Jump to content

Switching In-House to Bay Street


Guest Anonymous

Recommended Posts

Mets992
  • Lawyer
On 5/24/2022 at 9:50 AM, Rusty Iron Ring said:

We aren't biglaw, but my more senior partners definitely feel that it's different.  

I'm curious, what's changed? Are more and more associates simply not willing to work the grueling hours anymore?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rusty Iron Ring
  • Lawyer
7 hours ago, Mets992 said:

I'm curious, what's changed? Are more and more associates simply not willing to work the grueling hours anymore?

It's hard to say because I'm getting the information as perceived and relayed by older lawyers who spent the first 20 years of their careers working insane hours and achieving enormous career success because of it.  So when they tell it, it's about younger lawyers being lazy and irresponsible and not being willing to do what it takes, and not justifying their salaries, etc.  

From my perspective, as somebody who also has no interest in that old school workaholic lifestyle, one could just as fairly say that a lot of younger lawyers have seen what is on offer if you work that hard, and have decided it's not worth it to them. 

Of course, there are also the people who refuse to work that hard, but who also get upset that they don't get the same rewards.  Those people, I just don't understand. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

KOMODO
  • Lawyer
7 hours ago, Mets992 said:

I'm curious, what's changed? Are more and more associates simply not willing to work the grueling hours anymore?

I think people are really burned out. That goes for partners too, but associates feel it even more because (1) they have more to miss out on, given their typical age; and (2) they generally have less exciting payoff for their work (servicing student loans, paying rent on an apartment, whereas partners working hard are more likely to take fun vacations, live a more luxury lifestyle, etc.). Also think about the fact that when many partners were associate age, they were saving up for houses and working hard towards a meaningful goal, they had stay at home spouses who lessened the non-office workload, etc. 

So you have a super burned out workforce, they're exhausted, their jobs don't include the same incentives and excitement that they did a few years ago when everyone was in the office, the labour market is really tight and these associates are getting calls every week from recruiters saying they could easily get another job, and then a partner calls to say there's a new big file that needs immediate intensive evening and weekend work. And the associates are like, no way. I'm already at my limit, I could easily get basically the same job at another firm, so the answer is: I'm at capacity, I would be happy to assist on the file but can't start for two weeks, and it will take me longer than you'd like to complete the tasks. Cue partner yelling into the void because every associate on the floor says the same thing.

The other thing that I see happening is an increase in the amount of working time it takes to bill hours (or conversely, more pressure to get things done "quickly", but they take the same amount of time, so you just hide the "extra" time, often by putting it to a nonbillable file or not docketing it at all). This is one of the key burnout factors in my opinion. Associates are working like dogs, and at the end of the year the partners are like, your hours are okay but not amazing. And that's super demoralizing and just makes people want to quit. I think this is happening more lately because of the massive increase in volume of non-productive email which takes time to review, sort and file but doesn't accomplish anything. It's much more noticeable if you work on lots of files in a day, which makes it harder to "hide" the organizational time in a bigger matter.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rusty Iron Ring
  • Lawyer
19 minutes ago, KOMODO said:

The other thing that I see happening is an increase in the amount of working time it takes to bill hours (or conversely, more pressure to get things done "quickly", but they take the same amount of time, so you just hide the "extra" time, often by putting it to a nonbillable file or not docketing it at all). This is one of the key burnout factors in my opinion. Associates are working like dogs, and at the end of the year the partners are like, your hours are okay but not amazing. And that's super demoralizing and just makes people want to quit. I think this is happening more lately because of the massive increase in volume of non-productive email which takes time to review, sort and file but doesn't accomplish anything. It's much more noticeable if you work on lots of files in a day, which makes it harder to "hide" the organizational time in a bigger matter.

This is absolutely huge, and doesn't seem to get talked about enough.  I'm feeling it at my level, given the increasingly complicated/restrictive billing guidelines that clients are using in an effort to control costs, but that often penalize doing work that legitimately needs to get done. 

Frustrating to somebody like me who is working completely for free if I am spending time on somebody else's problems that I can't bill for. But it's especially frustrating when associates find that their hours have been 'trimmed' on a file, either because they have been forced to do something that's difficult to bill for, or because the bill is just too big, and they have no say in it.  And then to add insult to injury, the person who trimmed their hours complains about their hours being low. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

WhoKnows
  • Lawyer
55 minutes ago, Rusty Iron Ring said:

a lot of younger lawyers have seen what is on offer if you work that hard, and have decided it's not worth it to them. 

Some really good responses in this thread, but this stands out. When you realize that it's a pie eating contest where the prize is more pie, the thought of partnership loses its luster. And if you aren't going to make partner, what's the point. 

I also think it's that a lot of people find themselves in practice groups they really just don't enjoy. People underestimate how easy it is to just kind of tumble into an area and end up there but hating it. Because the new generation doesn't think they're going to only have 1 career, when faced with that they're much more likely to leave for a different path. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rashabon
  • Lawyer

2021 was kind of went the dam broke in Canadian big law. Previously, you had to work sometimes but it was not all the time. Last year, every month was a fire drill. I am a notoriously hard worker and achiever and 2021 for me was beyond the pale. People saw all that and just decided it was too exhausting.

I'm fortunate enough to not have a heavy load so far this year, but I am also not as motivated to grind on billable work like I was in the past (although my circumstances are now different).

Before, a large bonus was the carrot for a big year, but last year, everybody got what used to be a relatively difficult to achieve bonus, which changes the dynamic. Also New York hiring every big law associate with a pulse no matter how good they were made the good associates question whether they wanted to work as hard when mediocre associates were getting paid twice as much and living in California. The markets cooling a bit might rebalance that perspective though.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reward ratio has also changed quite a bit, quite quickly. When I joined the firm in 2008, I immediately, on my associate's salary of $100,000 and a family income of probably about $160K, bought a brand new two bedroom condo in the Annex and had leftovers to feed a fairly lavish lifestyle. That condo is not affordable now for someone with a starting Bay St salary.

Sure, if you make partner, the money will buy you anything you want. But to grind your life away for 8-10 years before that doesn't look like much fun to a lot of people.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pantalaimon
  • Lawyer

There's probably a large aspect of selection bias, too. You're hearing about the associate lifestyle through the lens of the ones who decided to stay at the firm and made partner, not the majority of associates that dropped out (or were managed out!) to go in-house, etc. So they may not have seen that aspect of the less dedicated associates they worked side by side with 20 years ago.

1 hour ago, KOMODO said:

The other thing that I see happening is an increase in the amount of working time it takes to bill hours (or conversely, more pressure to get things done "quickly", but they take the same amount of time, so you just hide the "extra" time, often by putting it to a nonbillable file or not docketing it at all). This is one of the key burnout factors in my opinion. Associates are working like dogs, and at the end of the year the partners are like, your hours are okay but not amazing. And that's super demoralizing and just makes people want to quit. I think this is happening more lately because of the massive increase in volume of non-productive email which takes time to review, sort and file but doesn't accomplish anything. It's much more noticeable if you work on lots of files in a day, which makes it harder to "hide" the organizational time in a bigger matter.

Ugh, plus the non-billable targets at even 1st year level...

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, KOMODO said:

 

The other thing that I see happening is an increase in the amount of working time it takes to bill hours (or conversely, more pressure to get things done "quickly", but they take the same amount of time, so you just hide the "extra" time, often by putting it to a nonbillable file or not docketing it at all). This is one of the key burnout factors in my opinion. Associates are working like dogs, and at the end of the year the partners are like, your hours are okay but not amazing. And that's super demoralizing and just makes people want to quit. I think this is happening more lately because of the massive increase in volume of non-productive email which takes time to review, sort and file but doesn't accomplish anything. It's much more noticeable if you work on lots of files in a day, which makes it harder to "hide" the organizational time in a bigger matter.

This is interesting to hear from a more senior lawyer. I have noticed it in my own work, but always chalked it up to just becoming more senior (relatively speaking). Every year my rate of billable hours per hour in the office seems to shrink. 
 

Id also echo the pay sentiment. While lawyers are still very well paid, it sure seems like they were paid better before (whether 10, 20, or 30 years ago) once cost of living and student debt is accounted for. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talleyrandophile
  • Lawyer

Similarly. The pay is objectively nice, don't get me wrong, but it doesn't necessarily feel like it's worth the work sometimes in comparison to the past (i.e., it feels like $100,000 annually used to be good money, whereas that doesn't really feel like it's the case any longer, at least in HCOL urban areas). I'd emphasize that this is entirely subjective and realize that most Canadians make far short of that, so this is a super privileged take.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mets992
  • Lawyer
1 hour ago, Cool_name said:

This is interesting to hear from a more senior lawyer. I have noticed it in my own work, but always chalked it up to just becoming more senior (relatively speaking). Every year my rate of billable hours per hour in the office seems to shrink. 
 

Id also echo the pay sentiment. While lawyers are still very well paid, it sure seems like they were paid better before (whether 10, 20, or 30 years ago) once cost of living and student debt is accounted for. 

Very insightful feedback from everyone. I'm looking at making a similar switch, but it doesn't seem like the grass is always greener.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spreckles
  • Lawyer
On 5/26/2022 at 1:08 AM, Bob Jones said:

Lol making a household income of 550K makes a huge difference

What I meant was I can’t imagine how our family life will change in any meaningful way if we earned more than what we earn now ($550k). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheezit
  • Lawyer

Made the transition from in-house to a seven sister approximately 1.5 years ago at a mid-year call.  Depending on where you are at in life, it's hard to really justify the pay given the work-life balance (since you know it's possible to make a decent salary not working 60-70hrs/week). Covid made things particularly tough with just being glued to a PC screen all day but maybe things are better now? In fairness, the past few months have also been a lot better than earlier on in the pandemic for my practice area.

You can private message me if you want to chat more.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our income puts us in a pretty good spot (probably top 1-3% of households in Canada) but a household income of $550K puts you in the stratosphere. Probably the top 0.1% of households.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

disgruntledpelican
  • Lawyer

I am someone who made a similar move into Biglaw. It didn't end up working out. The added pay wasn't work the added stress and near around the clock availability that ended up happening because my group was absolutely crushed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mets992
  • Lawyer
3 hours ago, disgruntledpelican said:

I am someone who made a similar move into Biglaw. It didn't end up working out. The added pay wasn't work the added stress and near around the clock availability that ended up happening because my group was absolutely crushed.

What year call are you? I'm assuming you were able to make the switch back to in-house fairly easily?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, disgruntledpelican said:

I am someone who made a similar move into Biglaw. It didn't end up working out. The added pay wasn't work the added stress and near around the clock availability that ended up happening because my group was absolutely crushed.

Did you stick it out for a while before you switched back? I'm always hestitant about switching to new jobs because I want to stick through a full year even if it wasn't a good fit. 

On 5/26/2022 at 8:28 AM, Cool_name said:

The other thing that I see happening is an increase in the amount of working time it takes to bill hours (or conversely, more pressure to get things done "quickly", but they take the same amount of time, so you just hide the "extra" time, often by putting it to a nonbillable file or not docketing it at all). This is one of the key burnout factors in my opinion. Associates are working like dogs, and at the end of the year the partners are like, your hours are okay but not amazing. And that's super demoralizing and just makes people want to quit. I think this is happening more lately because of the massive increase in volume of non-productive email which takes time to review, sort and file but doesn't accomplish anything. It's much more noticeable if you work on lots of files in a day, which makes it harder to "hide" the organizational time in a bigger matter.


As a junior associate, this is a huge struggle! But why is there an increase in all that non-billable time? What were people doing 10 - 20 years ago? I imagine there would still be ton of non-productive correspondence that requires review, sort and file.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

C_Terror
  • Lawyer

All very valid points re:younger associates just realising it's not worth it to be in big law

Billable targets has gone up for big law as well, from 1600 ish for the sisters around 10-15 years ago to 1800 now, and to achieve the full bonus, a lot of firms are expecting close to 2000 hours a year. 

Which, imo is garbage, especially if you're in corporate law, and work with bankers, who work as much as you but have much higher bonus thresholds. 

Another thing is that the business model is very unfriendly to associates, and more and more are catching on to that, especially in a world of tech and RSUs (aka grow with your company). If you're an associate, why do you care how well your firm does year after year? As long as you hit your max bonus billables, there's no incentive to do anything more. From years 1 to 9, you can be a super star associate, but you'll always be awarded the same 20-30% bonus and more work. (The prize of good work at a law firm is, of course, more work). All this while working ridiculous hours because of the flawed billables compensation system. After 9 years, (of which, you're expected to bill 2100+ the last three years to prove you're partnership material), the partnership committee then either invites you in (and then you're defacto income partner for 3-4 years then), or you get pushed out. 

At 8th year associate at a sister firm, you can probably expect 300-350k total comp, which is a lot. But is it really, when you compare roles in professions like ibanking (where you don't need to go to law school and article), where at 4-5 years in you are earning that same salary with much higher upside based on the deals they're on, or tech, where RSUs and equity incentivizes tech workers to grow with their companies, or even in house where you're maybe capped at 200-250k but you work reasonable hours? Then you add on to the red hot US associates market where a first year US associate (the equivalent of an ARTICLING student) making as much as an 8th year here, working the same amount, in a city where cost of living has skyrocketed.

The way I see it is that life of an associate sucks in private practice and you can have a much better life in terms of compensation Vs work life balance in other comparable industries. The only reason to stay is to grind it out in 10-14 years to become equity partners for the big money, but more and more associates don't think grinding a decade, decade and a half to hit the eye popping salary to be worth it. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It wasn't 1600 hours 10-15 years ago. That's when I was at a big firm, and it was more like 1750-1800.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rashabon
  • Lawyer

It's always weird to me when non-law jobs are brought up as comparators. Why is tech or ibanking a comparator for a big law associate to even look to? You're not working in those industries. You might as well say being an NHL athlete is better than being a big law associate.

  • Like 3
  • Nom! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Snax
  • Lawyer
31 minutes ago, Rashabon said:

It's always weird to me when non-law jobs are brought up as comparators. Why is tech or ibanking a comparator for a big law associate to even look to? You're not working in those industries. You might as well say being an NHL athlete is better than being a big law associate.

I know what you’re saying in that comparisons between industries aren’t that useful, but I think those comparisons are relatively fair in this context. Most lawyers, especially those intelligent enough and who posses a strong enough work ethic to get positions in big law for the most part would have been able to pursue those careers had they chosen to do so prior to pursuing law.  Effectively, it’s a comparison to foregone opportunities, which I think is fair.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

C_Terror
  • Lawyer
39 minutes ago, Rashabon said:

It's always weird to me when non-law jobs are brought up as comparators. Why is tech or ibanking a comparator for a big law associate to even look to? You're not working in those industries. You might as well say being an NHL athlete is better than being a big law associate.

These professions are law adjacent, and client facing, and big law associates often lateral into finance or tech if they decide to opt out of the legal profession, so these are valid professions to compare to. I suppose I can also include management consulting in the mix, but based off of my friends there, it's just as bad as law.

Besides, what's the point in comparing to just firms within the street, when we all know they're all lockstep with each other, and slow to change? I haven't seen any big law associates lateral to the Leafs yet, but until then, I'd say these are pretty valid industry comparisons. 

  • Like 2
  • LOL 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

CleanHands
  • Lawyer
12 hours ago, Snax said:

Most lawyers, especially those intelligent enough and who posses a strong enough work ethic to get positions in big law

lol

  • LOL 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

C_Terror
  • Lawyer
14 hours ago, Jaggers said:

It wasn't 1600 hours 10-15 years ago. That's when I was at a big firm, and it was more like 1750-1800.

Did the math wrong. Partners  told me that their target as associates were in the 1600 range in the early to mid 2000s, which would be closer to 15-20 years ago. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Snax
  • Lawyer
11 minutes ago, CleanHands said:

lol

It’s not a comment that all other lawyers are unintelligent and don’t posses a strong work ethic. It’s a statement that those lawyers, as most lawyers do, have foregone other opportunities available to then when they decided to pursue law. The whole conversation here has been around big law lawyers, not the profession as a whole.

I think that’s pretty obvious, but I should know by now that saying anything along the lines of “big law lawyers are good at …” is basically heresy here. Sigh. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By accessing this website, you agree to abide by our Terms of Use. YOU EXPRESSLY ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT YOU WILL NOT CONSTRUE ANY POST ON THIS WEBSITE AS PROVIDING LEGAL ADVICE EVEN IF SUCH POST IS MADE BY A PERSON CLAIMING TO BE A LAWYER. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.