I was tempted by (in no particular order):
- The salary.
- My friends. Wouldn't it be fun to practice among friends again?
- The location. The partner lead by offering that I would be able to work from my hometown. No relocation required.
- The brand. Better brand than my current firm.
- The platform. I could return to cross-border deals, which is exciting, but also tough on an associate's sleep schedule.
- Some continuity. A lot is lost in a lateral move, but this move would offer some continuity in that at least one of my working relationships would remain intact.
- The maternity leave. Standard Big Law maternity leave policy, which outshines the unpaid leave policy at the new job I had intended to take.
I was turned off by:
- Internal politics. Concerns related to continued post-merger growing pains.
- Long-term prospects. This would be a 2-3 year job since I don't believe there was real partnership opportunity.
- The schedule. Getting out of the Austin to Dallas commute helps a lot, but it's still a Big Law schedule. I'd already given a lot of thought to how I planned to spend my personal time once I started the new job.
The most important issue that I identified was whether extending my law firm career would meaningfully improve my job prospects post-Big Law. To sort this out, I reached out to friends who are already in house. Their advice was consistent--two more years in a firm was unlikely to meaningfully improve my job prospects and that I should stick with my plans to start new job. None of them regretted their decision to leave the law firm environment. They remembered what it was like to hesitate/worry about making the leap, but each and every one encouraged me to jump and never look back.
Still, I worry about leaving money on the table (and all the news regarding the shifting Big Law salary scale hasn't helped in this regard).
Still, I worry about leaving money on the table (and all the news regarding the shifting Big Law salary scale hasn't helped in this regard).
No comments:
Post a Comment