Career advice please (government attorneys)

[Susie]

H is trying to make some decisions about career options within the state government system.  I have spent my whole career in private practice and am not sure what to recommend.  PDQ details, but would appreciate any suggestions from those with more experience.

{poof - thank you everyone who responded!}

WWYD?  As I mentioned above, PDQ because I will likely redact some of the specific details later.

[smock]

I'm not an attorney and I don't work for the government, but I'd stick with option 1. You've got very young kids, so I'd be okay with the potentially slower timeline since it sounds like he's happy with his job right now and it gives him flexibility.

To me, the other options seem like they're driven by impatience rather than what he really wants to do. I would really not want to lose the no travel perk with young kids, knowing that your job is demanding. And it seems rash to completely leave the legal field.

With his amazing scores, I'd also think he will probably have an offer by Sept 2020, so I wouldn't see the potential for promotion in Option 2 as anything better than Option 1.

[traveltheworld]

Does he want to be a program manager? What is the long term career trajectory on that one? Being a program director is very different than being a lawyer. Without knowing the response to that, it's hard to say which option would be best.

[Susie]

traveltheworld , honestly, I don't know if he wants to be a program manager.  I don't think he does either.  We've talked a number of times about what does he WANT to do for the state, and the answer is he really isn't passionate about it and just wants to make the best money he can within the system and work with decent people.  He doesn't have a specific agency he's targeting, or a particular type of work that he wants to do.

{poof}

[lessel]

Given your description and follow-up, I think I would stick with option 1. Has he thought about a federal position? From the level of roles you're describing, I feel like the comparable federal positions would pay more?

[Susie]

Sept 17, 2019 14:52:12 GMT -5 lessel said:

Given your description and follow-up, I think I would stick with option 1. Has he thought about a federal position? From the level of roles you're describing, I feel like the comparable federal positions would pay more?

Yes, he has, particularly a few years ago, and yes it would, although state benefits are better.  The big sticking point now is that he doesn't want to throw away the 12 years he has into the state retirement system and start over, which I understand.  We aren't planning to rely on the state pension in retirement, but with only 8 years to go it would be a shame to throw it away.  Plus the access to state health insurance in retirement is also valuable.

[ESF]

Why does pushing for #2 mean he has to stop interviewing for #1? I suppose if it were the same agency, he'd have concerns that interviewing for #1 would make them not want to give him #2, but is the state gov world that small that word would get back across different agencies?

[Mushe]

Haven’t read replies yet, but this quandary resonates with me. I am also in state government, and was frustrated by a lack of options for promotion. I was offered a policy position that would have had great potential for advancement, but leaving behind legal for a long time, if not forever. I work closely with our policy division, and find it really hard to draw the line between our two areas, so I know this wouldn’t have worked for me! If he’s still expected to refer legal questions to legal, how will he handle it if he disagrees?

Ultimately, I stuck it out where I was and have since been promoted two times, now in our top spot. Long story short, I wouldn’t take a small raise today at the cost of a bad fit. The position I was offered wouldn’t have been a raise at all, since it paid less than I made and I would have been red lined for years, but the determining factor was the bad fit and not the salary.

[Susie]

ESF , I guess he wouldn't HAVE to, but I sort of feel like he'd have to from a practical perspective.

{poof}

[hbomdiggity]

Not a government attorney, but as exhausting and sucky as it is, I’d prob stick with option #1. Hopefully this latest lead is a good one.

[starlily]

County prosecutor for 17 years, lawyer for 19. I suggest that he goes with Option 1. It offers the best quality of life and seems the most likely way to get to that salary range.

Government hiring is slow and even though hiring parameters are often score based, who your connections are still matter. Option 2 would likely entail the same lengthy process for a promotion, but that still hinges on someone else's retirement. That adds risk.

I wouldn't recommend a non-legal job if he wants to eventually run for DA. That'd make it way too easy for opponents to attack him.

[egeiger]

Being qualified for everything doesn’t mean he has to be interested. The simple advice I was given when in a similar predicament of choose direction was to forget everything and just spend a day thinking about the end goal. Then, only consider options that get you to that end goal. Sounds to me like waiting for the right #1 is what will get him back to the prosecutors office where he wants to be. Best of luck to your family - it’s a lot of mental “what if’s” until he commits to his path, and that’s exhausting for all.

[Velar Fricative]

Well, I definitely would not pick option 3 for sure. I'd lean towards option 1 but wouldn't fault him for taking option 2 as long as he doesn't take the job with the expectation that that promotion will definitely happen. But because that's so up in the air at this point, I think with his scores an opportunity will come up soon (or "soon" on the government timeline). $100k would be nice but I'm sensing that he'll get to that number in the near future anyway.

[lishie]

I'm fed gov, not state, but we have similar ridiculous TIG requirements. I'd stay in his current role and keep interviewing. He'll get one of those roles, likely before the retirement in job 2, and there's no guarantee he'd get that promotion. It sounds like there are many more potential options with job scenario 1.

Unless he's totally burned out of the law, option 3 doesn't look good, and isn't enough of a salary increase.

If he decides he wants a change later, a program management position could always be an option in the future.

[traveltheworld]

Given your follow up, I'd pick option 1. Something should turn up.

[simpsongal]

Fed attorney, as you probably recall. Does he have to take the option #2 lateral to be considered for the promotion? Our agency isn't nearly as lockstep. Do they know he's interviewing and considering leaving? We tend to make promises and move things around to keep certain people (including retention bonuses). All this hiring/promotion business is highly agency specific.

I wouldn't take the program manager job, stay in the same legal field. Government is such a different animal than the private sector - it's frustrating how opportunities and promotions are completely held hostage to retirements and whatnot. I'll just say, you never know when something is going to change. If you asked me 3 years ago (when I was a line attorney) what I would be doing in a couple years, I would never have predicted I'd be managing my group. I like the new gig and extra money but it's A LOT - not nearly enough of a raise to compensate for what I took on. So in that sense, I'm glad I was a line attorney for ~9 years.... a colleague jumped ship for his dream job - he's already looking again b/c things were not as great as he'd hoped and it was the right job, at the wrong time for him (he has young kids, new job is not flexible).

Good luck to your DH!

[Susie]

Sept 19, 2019 14:09:54 GMT -5 simpsongal said:

Do they know he's interviewing and considering leaving? We tend to make promises and move things around to keep certain people (including retention bonuses). All this hiring/promotion business is highly agency specific.

Yes, they know.  As soon as scores on the exam were released (they're public), one of his supervisors had a conversation with him, and said they saw his score, and they knew he was a "retention problem" based on that.  He has also interviewed for a couple of #1-type positions in the last month with other agencies, which meant he disclosed those interviews in order to not have to use PTO to cover the absence.  Also, #2 and #3 are within his agency, and #2 is within legal within his agency.  Unfortunately his current agency just doesn't have any open position to promote him into to keep him from leaving.

Since the OP, he has declined the offer for #2, and is continuing to hunt hard for #1 opportunities.  He has 4 more resumes to submit this weekend to various agencies that have openings.  I think everyone is right that he should hold out for that, it's just so exhausting!