50 but the hours and unpredictability were hitting a breaking point with my family.

I've been in-house at a mid-size, publicly traded company for almost 3 years now. The first six months I experienced the same issues as you described. The work is not nearly as interesting or challenging. Being in a cost center and working in an ancillary role is professionally unfulfilling. When you're at a law firm, the long hours make your job become a central part of how you value yourself (since you've sacrificed the other parts of your life that used to provide that meaning). It takes time to readjust and find satisfaction in other areas of your life, which is probably a healthier way of living. Reinvest your time in family, friends, hobbies, and interests outside of work. There are no shortage of pro bono opportunities that you can work on.

If you want to work in house but don't like the narrow role you experienced in your secondment, work for a company with smaller legal team. Smaller legal teams will get you exposure to more legal issues and your position on the team will grow as the company grows.

[Anonymous User]

I'm considering leaving and wondering what people's experiences have been going in house. For some background, I'm a 6/7th year in a transactional practice group at a NY V5. Hours and predictability are terrible which is why I'm considering a move. On the plus side, I like my colleagues, (most) clients and the substantive work. As in, if I could do my current V5 job with a 9pm cut off and every other weekend off or sth like that, I would stay.

What time do you usually start and stop work?

[Wild Card]

If your choices are doing meaningless work for 5 hours a week for $150,000 or being unemployed, I don't think the decision is that difficult.

What is your preferred future?

Being pushed out of your V5 and becoming of counsel at a V50?

[Anonymous User]

OP here - thanks for the additional responses and good to know that there's an adjustment happening after a while that makes life overall better even if the job is not that interesting.

In terms of alternatives: making partner or long term counsel. For partnership, I wouldn't mind spending another 2-3 years grinding to get there but my impression is that junior partners still work way too much so I'd be looking at another 10ish years of grinding and that doesn't seem worth it. For counsel, my practice group has a bit of a hiring problem (because of our shitty hours, lol) so we don't have an up or out culture and keep quite a few people on as long term counsel. The money is good, the work is interesting, the hours suck - so more or less same as right now.

[emc91]

If you find the work interesting but the hours terrible, why not consider another firm?

I’m at a V40 and rarely work past 8:30 (though I’m a very early riser and do my serious focus work at 5 am instead) and try to only work like one weekend a month (even if that means longer weekdays). The unpredictability still sucks, especially when you have that one never ending deal that kills your routine and semblance of a life, but it seems a lot better than your situation.

Also, I’m honestly fine doing menial work 9-5 if I can be hybrid (and thus get other shit done on days I’m doing very little) and make $200k. I don’t derive much satisfaction from this job. I like my colleagues a LOT and some clients but like… I like my personal life a lot more. You may just need to readjust your perspective and think about your job as a means to an end to do things you love instead of your job as your identity. Just my two cents.

[Anonymous User]

Fair point. Thank you for sharing.

[johndhi]

What is your practice area? Certain areas in-house are as, or more substantively engaging, than being at a law firm (in my opinion).

Also - note that in-house the hope is that you have some autonomy or ability in the role. So if you think 50% of your work could be done by a junior paralegal, then you should strongly advocate to hire a junior paralegal and get them up to speed on that work. That will free you up to work on a more valuable strategic project - surely some are available?

[jhett]

I'm in-house, was at a big multi-national and now at a start-up. The multi-national was a bit as you described - lots of red tape, bureaucratic non-sense, low-level or make-do work that led nowhere, and random pronouncements from above, interspersed with actual interesting legal work. It was a low-stress job with good hours, and let me spend a lot of time with my new-born kids, but it wasn't very inspiring.

At the start-up I am the only lawyer, so I have to handle everything. This includes a lot of low level work, but also includes many issues that are new to me (and some truly novel legal issues) that keep me interested and on my toes. In-house is not a monolithic experience, so perhaps you should explore a range of in-house environments.

[s1m4]

If you find the work interesting but the hours terrible, why not consider another firm?

I’m at a V40 and rarely work past 8:30 (though I’m a very early riser and do my serious focus work at 5 am instead) and try to only work like one weekend a month (even if that means longer weekdays). The unpredictability still sucks, especially when you have that one never ending deal that kills your routine and semblance of a life, but it seems a lot better than your situation.

Also, I’m honestly fine doing menial work 9-5 if I can be hybrid (and thus get other shit done on days I’m doing very little) and make $200k. I don’t derive much satisfaction from this job. I like my colleagues a LOT and some clients but like… I like my personal life a lot more. You may just need to readjust your perspective and think about your job as a means to an end to do things you love instead of your job as your identity. Just my two cents.

This post is not helpful. You rarely work past 8:30 but you wake up at 5am to work? So, if you are a normal person and start work at 8:00 or 9:00am, you would still be working to 11pm or 12am. This makes no sense, you are just pushing your schedule up by 3 hours to 5am?

[Anonymous User]

Have multiple friends that returned to biglaw (with class year haircut(s)) precisely because of the reasons you described. The increasing pay gap does not help either. Also, never thought about this but not having your own office is pretty big, it seems, especially now that most places are at least 3x RTO (sitting in a cubicle).

Why not try like a V50? Sure, less prestigious, but same money, less work, but generally just as sophisticated work (just smaller sizes and less WSJ headlines). Not all V50s will work you less, but at least based on my experience (I lateraled three times), the less “prestigious”, better your life gets. You obviously need to do your diligence and knowing someone on the inside that can give you a real insight into the group / firm will generally give you enough to make your decision (which is what I did - reached out to law school classmates, college friends that are lawyers, random connects on fishbowl, etc.).

[Anonymous User]

I am in house at a private fund sponsor, and my total compensation is the same were I still in biglaw. For context, I am 5-10 years removed from law school, worked at a V10 for a handful of years.

Look up the BarkerGilmore report on PE/VC/Hedge in house counsel compensation.

I see more legal issues than I did at my biglaw firm because I now work in all areas of the business. Though all of the heavy lifting is done by outside counsel, I am free to improve my personal skill set by reading through the latest PSA redline, etc. Or I can simply defer to outside counsel.

Hours are 9am-6pm. No weekends other than answering emails. Only downside is comp somewhat trails biglaw once you are 10 years removed from law school, but it's still very lucrative.

[nealric]

For what it's worth, your secondment experience is really not much at all like what I have experienced in-house in over a decade. I do completely different things all the time and am always learning new things. No monkey work or mindless paper pushing to speak of.

Three things to consider:

1) Most in-house lawyers are going to use secondees for overflow work they don't want to do. Nobody is going to pass off a juicy/interesting project to someone who is only there temporarily.

2) A very large company (50+ attorney legal department) is likely to have more narrow silos and repetitive work for rank and file attorneys (i.e. not legal management level). You may get better flexibility at a smaller shop.

3) In house jobs probably even more varied than biglaw jobs. So much depends on your specific role, company culture, industry, etc. I wouldn't draw sweeping conclusions based on a short secondment.

I will agree with you that the pace is slower. But I think that's what most people who go in-house want. Biglaw pace was great for learning a lot in a short time, but it's exhausting over long periods of time. I'd rather take things a bit easier.

[Dcc617]

Holy shit, from the non-biglaw perspective, having goals of cutoff at 9PM and every other weekend off is an insanely low bar. That's wild that's aspirational. Your goal would be unacceptably awful to most people and you should interrogate your perspective on work life balance.

[AaronCarter]

Holy shit, from the non-biglaw perspective, having goals of cutoff at 9PM and every other weekend off is an insanely low bar. That's wild that's aspirational. Your goal would be unacceptably awful to most people and you should interrogate your perspective on work life balance.

The mighty dollar will have you working nonstop.

[Anonymous User]

Holy shit, from the non-biglaw perspective, having goals of cutoff at 9PM and every other weekend off is an insanely low bar. That's wild that's aspirational. Your goal would be unacceptably awful to most people and you should interrogate your perspective on work life balance.

Agree with this. I am a biglaw partner (albeit not in NY or at a V5) and I go to bed at 9 most nights and don't work more than a couple of hours most weekends.

[s1m4]

Holy shit, from the non-biglaw perspective, having goals of cutoff at 9PM and every other weekend off is an insanely low bar. That's wild that's aspirational. Your goal would be unacceptably awful to most people and you should interrogate your perspective on work life balance.

Agree with this. I am a biglaw partner (albeit not in NY or at a V5) and I go to bed at 9 most nights and don't work more than a couple of hours most weekends.

What time do you wake up and start working?

[Anonymous User]

Holy shit, from the non-biglaw perspective, having goals of cutoff at 9PM and every other weekend off is an insanely low bar. That's wild that's aspirational. Your goal would be unacceptably awful to most people and you should interrogate your perspective on work life balance.

Different jr associate V10 M&A here. I just went back through my timer to look at weekends from May-October (had time off on either side so it was a good barometer). Of those 26 weekends, I billed fewer than 5 hours six times. of those 21 weekends where I worked at least five hours, during 15 of them I billed more than ten hours.

I get that it's unhealthy and I'm not arguing that I'm not fucked in the head for doing this (really need the money to support family etc.) My question is, are there market-paying gigs in TX (my market) where people have job security while working fewer weekends? I've been told that this is just how it is pretty much everyhwere in this job. I know I'm not long for it, but I do want to survive into year 4 or so where I can get a decent in house job. Should I be looking for something better? I kinda just figured everybody in M&A is doing this.

[Anonymous User]

Holy shit, from the non-biglaw perspective, having goals of cutoff at 9PM and every other weekend off is an insanely low bar. That's wild that's aspirational. Your goal would be unacceptably awful to most people and you should interrogate your perspective on work life balance.

Different jr associate V10 M&A here. I just went back through my timer to look at weekends from May-October (had time off on either side so it was a good barometer). Of those 26 weekends, I billed fewer than 5 hours six times. of those 21 weekends where I worked at least five hours, during 15 of them I billed more than ten hours.

I get that it's unhealthy and I'm not arguing that I'm not fucked in the head for doing this (really need the money to support family etc.) My question is, are there market-paying gigs in TX (my market) where people have job security while working fewer weekends? I've been told that this is just how it is pretty much everyhwere in this job. I know I'm not long for it, but I do want to survive into year 4 or so where I can get a decent in house job. Should I be looking for something better? I kinda just figured everybody in M&A is doing this.

I'm a mid/senior associate doing M&A -- I have been at a v5 and v50, and the v50 is maybe a little bit better, but not remarkably so, when it comes to nights and weekends. The clients are the same, demands the same, deals pretty much the same. People are much nicer, but that's just office to office and doesn't really change the "I'm working all the time" dynamic.

Edit to say: I'm in Texas.

[Anonymous User]

Holy shit, from the non-biglaw perspective, having goals of cutoff at 9PM and every other weekend off is an insanely low bar. That's wild that's aspirational. Your goal would be unacceptably awful to most people and you should interrogate your perspective on work life balance.

Different jr associate V10 M&A here. I just went back through my timer to look at weekends from May-October (had time off on either side so it was a good barometer). Of those 26 weekends, I billed fewer than 5 hours six times. of those 21 weekends where I worked at least five hours, during 15 of them I billed more than ten hours.

I get that it's unhealthy and I'm not arguing that I'm not fucked in the head for doing this (really need the money to support family etc.) My question is, are there market-paying gigs in TX (my market) where people have job security while working fewer weekends? I've been told that this is just how it is pretty much everyhwere in this job. I know I'm not long for it, but I do want to survive into year 4 or so where I can get a decent in house job. Should I be looking for something better? I kinda just figured everybody in M&A is doing this.

I'm a mid/senior associate doing M&A -- I have been at a v5 and v50, and the v50 is maybe a little bit better, but not remarkably so, when it comes to nights and weekends. The clients are the same, demands the same, deals pretty much the same. People are much nicer, but that's just office to office and doesn't really change the "I'm working all the time" dynamic.

Edit to say: I'm in Texas.

Thanks for taking the time to respond. I'm hearing the same things from my colleagues around town. You're either way too busy for any kind of consistent downtime or terrified of being laid off. No in-between.

[emc91]

Holy shit, from the non-biglaw perspective, having goals of cutoff at 9PM and every other weekend off is an insanely low bar. That's wild that's aspirational. Your goal would be unacceptably awful to most people and you should interrogate your perspective on work life balance.

Different jr associate V10 M&A here. I just went back through my timer to look at weekends from May-October (had time off on either side so it was a good barometer). Of those 26 weekends, I billed fewer than 5 hours six times. of those 21 weekends where I worked at least five hours, during 15 of them I billed more than ten hours.

I get that it's unhealthy and I'm not arguing that I'm not fucked in the head for doing this (really need the money to support family etc.) My question is, are there market-paying gigs in TX (my market) where people have job security while working fewer weekends? I've been told that this is just how it is pretty much everyhwere in this job. I know I'm not long for it, but I do want to survive into year 4 or so where I can get a decent in house job. Should I be looking for something better? I kinda just figured everybody in M&A is doing this.

I do M&A at a West Coast V30 and I have been pretty successful with protecting weekends. I think I’ve only had one weekend this year where I felt like I worked the whole time. I don’t work at all probably 70% of weekends. 20% of weekends I bill like 1-2 hours. 10% or so I bill between 4 and 8 hours. Pretty rare for me to bill more than that. I will say that I work longer weekdays intentionally to avoid weekend work so weekend work is solely *random client demand* or *Monday closing* rather than just working to catch up or something.

I hit 2000 hours last year and have a fantastic reputation. This job is still hard and unpredictable and I don’t want to do it much longer, but I definitely have it pretty good for biglaw compared to friends. My point is not all firms are the same, I guess I just got lucky.