We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
Would love to hear insights about in house work + companies which have decent culture.
My take is that inhouse does have equally long work hours, I guess 80% of a law firm. But the big difference is the TYPE of work, the RIGOUR, the PAY and the STRESS levels.
Work TYPE is usually more than a law firm because all kinds of queries get directed to legal. In some big inhouse teams like ICICI or Yes Bank there may be specialised legal teams for specific queries but generally policy, tax, litigation, contracts, compliance - all go to legal. In a law firm the types of work is more narrow and more specialised.
RIGOUR is a big deal in a law firm. People can be fired for wrong legal research, mistakes in documents and other goof ups. As an associate or a partner the work has to be done more meticulously and people will notice mistakes and act on that. Inhouse lawyers get away with all kinds of nonsense. Bad work may result in a poor bonus and being pulled up by the boss but theres not much else - nobody will be asked to leave or punished. Due to this STRESS levels are insane in law firms compared to inhouse and the atmosphere is more competitive.
PAY is far far more in law firms than inhouse though a few GC positions may have good salaries.
The work like balance absolutely cannot be compared for the average in-house role and the average good law firm role. Even PE / VC funds in-house counsels (on an average) don't have it as bad as an equivalent PQE lawyer in a firm.
I recently worked on a rather hectic and complex funding round and kept the sort of hours I was used to doing in my last firm for about a month and it really made me realise why I'm so much happier for having left that life.
1. Exposure: not a good place to be in especially you are starting your career. It is likely that you will spend majority of time in compliance or review of useless policies. If you spend initial 5 years as in-house counsel, it is unlikely that you will be able to shift to law firms. On the other hand, you will have great exposure in law firm and whatever your practice areas is, you will learn better.
2. Earning: Law firms pay significantly higher than in house ( legal department is a cost centre there). This couple with high taxes, your take home will be significantly less than law firm earnings. In law firm, you will make enough money in long run ( money = happiness).
3. Career Shift: An experienced law firm resource can easily shift to in house.
Now coming to cons, law firms are not known to offer great work life balance. However there is no guarantee that you will have work like balance in in-house job (at least I never had).
So play a big game. Go to law firm. I am sure you will come over anxiety issues.