#2 wouldn't even be an option for me. I would really lean toward #3. If your H was unable to work for some reason, would your family be okay on #3's salary alone? Also, if funding for #3 ran out, would you still be as marketable as you are now or would job #3's duties really limit your future opportunities if the need would arise. Those would be the only things that would make me hesitate.
Post by doctorsbaby on Jul 13, 2014 15:13:54 GMT -5
Not an attorney either but the flexibility of #3 would be awesome with 2 under 5. You have one that will be starting school within a year or 2, that job will give you the ability to be involved that you won't have with the other jobs.
If you can take a few jobs from your husbands firm a year to keep yourself up to date, that would be even better.
Post by WinterWine on Jul 13, 2014 18:01:40 GMT -5
I'm sorry to hear about your current job but super impressed tgat you've put yourself out there quickly and have so many offers. For me it would be between 3 and 4. The balance of 3 sounds great, however university work can come with it's own challenges. Moving from corporate to university, you might be frustrated by the pervasive politics and inefficiencies (from my experience ). 4 seems like a fun new venture that would be more challenging and offer a more similar salary.
I would reach our to 4 and see if they can speed things along. I don't remember the vacation allotment of 4, but perhaps you could negotiate that and a 1/2 day on Fridays or every other Friday off to get more balance. I feel like a start-up may be more open to that, especially in tech! Good luck!!
New poster but I've been reading along. I am also an attorney turned non-attorney. Disclaimer - I did NOT love my practice area, so I don't miss it at all. That said, Job 3 sounds perfect to me - even with the salary decrease. With the tuition benefit, gym, sporting activities - and especially the vacation days and schedule - to me, it seems like a no-brainer. (But as I said, I don't miss practicing). I think you'll find #3 challenging in different ways, and it helps that you can do work for your DH's legal practice if you want to d legal work.
I can't say enough abut how nice it is to have flexibility to attend things with / for my kids (now 4 and 7) - and that's with 23 vacation and sick days combined! I think if you break down the salaries (and benefits) into an hourly amount, you would actually find the school job pays quite well.
Also, with all of the networking you'd be doing, you can probably always keep a foot in the legal market. To me, #3 sounds like the perfect non-legal legal job. (So you do have to decide if that's what you want).
I would also look into the health benefits. Being a state school, you might find it comes with a really competitive benefits package. Good luck!
PS - I took a huge cut when I left my firm job for non-firm job - but I was miserable - best decision I ever made - and we did need my salary, but my happiness was more important. After being at a law firm and having a billable requirement, 5 years away from that (and I practiced for 7) - and working M-F 8:30-5 still feels like I'm working part time . #3 in a heartbeat.
I would take #3. With 2 young children , it is nice to have 1 parent that is flexible.
Also, if you end up staying there for years, can your kids attend that college for free? I know it's many years off, but you mentioned you could see yourself retiring in that position.
I agree that is a huge pAycut, but you will be saving on pre-school, sporting events. Between the 2, that's $20k of after tax dollars that you don't have to pay.
With all of that vacation time, you can take time off in the summers when your kids are off.
Post by petitefrite on Jul 14, 2014 0:26:17 GMT -5
Another lawyer chiming in. I'm certain I know who you are, and as previous posters have said, #3 is clearly your best choice. You've got two young children, and 2000 billable hours is just not worth the sacrifices. I don't think the stress at job #3 would be nearly as stressful as a job requiring that many billables. And, if a pay cut isn't a problem, why even consider it? I also agree with someone who said that the 70k is offset by the 15k savings in tuition, as well as the 5k spent on sporting events.
Have you figured out hourly rates of the 130k versus the 70k job? If my math is correct, you'd make roughly $51/hour at the 130k job and $44/hour at the law school job. (My math: 130k/2500 hours presumably worked in a 2000 billing year, and 70k/1560 hours worked with 65 days of vacation.)
Job number 3 had me at 65 vacation days a year. If you don't think you're interested in getting back into litigation later, then I think it's a great option, and the $15k discount on school for your kids at least softens the blow on the salary cut.
All my friends who work for our local universities love working in higher ed, even with the sometimes crappy pay. Good luck!
Post by quickstepstar on Jul 14, 2014 8:14:19 GMT -5
Not I am not a lawyer, but I would go with Job #3. It sounds like you would love that rather than billables, and especially because you said money is not an issue, and it has a bunch of benefits that would save you a bunch of money.
#3 looks great on paper. But would you like the work? I took a job solely for the great work/life balance (5 minutes from home, lots of days off, no overtime). But I don't like the job and that is way more important than I realized. So, I'm likely leaving to go to the less convenient but more interesting job.
Post by pepperpeople on Jul 14, 2014 11:14:01 GMT -5
I wrote off jobs #1 and #2 for you with this quote alone: "I also don't really love the litigation part of my job ". As an unhappy litigator, I can assure you that going to a 100% litigation job if you don't love litigation would be a recipe for unhappiness.
Despite the benefits, I'd be a little worried about #3 taking you out of practice completely, but with your DH / fallback plan that may not be so much of a concern.
Good luck (and I'm a little jealous at all your options )
3 and 4 both have their benefits. 3 has great flexibility but the money is low, 4 gives you the chance for litigation and better money. Plus as an up-and-coming e-commerce, there is the future possibility of growth, better income and stock options (I know a few people who have made a killing with stock options.) If your DH's firm is on a stable growth path and you are the type of person who could find things to like and challenge you with any job you have or you think you can get your litigation "fix" working with DH's firm during some of your off time, 3 would be ideal with its flexibility. If you are a person who thrives on a challenge and the money (and possibility of even bigger money in the future) is part of the allure, then 4 would be ideal. See if 3 can hold off while 4 has time to come up with an offer if they are interested.
1 and 2 should be off the table for reasons previously mentioned. Good luck and congratulations on your opportunities.
Post by jennistarr1 on Jul 30, 2014 17:35:27 GMT -5
Okay here are my off the cuff inexperienced thoughts
option one just seems like a big no to me
option 2 sound like it will be a whole new world full of exciting opportunities and experiences, great option if you are in an ambitious stage
option 3 seems like a nice step back, you are rights about the pay, it will never go much higher. Seems like a great option with family life, can't fault any one for choosing this...and it's more then my husband or I make so while it's a huge decrease for you, you are still up there salary wise
option 4 is kind of wild cardy to me, I think it will be okay, fine, very typical of everyone else's life
It sounds like you enjoy practicing law enough that job 4 might be more fun even if it's more work. I don't know how much you value career growth; if you do, how much growth opportunity is there at job 3?
I think negotiating a partial severance and taking job 1 IF it's truly a 36-40 hour, 4 day/week job doesn't sound so bad.
How flexible are the vacation days with job #3? Sometimes in higher ed you can only take specific times off: 2 weeks at Christmas, spring break, etc. Those times are often busy and expensive for travel. Also not a lawyer; I work in higher ed.
Job #3 since you value quality time and travel - it is the best fit. Much less stress at work and at home. You need quantity time in order to create quality time. There are some things you cannot buy - don't spend your life chasing $$ - just make the best use of the $$ you have to work with. Good luck with your decision.
I'd take job #3. Quality of life is just as important as money, you aren't going to be hurting for money, and if you think of it this way, it's about $20k higher than what you have on paper, since you'll be saving $5k in sporting tickets and $15k on daycare.
EDIT: Ha, I didn't see that this was from July. Well, I hope she picked Job 3.