In-House Lawyer Taking Questions

(Discuss Advantages vs Disadvantages, Making the Switch From Private Practice to In-House, Compensation & Hours, Work-Life balance, In-House Reviews & Experiences)
Anonymous User
Posts: 358803
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: In-House Lawyer Taking Questions

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Nov 13, 2019 5:57 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Bumping this thread
What knowledge base were you expected to come in with--i.e., you were a corp attorney, so were you expected to have knowledge on, e.g., IP or real estate matters, or did the company expect you to have a learning curve, and what have you done to get yourself up to speed.

Anonymous User
Posts: 358803
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: In-House Lawyer Taking Questions

Post by Anonymous User » Thu Nov 14, 2019 1:29 pm

OP, what is your biggest complaint about in-house? Would you mind sharing your salary and the city you are in? I made the move as a 4th year as well (immediately after bonus, so very early) in TX, only real complaint is (1) the pay (and I make $190 base with about $30k bonus and $25k options) because it falls behind the firm as time goes and isn't all cash and (2) when you are at a firm, every year is super valuable, people see each year of firm experience as valuable even if you have a slow year/don't learn anything. In-house, at times I feel like I am not growing and wonder if in 4-5 years if getting a GC gig will even be an option (where if you are passed up for Partner, of-counsel making $500k/year seems like a sweet job).

As to the other person who asked about regrets. I still contemplate going back to biglaw, but it is 90% because of money and 10% because it feels like while you're at a firm you have ultimate job security. You can leave and go to another firm, you can stay and make partner/counsel or stay as a senior associate and make tons of cash with no biz dev obligations, and you could go in-house. You can also move cities easily, whereas in-house, you may tie yourself to an industry and it be harder to move around.

Anonymous User
Posts: 358803
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: In-House Lawyer Taking Questions

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Jan 13, 2020 3:18 pm

Anonymous User wrote:OP, what is your biggest complaint about in-house? Would you mind sharing your salary and the city you are in? I made the move as a 4th year as well (immediately after bonus, so very early) in TX, only real complaint is (1) the pay (and I make $190 base with about $30k bonus and $25k options) because it falls behind the firm as time goes and isn't all cash and (2) when you are at a firm, every year is super valuable, people see each year of firm experience as valuable even if you have a slow year/don't learn anything. In-house, at times I feel like I am not growing and wonder if in 4-5 years if getting a GC gig will even be an option (where if you are passed up for Partner, of-counsel making $500k/year seems like a sweet job).

As to the other person who asked about regrets. I still contemplate going back to biglaw, but it is 90% because of money and 10% because it feels like while you're at a firm you have ultimate job security. You can leave and go to another firm, you can stay and make partner/counsel or stay as a senior associate and make tons of cash with no biz dev obligations, and you could go in-house. You can also move cities easily, whereas in-house, you may tie yourself to an industry and it be harder to move around.
Apologies for the very long delay in responding. My biggest complaint is the lack of workplace support compared to a firm. I am in a major market (Chicago/LA). Your pay is actually the same as mine and I am in a more expensive area. I am hoping for a promotion in the next month which should add a little bit. I feel like I am getting a lot of experience and growing, but as I mentioned I am in a really small dept. I am hopeful that GC is an option in 4-5 years, but honestly who knows. I am worried about tying myself to one industry too much, but I think I can spin a narrative around tech/public company to be able to move around. I don't really want to move back to a firm, but I think in the next year or two if I don't, that ship may sail

Anonymous User
Posts: 358803
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: In-House Lawyer Taking Questions

Post by Anonymous User » Mon Jan 13, 2020 3:19 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Bumping this thread
What knowledge base were you expected to come in with--i.e., you were a corp attorney, so were you expected to have knowledge on, e.g., IP or real estate matters, or did the company expect you to have a learning curve, and what have you done to get yourself up to speed.
I was an M&A attorney, but honestly less than 10% of my work has been that. So it has been mostly getting caught up on licensing, software, manufacturing agreements. Mostly been learning by doing and reviewing previous contracts and talking to outside counsel for advice

Anonymous User
Posts: 358803
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: In-House Lawyer Taking Questions

Post by Anonymous User » Tue Jan 14, 2020 6:11 pm

Thanks OP for doing this!

By the time a candidate gets to the third round of interviews - or let’s say the first set of in person interviews after one or two telephone screening interviews - how many candidates are still in the running at that point?

Want to continue reading?

Register now to search topics and post comments!

Absolutely FREE!


Anonymous User
Posts: 358803
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: In-House Lawyer Taking Questions

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Jan 15, 2020 12:36 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Thanks OP for doing this!

By the time a candidate gets to the third round of interviews - or let’s say the first set of in person interviews after one or two telephone screening interviews - how many candidates are still in the running at that point?
I think it really depends on the company and position. I think most F500 companies still have at least 10 people in the running for in-person interviews. For my company, I think they used to a recruiter to cull it to just 3 or 4 for my position. But for another position where I was involved in the hiring, we interviewed 7 people in person after HR and recruiters limited the list.

Anonymous User
Posts: 358803
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: In-House Lawyer Taking Questions

Post by Anonymous User » Wed Jan 15, 2020 5:21 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Thanks OP for doing this!

By the time a candidate gets to the third round of interviews - or let’s say the first set of in person interviews after one or two telephone screening interviews - how many candidates are still in the running at that point?
Different anon (also in-house). There really aren't rules to this game. But one point of reference: My company's last hire I took part in did 3 in-person interviews. Phone was done by HR, but I don't think they spoke to many more than we selected for in-person. Even though there were a lot of applicants, there were actually very few who were truly qualified for the position. HR screened the people who weren't even JDs (and similar) before we even saw them, but we still got plenty of resumes from people with no relevant experience whatsoever. The number of plausible candidates is probably strongly influenced by how niche of a position they are looking for, but I think it would be fairly rare to interview more than 3-5 folks in-person.

Anonymous User
Posts: 358803
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: In-House Lawyer Taking Questions

Post by Anonymous User » Fri Jan 17, 2020 4:20 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Thanks OP for doing this!

By the time a candidate gets to the third round of interviews - or let’s say the first set of in person interviews after one or two telephone screening interviews - how many candidates are still in the running at that point?
Different anon (also in-house). There really aren't rules to this game. But one point of reference: My company's last hire I took part in did 3 in-person interviews. Phone was done by HR, but I don't think they spoke to many more than we selected for in-person. Even though there were a lot of applicants, there were actually very few who were truly qualified for the position. HR screened the people who weren't even JDs (and similar) before we even saw them, but we still got plenty of resumes from people with no relevant experience whatsoever. The number of plausible candidates is probably strongly influenced by how niche of a position they are looking for, but I think it would be fairly rare to interview more than 3-5 folks in-person.
To offer another sample, I recently went through some in-house interviewing and was expressly told by the screener that they were doing initial interviews with 5 folks, and then in-person interviews with 3 or 4 of those 5. So that largely tracks what was stated above; though of course, that's not to say that the numbers don't vary wildly.

Want to continue reading?

Register for access!

Did I mention it was FREE ?


Post Reply Post Anonymous Reply  

Return to “In-House”