Congrats on having multiple opportunities. I would think about trying out #3 and reassess in maybe two years. It will challenge you professionally to do something new, even if it's not technically practicing. If you decide you don't like it, you will have networked even more and will already be pretty aware of the market given the nature of the job.
The networking and awareness of the market was a benefit I was thinking of job 3. I know 2 former Directors of Career Services for law schools. One was able to move into a very good in house job because of her knowledge of the market and connections, though the law school she worked for was in a smaller market. The other wasn't able to find as good of an in house job, but that seemed be in large part because she moved to a city where her school wasn't as connected.
That's an interesting point. I didn't even think about the fact that I'd have more connections and better knowledge of the market should I ever want to leave. I just kept thinking about how hard it will be to find something in my practice area after leaving the practice of law.
Another thing to add. My husband is very supportive and has told me to do whatever I think is best. He just thinks it's hard to take a 50% paycut when the work load isn't decreased by 50%. I'd be working pretty much the same hours as I do now and I'd have the same level of stress, I'd just be making about half my current salary. Of course there are benefits to the current job that I don't have now, like an extra month and a half of vacation time and fun perks like season tickets to sporting events, but does that all make up for a 50% cut? Does it even matter if I don't necessarily need the money?
He also likes the idea that I'd get 30k severance (after taxes) paid out in a lump sum up front as that would make the pay cut seem a little less drastic.
You can't think of it this way though. Keeping your current job isn't an option. The only thing close to that is #1 and that's way more hours and still a pay cut.
I would take #3. If you had an offer on the table for #4, that would probably be the one I would take but I wouldn't wait on it if it means you lose the offer for #3.
I am a lawyer so I'll ask this question, since everyone seems to be pushing for job #3 - do you want to leave practice? B/c even though job #3 offers great flexibility...you're no longer practicing. And it sounds like you like your practice enough to want to continue practicing.
I know a lot of female lawyers who leave practice and go into recruitment positions, corporate development positions, stuff like #3. they do it largely for the flexibility and time, and as a currently pregnant lawyer, i totally get it. but they rarely, if ever, are able to go back to practice. So if you want the option to go back to practice, I would avoid #3.
Another thing to add. My husband is very supportive and has told me to do whatever I think is best. He just thinks it's hard to take a 50% paycut when the work load isn't decreased by 50%. I'd be working pretty much the same hours as I do now and I'd have the same level of stress, I'd just be making about half my current salary. Of course there are benefits to the current job that I don't have now, like an extra month and a half of vacation time and fun perks like season tickets to sporting events, but does that all make up for a 50% cut? Does it even matter if I don't necessarily need the money?
He also likes the idea that I'd get 30k severance (after taxes) paid out in a lump sum up front as that would make the pay cut seem a little less drastic.
You can't think of it this way though. Keeping your current job isn't an option. The only thing close to that is #1 and that's way more hours and still a pay cut.
I would take #3. If you had an offer on the table for #4, that would probably be the one I would take but I wouldn't wait on it if it means you lose the offer for #3.
Exactly. The only way to avoid a paycut is #2, and billables are the suck.
I don't think #3 would be the same amount of work. You will have busy, stressful seasons, but then you have a TON of vacation time to use during the slower times.
I'm still in favor of #4 if it materializes and like @songforyou's advice about seeing if they can speed things up.
The way I see it, you'll likely be resentful in #1, taking a paycut to likely work more hours doing your least favorite part of your job for what is essentially the same company. Unless you just LOVE practicing and litigation, you will be miz at #2 because that is going to be a lot more work and the stress of billables. I think #4 sounds the best. But I think that between 1, 2, and 3, you'll be happiest with the flexibility and quality of life that 3 allows without the resentment that comes with feeling fucked over by your employer (#1).
Definitely job #3. I have my law degree, but work in education (HR) and I love the fact that I still flex my legal muscles without all the stress associated with the practice of law. The work/life balance is also great. I think the best point a pp made is all of the networking you'd do in career services really could help you if you decided to transition back into practice later. Good luck with your decision!
I am a lawyer so I'll ask this question, since everyone seems to be pushing for job #3 - do you want to leave practice? B/c even though job #3 offers great flexibility...you're no longer practicing. And it sounds like you like your practice enough to want to continue practicing.
I know a lot of female lawyers who leave practice and go into recruitment positions, corporate development positions, stuff like #3. they do it largely for the flexibility and time, and as a currently pregnant lawyer, i totally get it. but they rarely, if ever, are able to go back to practice. So if you want the option to go back to practice, I would avoid #3.
If it were me, I'd probably go with #4.
I think I'm ok with not practicing. I think I could still get my fill by helping DH with little side projects (legal research, drafting motions, giving opinions on value, etc), even if I'm not actually in the courtroom.
If it were me, I'd probably go with 1, because I couldn't take that much of a paycut (job 3) in my situation, and job 2 is out of the question- I will never go back to billable hours. But in your situation, if finances permit, I'd seriously consider 3.
That being said, if I did take 1, I'd continue to look for other jobs if you don't think it's long term.
Is there any way you can negotiate to keep your current salary with 1? It would benefit them to keep you and not pay out severance.r
And I'd take 4 if offered. Definitely.
I thought I wanted something like 3 but after going in house and even though I'm not technically practicing, I'm still using my legal skills. I think I would have been unhappy if I did something entirely different altogether.
Definitely Job 3, or maybe Job 1. As someone in biglaw, you couldn't pay me enough to go back to 2000 billables a year after getting out. I'm sorry you are losing your current job - sounds too good to be true. It's exactly what I'm looking for.
Post by barefootcontessa on Jul 13, 2014 8:57:49 GMT -5
I agree with the poster who said I would give it some more time and see how things pan out with #4. I worked at a university for a long time (but as teaching faculty) and I would be concerned that job 3 would get boring. It can also be stressful when students are not getting jobs. My friend directs career services for a top-ten law school and these last years have been quite stressful for him. But your situation may be different as it sounds like this school feeds primarily into a regional market and that market is good. Are you a very people-orientated person? That would probably offset some of the potentially boring factor. GL.
That's fantastic that you have so many offers to choose from. You're very lucky! Personally, I'd go with offer 3 because of the benefits and schedule- those are more important to me than the salary. Plus it sounds like it would be a new challenge, position wise.
Job 3. I think that mentally, the pay cut be be hard to accept, however you said yourself you don't need the money. So much time off, and leaving work at work at a normal time at the end of the day. Sounds amazing.
With the age of your kids, I would do #3. Once they get to elementary school it is a lot more time consuming than the daycare stage. You would have time to volunteer and participate in school functions and afterschool activities, if you want to.
But really anything but #2. I think you're being overly optimistic about it and 2000 hours billable which is really high from everything I've heard on here. And selling the company is a whole different skill set that sounds like kind of an unknown for you.
I'm sorry about your job, but good luck and it's great you have so many options!
I'm fairly certain I know who you are and if I'm right, I'd worry about essentially getting out of law at this point because you've always really enjoyed your work. Even here, it seems as though you really enjoy what you do. I would assume that taking the school job would mostly eliminate (or at least make very difficult) your ability to get back into "real law" if you wanted in the future. That being said, I wouldn't be taking your restructured current job for anything, and the firm job you discussed here sounds like another miserable step back. If you're not under a time crunch, I think I would see what happens with the startup and consider that and the school job. Another thing to consider...does the school job provide a tuition benefit for your kids? DH is a professor and all employees get free tuition for their kids at his school. If so, that could be another benefit to consider there.
GL!
You are right about all of this. I love law and I think I'm good at what I do. I love my current job but in my industry my company is one of the only ones structured the way it is so the chances of finding the exact same type of gig would be very low. And honestly I'm not married to being a lawyer and would be ok with getting out of law completely, even if it would mean leaving behind years of knowledge and experience in my practice area.
There's no tuition benefit that I'm aware of other than the subsidized preschool for my kids and only my youngest can really benefit from that. Definitely something worth looking in to though, I hadn't really explored anything past preschool.
I'm pretty sure I know who you are as well, and given what I know of you, I'm not sure you'll be happy in job 3. I would think long and hard about whether or not you want to lean back. It seems like being in a competitive and challenging environment was important to you. I wouldn't underestimate how different a university will be. There are a lot of politics and inefficiencies and I have a feeling that might frustrate you. The benefits can be great, but that big of a paycut can mess with your mind too.
you might want to talk to @gingersb about her recent job change for perspective on it.
Another lawyer and mom of a young child chiming in, and I would take #3 in a heartbeat. It sounds like the benefits outweigh the salary cut, given your stated background that you don't NEED your salary, but want to work. I wouldn't want to take on more hours with young kids,
Love of my life baby boy born 11/11. One and done not by choice; 3 years of TTC yielded 4 MMC and 2 CPs, through 4 IUIs and 2 IVFs. Focusing on making the world a better place instead...and running.
I would take 3. Being home with my kids in the evening, not working weekends, and having tons of vacation time would be worth the pay cut to me, especially since your financial situation is such that you don't need the money to maintain your lifestyle. I think 1 would end up feeling like just as much of a pay cut when you factor in how much more you would be working to make less money, and IME billing 2000 hours a year while trying to bring in business was unpleasant without kids and pretty much total hell with them.
If you want to continue practicing and make more money, then hold out for 4, but 1 and 2 both seem much less desirable than 3.
(On a side note, has anyone voted for 2? The universal distaste for big law jobs is pretty telling.)
I wouldn't think of any of these jobs in comparison to your current one, salary-wise. You are probably very talented but there is still an element of luck in landing a 36 hour/wk 125k job without billables. Unfortunately it seems like the luck has run out for now. I'd consider myself lucky to have had that gig while it lasted, and look at the new situation objectively.
You know you don't like the litigation part of your job so I would scratch #1. #2 sounds terrible. #3 and #4 sound great in different ways. I'd see if you can push #4 along and get an offer in hand ASAP. Then if both are a real possibility, I'd do a gut check. Flip a coin and see if you're excited or disappointed with the results.
If you take #3, can you do a touch of lawyer stuff at your H's firm to keep it on your resume and keep your skills fresh, in case you ever decide to go back?
I am a lawyer so I'll ask this question, since everyone seems to be pushing for job #3 - do you want to leave practice? B/c even though job #3 offers great flexibility...you're no longer practicing. And it sounds like you like your practice enough to want to continue practicing.
I know a lot of female lawyers who leave practice and go into recruitment positions, corporate development positions, stuff like #3. they do it largely for the flexibility and time, and as a currently pregnant lawyer, i totally get it. but they rarely, if ever, are able to go back to practice. So if you want the option to go back to practice, I would avoid #3.
If it were me, I'd probably go with #4.
I think I'm ok with not practicing. I think I could still get my fill by helping DH with little side projects (legal research, drafting motions, giving opinions on value, etc), even if I'm not actually in the courtroom.
If you know you are ok with not practicing, then #3.
If you think you are ok, I would continue to give it serious thought. As someone who likes practices, all the benefits in the world could not save #3 for me.
#4 sounds ideal to me.
Just throwing this out there, but what do you think your options will be like if you keep looking? If you have this many options now, do you think something more perfect could come along? The only way I'd choose #1 if I had solid reasons to believe that I could find something better. I understand why #2 isn't appealing, but if I wanted to continue to practice and didn't know something better would come along, and didn't get #4, I'd probably choose that.
I'm fairly certain I know who you are and if I'm right, I'd worry about essentially getting out of law at this point because you've always really enjoyed your work. Even here, it seems as though you really enjoy what you do. I would assume that taking the school job would mostly eliminate (or at least make very difficult) your ability to get back into "real law" if you wanted in the future. That being said, I wouldn't be taking your restructured current job for anything, and the firm job you discussed here sounds like another miserable step back. If you're not under a time crunch, I think I would see what happens with the startup and consider that and the school job. Another thing to consider...does the school job provide a tuition benefit for your kids? DH is a professor and all employees get free tuition for their kids at his school. If so, that could be another benefit to consider there.
GL!
I'm not a lawyer, but I think that this seems like very sound advice and in line with what I'd consider if I was in a similar position . I also would be a little concerned about you being bored in such a shift of direction.
Do you have professional certifications or licenses that you'll need to pay for annually?Perhaps you could also keep your hands in law by taking a case or two a year from/with your DH to keep current. You've got a lot of experience in a practice area!
Post by thedutchgirl on Jul 13, 2014 12:25:17 GMT -5
Another lawyer chiming in. I'm at big law and love it, but knowing your situation, I think you wouldn't be. Going from 36 hours a week to 2000 billables is a HUGE change, especially with kids. For that reason, no way to #2. And #1 is similarly problematic. It seems like you are considering it in large part because you love your current job, but all the perks of your current job disappear with that job.
I'm with lasagnasshole and @songforyou. #4 is tops, with #3 in second. I'd push to see if you could move #4 along. If there's any tuition perks for #3 that you are unaware of, that might push it up, particularly if you could do some legal work for your H on an ongoing basis to keep your foot in practicing.
I'm sorry about your current job but very happy you have options!
#3 and #4 sound great in different ways. I'd see if you can push #4 along and get an offer in hand ASAP. Then if both are a real possibility, I'd do a gut check. Flip a coin and see if you're excited or disappointed with the results.
If you take #3, can you do a touch of lawyer stuff at your H's firm to keep it on your resume and keep your skills fresh, in case you ever decide to go back?
This. Jobs 3&4 sound great it different ways.
However, if you can keep some side work using your law skills by working for your H's firm, I would pick job #3 in a heartbeat and have the beat of both worlds. Good luck with your decision.
Job 3 sounds fabulous. If that's the one you are leaning to that's the one you should take.
Especially since your priorities are flexibility and ability to travel, rather than money. It sucks to take a pay cut, but really a $70K salary is great, it won't really impact your lifestyle, and it offers the other perks and benefits you'll enjoy.
I'd go with #3 since money is not a concern. Those benefits are amazing and it sounds like you'd have a great work life balance with that amount of vacation and flexible schedule.