Archive for November, 2008

This year, more than 100,000 unpublished and published writers – lawyers among them – were expected to accept the National Novel Writing Month challenge ending at midnight tonight. And the challenge? Oh, nothing much: just complete a 50,000-word novel between Nov. 1st and Nov. 30th. That’s right, write a book-length piece of fiction in 30 days! Writing novels isn’t for sissies. Just ask lawyer/writer Kimberly Alderman, one of the few lawyer/writers to meet the NaNoWrimo challege, and whose work is excerpted here:

THE LONG WINTER

Backstory: After a global economic collapse, an Outsider named Kilaun shows up in a remote Alaskan village offering a better life for its inhabitants. This is the story of the residents of that village living, learning, and coping over the course of a single, long winter.

“Chu was in a mindless, trekking state as he plunged his walking stick into the snow. It stopped suddenly, a foot or two higher than he expected. He was thrown off balance, and the embankment cracked from the disturbance. As he stumbled forward, he thought he saw the ground moving. Indeed he did. He steadied himself and realized that the earth was rising up to meet him. But it wasn’t just snow, it was a large animal that Chu had most unceremoniously awoken with a poke in the rear end. The grizz stumbled to her feet and roared furiously, half-confused and half-angry, but all ready to fight.

“Chu tried to untangle himself from the pile of steel traps he was carrying but had no luck. Every movement caused them to clang together, attracting the attention of the groggy bear. He did a quick visual survey, but saw no trees big enough to climb within sprinting distance. He backed up slowly, trying to get out of sight of the beast, knowing that disappearing from view was unlikely. Chu reached for his hunting knife, pushing aside the lifeless rabbits roped to his belt. The bear turned to face him and …

– Sample chapter at writingkimberly.wordpress.com

– Ms. Alderman (Howard University School of Law, 2006) is a contract attorney and cultural property law scholar living in remote Alaska. She completed her 50,045-word NaNoWrimo novel four days ahead of deadline. For more about National Novel Writing Month, go to www.nanowrimo.com.

Recruiters and law firm leaders say the recent dissolution of several prominent law firms has flooded the lateral market with attorneys in need of employment. And uncertain financial futures at a number of firms are prodding many attorneys to consider their options elsewhere.

So, is this a time to go in-house?

Corporate lawyer-turned-law career consultant Cheryl Heisler explores the pros and cons in this essay for LawyerAvenue:

It was once in vogue for big firm lawyers to look down their noses at in-house counsel positions. The work was viewed as “less challenging”; the salary treated as “paltry”, and the pace billed negatively as a “life-style choice.” How times have changed!

While most in-house attorneys still earn less than their law firm counterparts (General Counsel not withstanding,) the irony is that on an hourly basis – and in terms of overall job satisfaction – they come out way ahead.

In my career consulting practice, I see far fewer in-house attorneys than I do firm lawyers, and their issues usually arise out of corporate bureaucracy, crazy bosses and layoffs than their actual dislike of legal practice. What I most often hear from in-house lawyers is that they basically like what they do.

* They have greater control over their schedules than their firm counterparts.
* They develop on-going relationships with their company “clients,” allowing for easier dialogue about how both business and legal issues can be satisfactorily resolved.
* They really enjoy knowing and understanding what makes the business tick, and they like being able to offer proactive legal advice. In fact, they like the business issues so much that they try and negotiate their way over to the business side, willingly trading in their time sheets for spreadsheets.

On the other hand …

From my experience, in-house lawyers start to experience major frustration when the corporate “crap” hits the fan. In larger companies, multiple reorganizations, constantly changing management, and endless projects, directives, and peer reviews can drive an in-house attorney nuts. Since most in-house counsel spent some part of their formative training in law firms, they remember the joy of not having to handle this kind of administrivia while in private practice. Sure, they had to keep time sheets, but many corporations still require their lawyers to “bill” or at least account for how they spend their time so that doesn’t count as a trade-off.

In-house lawyers are also frustrated by the increased levels of job insecurity. Especially in this economy.

If you are a firm lawyer, with good legal skills and control a fair amount of business, you will always work. Not so on the corporate side. Even if you are a great lawyer, with superior client relationships, you are only as safe as the state of the business for which you work. In other words, if your business tanks, or gets merged or bought out, you can pretty accurately predict that your services will no longer be needed.

It may feel better to know that you lost your job for business reasons rather than for personal ones, but once you’re on the street the reality is the same. Even worse, prospective corporate employers often identify you with the industry for which you last worked. If your last in-house job was with a manufacturing company, you may be branded as someone who can only work in manufacturing. Same for insurance, health-care, financial services, or real estate. Finally, in-house attorneys, no matter how well-respected, will always be an expense and never a profit center. When the times call for cost-cutting, as is happening now, legal becomes an attractive target. To paraphrase Shakespeare, “The first thing we do, is let’s fire all the lawyers.”

Things could be worse

If you are an unhappy in-house lawyer, you should know that there are dozens of miserable law firm attorneys who at this very moment covet your position. That may not be much consolation, but it is interesting to know. It also doesn’t explain why your search can be tough. Let’s start with the obvious; if you’ve been in-house for some time, you probably don’t have much of a book of business, making you fairly unattractive to the law firm market. The exception is if you do leave your job with a chunk of the company’s legal business. Then you have MUCH to offer to a firm and they will likely come courting you. Either way, if you already left private practice in the hopes that corporate law would offer a better fit for you, then you probably don’t want to go back in the law firm direction.

If you are hoping to transition to another in-house position, expect another set of obstacles. The industry you come from sticks like Velcro, and it may be tough to break out away. Making matters worse, if you are moving because your current industry has experienced cutbacks, other companies in the industry are probably feeling the same pinch, and jobs will be tight across the market. Also, as we’ve seen with other segments of the legal population, the more experienced (and expensive) you are, the fewer the slots available.

Watch out for red flags

Another strange component of the corporate legal market is that the longer you have been with any one company, the less desirable you are as a lateral hire. You may have all the expertise in the world, but if you haven’t put that expertise to work in assorted roles for a variety of companies you may be perceived as complacent/not a “go-getter.” A future employer may wonder if you will be too set in the ways of your former company to ever adapt to the ways of the new organization.

In-house legal departments are often quite close-knit, making breaking-in difficult. Sometimes you have to interview with, and be liked by, everyone in an existing group before you can even move on to the next level. As a job hunter, this should be a red flag. Joining a department where “group think” is the required norm may prove to be a little confining.

Even in the best of times, corporate hiring can move excruciatingly slowly. You can’t just meet the legal department over lunch and join the gang. HR has to get involved. There may be personality or assessment or drug tests to take. Maybe background checks. There will certainly be references required. If a recruiter was involved, there will be fees to be considered. Your compensation package will have to fit within the appropriate “band,” meaning that you can’t get paid that much more or less than anyone else at your level. And then there is always the infuriating “internal candidate” who shows up at the 11th hour and gets priority consideration.

Despite all the hang-ups, in-house attorneys with whom I consulted did choose to stay in-house and did manage to re-connect with other legal departments. Their searches did take a while, though, and often involved relocation and a decrease in compensation.

– Heisler (www.Lawternatives.com), a Chicago-based law career consultant.

The National Law Journal reports that the legal sector continues to bleed jobs. 2,200 jobs in August, 1,600 in September, and 1,100 vanished in October. So far, the profession is down by nearly 16,000 jobs compared to a year ago. But what about lawyers who remain employed, but who would rather do SOMETHING else?

Law career consultant Dave Behrend discusses one such group:

“Every day,” writes Behrend, “Thousands of thirty- to forty-something associates go to work unhappy and unstimulated. They’ve practiced law 12 to 15 years and, even though many of them are well-compensated, they don’t have a passion for their work anymore, their careers are going nowhere, and they’re sacrificing their personal lives just to meet the increasing billable hour requirements.

Sadder still, he says, these young lawyers bring home all the distress and heightened agitation of their work. And it affects their families and the significant others in their lives.”

There’s hope, though, says Behrend, a national law career consultant for more than 20 years. Even the unhappiest associate (or in-house counsel or government lawyer) can discover if the Act II of their career is in some other setting. But the answer only comes with honest self-reflection.

* Are you still getting assignments/cases commensurate with your skill level … or not?
* Are there reasons you might not be measuring up to the firm’s expectations?
* Is your practice group overlooking you, and why might that be so?
* Is there less work available now because of the economic downturn … or for some other reason?
* How likely is it that you will make partner when you factor in all the associates at your firm?

Behrend’s message to clients is that no matter how much money they make, there are few things worse than going to work every day without energy, enthusiasm, or enjoyment.

He says these are times to be brutally honest with yourself and ask, “Have I stayed too long at (the firm or in-house)? If you don’t believe you’re challenged where you are, if you sincerely believe your skill-set, knowledge, and business-development capabilities could be better suited in another setting, then the chances are your Act II is waiting for you somewhere else.

– Behrend, based in Philadelphia, has a national career coaching practice. For contact information, click on Careers (Avenue Resources) and go to the Career Counselor Locator (Pennsylvania).

The stock market fell to a six-year low today, taking it with it all gains made since 2002! Which raises two questions: “Where’s the bottom“, and “What happened to my next egg?” Not even Warren Buffett can answer the first, but the second is a little easier.

With an online financial calculator, you can actually simulate how well your nest egg may be doing. And it’s free! There are many good financial calculators online, and the Wall Street Journal reports that the best ones are getting quite a workout these days. One of the best is hosted by T. Rowe Price, the Baltimore-based mutual funds company. In about 10 minutes – after plugging in the latest information about your earnings, savings, and household budget – you can learn how much income your nest egg will generate in the years ahead. Check it out: www.troweprice.com/ric. We can also recommend two sources for online calculators: One is at www.AARP.org (click on Money). The other is at www.ChoosetoSave.org, hosted by the Employee Benefit Research Institute, a Washington DC-based financial research group. Click on “Calculator” on the toolbar, and you get to choose from dozens of online calculators for bonds, mutual funds, retirement, Social Security, taxes, and more.

With just 11 weeks to go before Barack Obama’s inauguration, there’s already talk of a “Barack effect” inspiring a new wave of enthusiasm for government and public sector jobs among lawyers and law students. The National Law Journal this week quoted David Stern, executive director of Equal Justice Works, a nonprofit organization that promotes public service law, that he believes the Obama administration will create a pipeline from law schools and Biglaw to government law. “Years ago, when Kennedy was president,” said Stern, “People looked at public service as a noble calling. I think we’re going to see a similar resurgence. I think we will see some attorneys who say, ‘This is my opportunity to do something for the world.’” For a list of government and public interest law Web sites, go to our Avenue Resources, click on Career and go to The Job Bank.

These days Wall Street’s employment woes seem to equal law firms’ losses. As business dries up in certain practice areas, firm managers are facing tough decisions. If you’ve already lost your job … or will soon be unemployed … you need to get up to speed on your health insurance options. Chief among them is COBRA, the federal law that lets you continue your employer-sponsored health plan for some 18 months in the event of a layoff. But is it the right option for you? Maybe not, says the Wall Street Journal. If someone covered by your current plan is pregnant, or has a pre-existing condition, or is taking prescription medications, COBRA may be a good option … but an expensive one. Under COBRA you’re responsible for the previously subsidized premium plus a two percent administration fee. If you’re relatively healthy, though, there are cheaper alternatives. If you have a pre-existing condition, choose COBRA for yourself, but look around for a less expensive plan for your spouse and/or child.