What is life like working as an in-house lawyer?
Posted Feb 28, 2021, 7:05 AM UTC
526
Meetings. Too many meetings? Let's book in a meeting to discuss.
11
Mostly good, and then also bad at times.
7
Why's that?
2
why the follow up? I was trying to be glib lol
however a quick summary, the Good - no billables, genuinely a 9-5 job (usually), interesting work, mostly good people.
the Bad - less money than private practice, stuck with the same ppl as clients all the time, similar issues pop up frequently, and internal clients can have interesting and wrong ideas of what a lawyer can solve, so education takes up a bit of time each week - but that last one may not be so different from private.
7
Agree except for less money. Less money overall - sure - the ceiling is a lot lower. But up until low senior associate you’ll get more in house. And the hours more than make up for it!
10
Yeah the pay/lifestyle equation definitely works for me in house but if you’re dreaming of proper big bucks it may not be the way to go
2
genuinely a 9-5 job
Cries in Treasury Laws Amendment (Design and Distribution Obligations and Product Intervention Powers) Act 2019
8
DDO is coming for us all
2
As a contrasting opinion, I find the same issues popping up as a positive - less stressful if you have experience in similar issues previously (although obviously less interesting).
2
More autonomy. More responsibility.
Worst part: can't sack the client.
7
I feel this is the best summary.
It can be good, great, terrible, laughable and frustrating and still extremely stimulating.
Clients don’t always value your time as they sometimes see you as an on call (free) goon to fight their petty battles and attend meetings about non legal issues or a hand holder. At the same time those clients generally respect and value your input and you get opportunities to delve into real discussions about important business considerations that deepen your understanding of how big organisations work. You are required to provide practical, actionable legal advice. Prevarication is not well regarded.
Personally I have found it much more interesting and rewarding than private practice but the politics can be difficult to navigate.
Private practitioners might diss it but you don’t know what you don’t know.
Personally I think a private practitioner who hasn’t worked in house or has a long term client relationship where they “get it” can’t offer the same quality of advice as those who do, or make the effort to connect in those ways.
5
Agree on your last point. Many pps tell me how good they are in the field but when put into action, they are complete crap. Intellectual Property is definitely the main offender here. Many pps cant draft a simple licence without fucking it up.
3
I’m not a highly technical field (advisory/disputes) but I still find the firm offerings completely interchangeable. If they don’t understand our ethos I am purely picking an appropriate temperament to be the intermediary.
2
!indahouse
6
All the lawyers in the house say yooooo!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
8
Casual Shirt Friday loses its significance because people aren't dressed like lawyers 4/5 days of the week.
4
A million times better than private practice.
My opinion and input is valued (or appears to be), far more autonomy, no billable hours.
However, you also get the people who make you feel like a giant red pen just existing to 'tick off' documents, and you do an awful lot of hand holding where questions have little to do with legal, but they just want legal to know about it/be present.
Also have somehow become the guardian of the delegation policy and strongly suspect I may be the only person who has read the damn thing.
Will never go back to private practice.
4
I can definitely see why you'll never return to private practice. I'm happy for you!
I've got two more questions:
-
Is it possible to go straight into in-house after law school, or would I need some experience in private practice beforehand?
-
What is the salary like working in-house?
2
To answer your questions:
-
Possibly but I believe the normal route is to gain experience in private practice first. I was 5 years PAE when I made the jump.
-
My salary is more than I was earning in private practice but due to working in the public sector less than I would be earning in-house in the private sector. It varies by sector, location, experience level etc, but there's also the non-salary benefits of no billable hours, improved work/life balance etc
1
Thanks for your submission.
If this comment has been upvoted it is likely that your post includes a request for legal advice. Legal advice is not provided in this subreddit (please see this comment for an explanation why.) If you feel you need advice from a lawyer please check out this thread for a list of places where you can contact one (including some free resources).
It is expected all users of r/auslaw will not respond inappropriately to requests for legal advice, no matter how egregious.
This comment is automatically posted in every text submission made in r/auslaw and does not necessarily mean that your post includes a request for legal advice.
Please enjoy your stay.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
0
Have been in both top tier and IH.
Far more autonomy, far less stress and far better hours in house. And my boss cares about my progress and interests and development rather than the hours I work.