Who’s in Demand for In-House Counsel Positions?
A new survey shows senior level lawyers are in particularly high demand for in-house counsel positions. The survey, by New York legal consulting firm Eoilis International Group, found an increase in attorney interviews at big corporations last year and, among them, were interviews of senior level lawyers and law firm partners.
Why Are Senior-Level Attorneys in Demand?
This is not surprising considering the state of the legal market. There is a plethora of highly skilled attorneys looking for work, and companies are taking full advantage of this market. They are seeking to hire experienced counsel, sometimes at junior-level prices, simply because they can. Also, law firms have not delivered the type of cost-savings companies were expecting during the downturn, and as a result companies have decided to take the legal work in-house and enjoy the savings.
Historically, in-house legal departments have not been good training grounds for attorneys, which is still the case today. Company lawyers are part of the “overhead,” and therefore they must quickly add value to an organization to justify their existence. They do this by being able to work independently, with few resources, on a wide variety of matters. These are typically the traits of senior level attorneys who have been practicing for ten years or more. These attorneys have extensive practice area, management, and business experience all rolled into one. They not only know how to practice law, but they know how to manage people and budgets.
What Else Are Companies Looking For?
According to the survey, in-house positions weren’t the only jobs up for grabs at big corporations. 38% of companies surveyed reported considering experienced attorneys for a wide range of positions, including quasi-legal and business roles. This study signifies two things: Corporations are hiring, BUT their in-house legal departments are looking for experienced lawyers who understand private practice.
"In-house departments are in the process of trying to revamp their images," says Nicky Mukerji, director of business intelligence at LegalBill. "Presenting hires with both legal and business experience sends a strong message to corporate executives and financial departments that law departments will be capable of handling all aspects of their caseloads."
What’s a Recent Graduate or Junior-Level Attorney To Do?
Do not set yourself up for failure by applying to in-house positions for which you are not ready. Get experience with a law firm first. In-house legal departments do not hire attorneys without substantive experience, which is usually translates to at least five years of experience. Moreover, all types of legal experience is not viewed the same by in-house legal departments. Companies tend to favor law firm-trained attorneys over those with government or private practice experience. Companies almost never hire solo practitioners. Companies also do not favor hiring government attorneys either, unless they have the type of regulatory experience that matches their industry. Finally, the great majority of in-house positions are in transactional practice areas, not litigation. Litigation positions are very rare and often reserved for partner-level candidates. If you want to improve your chances of landing an in-house job, focus on transactional practice areas with a law firm.
What’s a Mid-Level Attorney To Do In Today's Job Market?
They need to wait for the market to improve and bulk up on their skills in the meantime. Being a very good attorney is no longer good enough to land an in-house position. You have to be versatile, adaptable, and efficient and know the business and industry of the companies you are targeting. Forget the general counsel position or golden job at a Fortune 500, at least for now. Instead, go for in-house counsel positions that allow for upward mobility, and refocus on small-to-medium-sized corporations in industries in which you have experience. In other words bid your time, try to get your foot in the door at a smaller organization and in a more junior-level role, and stand out by virtue of your work and business skills.
What About Senior-Level Attorneys and Partners?
It’s not a panacea for them either. While experienced partners and attorneys are always more attractive to executives and general counsels, chances are unless you’ve already been a general counsel, not many companies will give you a shot at the top job unless you’ve already proven yourself. It’s a chicken and egg dilemma. This can be overcome by a strong show of the skills and experiences we discussed above. That said, it’s still a very competitive market, so be ready for a long process ahead.
There are still very few positions available and the requirements are increasingly demanding. You need to be able to do it all, be an expert in your field, knowledgeable in a variety of other practice areas, know how to manage, train and hire people, manage outside counsels, balance budgets effectively, and understand the business of the company. Oh, and be ready for a steep pay cut.
While Fortune 500 companies may still pay their general counsel handsomely, the odds of landing that kind of position is akin to winning the lottery. The vast majority of in-house positions are not with Fortune 500 companies, and do not come with a high compensation package. That’s right, companies do not pay law firm salaries, and the compensation cuts from a law firm partner to an in-house legal position, even at the general counsel level, are on average about 50%, no matter how talented the candidate. While you may be ready for a pay cut, the real question is, how low can you go? If you are lucky enough to be selected for a position, be ready to make significant concessions to go to the in-house side.
The Ice Age of In-House Legal Hiring Might Be Over
How long can in-house legal departments go on without hiring? As the last economic storm demonstrated, hiring freezes can last a pretty long time. But according to a recent report by InsideCounsel, the ice age of in-house legal hiring may be thawing out.
How Much hiring Are We Talking About?
While not everyone is exactly in agreement, the general consensus seems to be that hiring is nevertheless on the rise.
Hildebrandt Baker Robbins’ 2010 Law Department Survey reports that 41% of law departments expect an increase in lawyers between 2010 and 2011. Robert Half 's recent survey reported 29-31% of legal employers planning on increasing their numbers. No matter the source, over 50% of all legal departments are not planning to hire.
At least, they are no longer in a firing mood. Only about 8-9% expect a decrease, which is an improvement over 30% between 2008 and 2009 according to the same Hildebrandt survey.
No one expects any type of hiring frenzy, or even levels to get back to pre-recession levels, but at least the bleeding is over, and legal departments may be growing weary of doing “more with less,” at least to some extent. Companies that downsized a bit too much to survive the recession may still be enjoying the savings.
It will be difficult to get senior management to buy into an increase in headcount, unless they have very compelling reasons to do so. Chances are, in-house legal department that are ready to increase their capabilities will go into hiring toe first, starting with temporary and contract hires to test out the waters.
What’s The Hiring Like In-House?
In-house employers are demanding more, for less. In other words, they are favoring candidates with more experience, often hiring candidates with 5-10 years more experience than the minimum required for the position. At the same time, they have no qualms about offering the same senior candidates lower level salaries that were initially calculated for someone 5-10 years more junior. And they can getaway with it. It’s all about supply and demand.
The market is flooded with applicants. It’s not just a numbers game; the applicant pool is also very deep. The skill level of those being considered for in-house positions is astonishing. In-house employers are not only demanding more experience and better credentials for less money, but also more practice breadth and depth. Potential candidates need to be experts in their practice area, as well as be able to practice in a multitude of other areas. They are "jacks of all trade, and at least master of one." In-house candidates are also required to have industry-specific experience, strong business backgrounds, and excellent interpersonal skills. They have to be the “total package.”
While the in-house job market is heating up, there’s still a disparity between the number of job openings and the number of applicants. Therefore, for those seeking in-house jobs, patience is key. What can in-house legal job seekers do to improve their chances? Continue to work on their skill set, network, and keep their ears and eyes open. While the ice may be melting, it's still very slippery out there, and not everyone will land on their feet just yet.
In-House Legal Departments & Salary Reports for 2011
Now that the dust has settled from the economic tumble of 2008, where are in-house legal departments today? InsideCounsel explores the state of in-house legal departments, including in-house compensation.
With most economic experts declaring the recession over—the aftereffects of the crash are evident across all corporate sectors, including in-house legal departments. Staffs are smaller, workloads are heavier, budgets are tighter and salaries are somewhat stagnant.
Having to adjust quickly to the changes—whether they liked them or not—was essential for survival, notes Vanessa Vidal, president of ESQ Recruiting. "There is a sense of resignation and acceptance when it comes to low base salaries and freezes," she says. "Counsel have no choice in the matter, because no one else is offering anything different, and jobs remain hard to come by."
What Are Salaries Like?
In 2010, according to Hildebrandt’s annual law department salary survey, the average base salary for all attorney levels in-house was approximately $174,000. The median was even lower at about $167,000. While such six-figure salaries are nothing to sneeze at, it can be difficult for in-house counsel to suppress the sniffles when comparing those figures to law firm salaries. According to the 2011 Robert Half Legal Salary Guide, first-year associates at large law firms will earn, on average, between $107,250 and $132,000 this year. When a first-year associate can make nearly the same salary as an experienced in-house attorney, it’s easy to wonder why anyone would go in-house.
Robert Major, founding partner at Major, Lindsey & Africa, says it’s actually the overwhelming demand among lawyers to go in-house, though, that keeps the salary gap so wide. Since this is a “supply and demand” issue, with many lawyers going after few in-house positions, the gap is likely to remain.
The most highly compensated practice area in Hildebrandt’s survey was mergers and acquisitions. Intellectual property lawyers specializing in licensing earned the second largest amount of money. They also had the highest median base salary, $193,738. Lawyers specializing in securities litigation saw the largest median base salary increase (3.3 percent), as well as the largest median cash bonuses, which amounted to $71,000.
What Are the “Hot” Practice Areas?
Accordign to Robert Half Legal, companies continue to look for lawyers with business-development skills and strong interpersonal. Litigation, bankruptcy and foreclosure continue to drive the need for bringing on new talent.
Vanessa Vidal, president of ESQ Recruiting, says that companies looking for new growth will likely consider small acquisitions as opposed to multibillion-dollar deals, which will mean an overall uptick in M&A activity over the next couple years. "Some of the bigger deals will most likely occur in consolidating industries, such as energy and health care," she says. Vidal also predicts that "emerging markets will lead the M&A surge in 2011, with Asia in the lead."
What Does It Take to “Shine” In-House?
Michael Melbinger, a partner at Winston & Strawn and chair of the firm’s employee benefits and executive compensation practice, says that "The No. 1 skill that we see [being rewarded] is the ability to minimize the use of outside counsel," says Melbinger. "Companies are rewarding legal departments that are able to do the work themselves and build their skills. Sometimes this means spending more hours and taking on more work with fewer people. But what it comes down to is that if he or she can save money, then that should be rewarded."
Vanessa Vidal, president of ESQ Recruiting, says companies are frequently recognizing counsel who demonstrate flexibility and adaptability. "They are what I call the ‘MacGyvers’ of the legal world—counsel who can come up with creative strategies to accomplish their goals with few resources available," she says.
Can We Talk Bonus?
Scanning through Hildebrandt’s annual law department salary survey, one data set practically pops off the page. Bonuses, the survey results indicate, have jumped an average of 73.5 percent between 2009 and 2010. Even the significantly lower median increase of 10.2 percent is enough to make jaws drop in envy. But it looks like these figures are just a return to standard levels after a recession-motivated low in 2009, cautions Lauren Chung, director in the law department consulting practice at Hildebrandt. Today, bonuses tend to be set and non-negotiable, just like base salaries.
What About Long-Term Incentives?
They’re baack! Long-term incentives—deferred compensation such as stock and equity—may not have returned to pre-recession levels, but they’re likely to become increasingly important components of compensation packages in years to come.
InsideCounsel, "In-House Salary Report," by Kayleigh Roberts and Ashley Trent, February 2011 Issue.
In-House IP Law To Sizzle in 2011
Intellectual Property Law Will Be a "Hot" In-House Practice for 2011.
IP attorneys around the country can rejoice, as intellectual property promises to be sizzling in the New Year. Intellectual property is an organization’s most valuable asset, and securing that asset has made intellectual property a recession-proof practice. When the economy declines, it usually forces companies to think “outside the box” and look for new products, inventions, or ideas.
This usually translates into an increase in services to help protect the intellectual capital of these companies. Invention and innovation is what keeps companies competitive, and intellectual property lawyers, paralegals, and other professionals very busy. High tech companies are in the business of invention and innovation, and they are the main consumers of intellectual property services.
What Kind of In-House IP Attorneys are Companies Looking For?
As is the case with most in-house counsel hires these days, legal departments increasingly need lawyers who not only possess the requisite IP skills, but who are able to work across a lot of boundaries in the corporation. Today, to succeed as an in-house IP counsel, you not only need to be an accomplished IP attorney, but fully understand the business, and be able to provide business advice as well.
The new in-house IP counsel is one that can as easily handle a trademark application, but also be able to provide strategic advice to business executives on areas such as mergers and acquisitions and divestitures. Today's IP counsel needs to be business savvy, and have the people skills to effectively counsel senior executives on a wider array of matters.
What can IP counsels, or soon to be in-house IP counsel, do to succeed in this new environment? Get plenty of corporate business experience. The straight road from engineering to law school may not be the most effective route to becoming the type of IP counsel legal departments are looking for. Take the time to smell the "corporate roses" first. Getting good business experience is the key to making yourself attractive and succeed in this new in-house environment.
Are You Ready to Go In-House?
If I had a dollar for every time I heard a law firm attorney tell me “I want to go in-house,” I would be enjoying my retirement on a tropical island in the South Pacific. The allure of taking one’s practice in-house is understandable, and in many cases, quite appropriate.
The opportunity to take an active role in a client's business decisions, to focus on the growth of one client and one industry, to part with billable hour requirements and business development responsibilities, and operate within a more predictable and sometimes less taxing schedule, are all very compelling reasons to make that transition. But how do you know whether you are ready to make the move in-house?
There is a notable difference in wanting to go in-house and being ready to go in-house. No matter how enticing the opportunity might turn out to be; unless you are truly ready for it, it might not be the successful transition you were hoping for. How do you know whether you are ready? Here are some questions to consider in determining whether you are ready to make that leap in-house:
Do You Have the Experience?
When you consider that 80% of associates leave private practice by their fifth year of practice (NALP), it is not surprising to see a number of junior associates banging on corporate doors to transition in-house. Obviously most in-house job postings will include the minimum level of experience required for the position – but is meeting the minimum requirement enough? Not necessarily.
Companies that hire in-house counsels are looking for attorneys who are self-sufficient, who can work independently, with little support, and almost no supervision. Sounds like an ideal proposition? Yes, but consider the following: this also means that corporate legal departments are not good training grounds either. This is not a place where you will be taught skills, or have much of an opportunity to learn from more senior counsel. It will be assumed that you are already skilled in your practice area, can handle all of the documentation and processes that come with it, can provide strategic advice to your company, and can oversee the legal work of potentially more experienced outside counsels.
In light of what companies expect from their attorneys, it is recommended that you stay in private practice for at least five (5) years before you consider making a transition in-house. While the level of responsibility and training tends to vary on an individual basis, and from firm to firm; this minimum threshold can at least ensure that you have had the opportunity to be exposed to the various documentation and processes of your practice area.
While law firms continue to have a dubious reputation in terms of the quality of their training, they remain the best place for junior attorneys to acquire experience and develop legal skills. Corporate legal departments for the most parts are thinly staffed, and therefore provide you with more limited access to experienced counsels (and sometimes no access whatsoever) to whom you could go for support or advice. And remember, if you are thinking about picking up the phone to call an outside counsel to get advice, it will cost you and your company. Corporate legal departments operate under strict budgets – they do not provide for this type of on-the-job training. Corporate legal departments also tend to work with fewer resources, in terms of libraries, software programs, continuing legal education programs etc. Finally, the work you will be required to handle in-house, will demand that you not only be able to draft, revise, and negotiate or explain the various documents associated with the transaction or litigation matter, but that you take it a step further and advise your client on what strategy and steps they need to take to meet their business objectives.
The longer you stay in private practice, the more valuable you will become to a company, and the more likely you will be able to succeed in-house. The best time to transition your practice in-house is generally between your fifth year and tenth year of practice, or right before partnership. Why before partnership? Because by the time you make it to partnership, you may have become either too expensive, or too dependent on your high compensation package, to be able or ready to absorb the salary cut you will need to take when moving in-house.
Are You Ready for a Salary Cut ?
When speaking with attorneys who are ready to make that in-house transition, I invariably hear the same message, “I am ready to take a salary cut for the right opportunity.” They seem candid and honest about their willingness to give up a portion of their law firm compensation to move in-house, and they generally are. However, very few tend to understand just how much of it they will have to give up to make that move. That’s understandable; where law firms make their compensation public knowledge and generally align themselves in terms of their size and geographical locations, corporate legal departments are not only more guarded about their figures, but are also much more unpredictable – as compensation can vary greatly depending on a company’s size, industry, location, and financial situation.
The only in-house figures that seem to gather the attention of the press, and therefore those that are readily available to the general public are the compensation figures of Fortune 500 general counsels. In fact, those figures are typically those of the 100 highest-paid general counsels at Fortune 500 companies, which runs into the millions. While not everyone has the grandiose ambition or the profile to become a Fortune 500 general counsel – these figures have a tendency to skew the expectations of attorneys wanting to make the jump from law firms to corporate legal departments. Most law firm attorneys expect to take a 20-30% cut from their law firm compensation, while the reality is that most law firm attorneys transitioning in-house experience compensation reductions ranging between 50%-70%. The median base salaries for in-house attorneys with 5-10 years of experience ranges between $100,000-$150,000 per year, with bonuses averaging 20%-30% of base. Most attorneys who hear these figures gripe, “It’s not market.” It’s easy to understand why. The salary wars waged by large law firms around the country increasing first-year associate salaries to $145,000 and $160,000, as well as incremental increases of other classes by as much as $15,000 have done little to provide law firm attorneys with a realistic understanding of their worth in the corporate legal market.
They forget one crucial distinction between the law firm and in-house environment. While associates and partners are an integral part of the law firm’s “profit centers” and help generate millions of dollars in revenues on behalf of the firm, when they transition in-house, they become “part of the overhead.” In-house counsels, with very few exceptions in the licensing area, do not generate revenues. At best, they protect a company from liability. Unlike a law firm that sees the hiring of associates and partners as a means to increase productivity and revenues, companies must determine whether hiring an attorney in-house is cost effective, in both the short and long run. The value proposition changes drastically, and therefore, so does the compensation.
The question that each attorney must resolve in his mind, is whether he or she can absorb the cost of transitioning in-house – as for most of them, there will be a significant monetary tradeoff.
Can You Handle The Limited Career Path?
By now, some of those left with the experience and the willingness to make the financial sacrifices may think that it’s just a matter of time before they make their way to a more senior-level position or take the general counsel position. Well, not so fast. According to a Survey conducted by Corporate Counsel, nearly seventy-five percent (75%) of in-house counsels polled described overall opportunities for advancement in their departments as either "limited" or nonexistent. Although many of the 1,278 respondents reported that they had been promoted since going in-house, they said that they were unlikely to get much further. Nineteen percent (19%) said there were no opportunities for advancement whatsoever for them in their department, while fifty-six percent (56%) percent said opportunities were limited.
What does it mean for you? If you think that with time you will enjoy promotions including a better title or a significant increase in pay, you may be going in with unrealistic expectations. Most corporate legal departments are small or flat in terms of structure; therefore, title promotions or elevation to other roles tend to be rare. Unlike law firms where you move up class levels every year, and enjoy significant pay raises, when transitioning in-house you may find yourself in the same position for many years to come, with pay raises that average 3-5% a year.
Most in-house counsels bid their times and move up only when a more senior counsel decides to retire or to transition to another company. In fact, the best chance for advancement may be jumping to the legal department of another company. Companies with larger legal departments of fifty or more attorneys, usually have more avenues for advancement. They may have a more hierarchical structure to enable its attorneys to move up to more senior roles with more responsibilities and greater levels of compensation. That said, in-house attorneys don’t have the same clear and linear career path as their law firm counterparts, and opportunities for advancement for the most part are limited. Before you make any decisions, you need to ask yourself whether you are ready to bid your time and live with fewer opportunities for advancement.
Conclusion
Before you start polishing your resume and look for in-house positions, make sure you’ve gained the experience you will need to succeed in-house, that you are able to let go of your attractive law firm compensation package, and can work in an environment where your career path will not be a straight line.
The trade-offs are far from perfect; however, most lawyers who made that transition with open eyes insist that going in-house was a decision they would make again. Gripes and all, in-house lawyers are nearly unanimous in preferring the more complex path they've chosen. How do we know? Only 1 percent of in-house lawyers say they'd like to be at a law firm.
What Are The Hot In-House Practice Areas for 2011?
Hot In-House Legal Practices
Corporate Governance – What has increased the demand in this practice area is the result of the recent legislative and regulatory proposals generated by Washington as a response to the financial crisis of 2007–2010. This led to widespread calls for changes in the regulatory system that plunged the country and the rest of the world into an unprecedented recession. The result was the adoption of the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, which contains new governance obligations for all public companies. Companies are trying to respond to what has been termed to be “the most sweeping change to financial regulation in the United States since the Great Depression.” As a result, this has increased their reliance on legal counsels, who in turn have had to further focus their attention on new provisions and requirements guiding corporate governance matters.
Regulatory – This era of heightened scrutiny has made regulatory demands and requirements increasingly more intrusive, and the practice more defensive. Companies are gearing up accordingly, which has resulted in a demand boost in this practice area.
Labor and Employment – The combination of an ailing economy, business downsizing, a declining job market, and increased government enforcement is dramatically increasing employment lawsuits. Companies are on the defensive as they are sorting out differences with employees in a continuing downsizing marketplace. The EEOC has announced several regulatory initiatives from President Obama, which we are also now starting to see come into play. If there is a rise in litigation, labor and employment disputes will account for a significant number of those lawsuits.
Healthcare – With health care reform a reality, health care law is hotter than ever. As part of the newly enacted health care reform package, Congress tightened rules and statutes relating to the prosecution of health care fraud offenses. There were also modifications to the Anti-Kickback Statute under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, the new requirements for compliance under Physician Payments Sunshine Act. In preparation for addressing these legislative changes and reporting requirements, healthcare organizations are turning to healthcare lawyers to help them comply with these reforms, making the practice a very hot one. If the new Obama healthcare plan has boosted the need for healthcare lawyers, the aging of America’s population, has also increased the market for healthcare organizations. With a booming business on the horizon, healthcare organizations are likely to be growing in areas with high popularity densities such as Arizona, Florida and parts of the Midwest, which in turn are expected to enjoy a rise in the healthcare practice area.
Intellectual Property – Intellectual property is an organization’s most valuable asset, and securing that asset has made intellectual property a recession-proof practice. When the economy declines, it usually forces companies to think “outside the box” and look for new products, inventions, or ideas. This usually translates into an increase in services to help protect the intellectual capital of these companies. Invention and innovation is what keeps companies competitive, and intellectual property lawyers, paralegals, and other professionals very busy. High tech companies are in the business of invention and innovation, and they are the main consumers of intellectual property services. Primarily, concentrated in California, Silicon Valley and Lost Angeles County have become intellectual property litigation and patent prosecution hotbeds. Other states with a strong high tech industry presence that are enjoying a surge of intellectual property activity include Texas, New York, Florida, and Virginia.
In-House Practices that Will Heat Up in 2011
Mergers and Acquisitions – M&A activity has been on a “wait and see” path for some time as the system remains vulnerable and fear lingers. However, the good news is that the fundamentals are in place for M&A to start picking-up again. In 2010, the U.S. economy has found some stability and returned to growth, and consumer confidence strengthened. Companies who have weathered the worst of the storm will be looking for a new growth engine, and may be returning to the M&A market. Companies will most likely go in “toe first” and will likely stay away from very large, multi-billion dollar deals, in favor of “smaller acquisitions” to complement and strengthen their existing business, rather than enduring the burden and risk after a large M&A deal. As a result, we will most likely see an uptick in M&A activity over the next year or two. Some of the bigger deals will most likely occur in consolidating industries, such as energy and healthcare. As usual, technology companies also are expected to be on the prowl. We may also see some increase M&A activity with the real estate market and the financial industry, which is finally recovering. In terms of geography, emerging markets will lead the M&A surge in 2011, with Asia in the lead.
International – As companies look to focus on expanding their core businesses and increase their market share, they are likely to look outside of the U.S. as part of their competitive strategy. This will drive the international law practice. U.S. companies will continue to look opportunities in the three most popular emerging markets—Brazil, India and China. Some other markets that may generate some new and renewed interest may include Mexico, Vietnam, Korea and the Middle East, with Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates as attracting most of the attention. This boost in international transactions will come primarily from companies in the consumer and infrastructure sector seeking to expand into new markets.
Good New for In-House Job Seekers: Law Departments Plan on Hiring
As companies continue to slowly emerge from the recession, many are looking for ways to save money on their expensive legal bills. Corporate legal department, according to a recent Altman Weil's Chief Legal Officer Survey, are increasingly telling firms to just forget it, and taking more work in-house.
Altman Weil's Chief Legal Officer Survey, released Wednesday, showed that sixty-three percent of the officers surveyed reported that they had increased their internal budgets from 2009 to 2010, and 29% claimed that they would decrease their use of outside firms in the coming year.
That’s great news for attorneys and paralegals looking to go in-house. The survey showed that 41% of chief legal officers indicated that they plan to hire new in-house lawyers in the next 12 months, and 32% said they would increase the number of paralegals on staff over the same period.
The survey, conducted in September and October, is based on responses from 174 officers from law departments. 28% of respondents run law departments in corporations with over $10 billion in revenues.
Of course, the great majority of companies taking on more work in-house will do so with its existing legal staff, placing increasing pressure on an already overworked staff. However, this mark s a shift from companies simply trying to negotiate law firm fees, to looking at alternatives, including bolstering their own internal capabilities. That’s great news for attorneys who are already in-house, in terms of increased job security, and for those looking to break into the in-house world in terms of opportunity.
Legal Recruiting Firms: How To Find The Best Ones
Looking for an attorney job but finding it hard to find one? Here are tips to find legal recruiting firms that can find the right job for you.
If you are wracking your brains about finding the attorney job you really want, practicality should tell you to look for legal recruiters. To shed some light on that subject, good legal recruiters can help you land positions in certain companies or firms that best suit your professional goals.
Legal recruiters call themselves a number of things such as attorney recruiters, legal headhunters, or executive recruiters. Whatever name they use, effective legal recruiters can help you identify legal positions you would not otherwise be able to find on your own, as well as help you put together resumes and cover letters to help you stand out from the crowd. But choosing a legal recruiter is just as hard as finding a job, and if you are unlucky enough to choose a bad one, you may lose your chances of getting that dream job, or worse -- get blacklisted.
Almost every legal recruiting firm will style itself as the best in the business, and there are many that meet different kinds of needs. Some specialize in law firm placement, in-house jobs, or part-time and contract position. Not everyone’s need for a legal recruiter is the same; therefore in looking for a legal recruiting firm that best suits your needs, you should narrow down your list to one or two that best suits your job search. Now that you’ve narrowed your list, how can you find out if those legal recruiters are any good?
Ask your peers and colleagues what they have heard about that legal recruiting firm. There is bound to be more than one of your lawyer friends that knows a thing or two about legal recruiters. Some may even be where they are right now because of a legal recruiting firm. They may be able to recommend someone to you.
Check the Internet for more information. How well does the legal recruiting firm rank on Google? Are they on the first page? Don’t forget to check other sources as well, such as legal publications, blogs, and testimonials that can tell you how good or bad a legal recruiting firm really is.
If you find a legal recruiting firm that looks good on paper, but has only been in business for two years or less, then beware. Jumping the bandwagon based on their slick brochure or website is not the kind of risk you want to take. Do some research, inquire as to the clients they represent, and the candidates they have successfully placed. Look at the jobs they have listed on their website. If you are still uncertain, stick to a recruiting firm that has been in business for at least five years. If they have lasted this long, chances are probably good at what they do.
Legal recruiting firms tend to vary in terms of the services and the assistance they provide. Some legal recruiting firms do not only identify positions on your behalf, but also help you to secure the job. Some of the services that a firm can offer include resume and cover letter assistance, as well as interview preparation.
Professional legal recruiting firms often offer state-of-the-art database access where you can sign-in directly and update your contacts and resume. Finally, a good legal recruiting firm ensures that the job suits your skills and experience – they focus on making the right fit.
Finding top-notch legal recruiting firms is not a simple task. Just don’t forget to narrow down what you really need before signing up. You should know that there are a good many legal recruiting firms available out there, so take your time and look them up. Always keep a keen eye, and never let yourself fall for bogus over exaggerated ads; chances are the bigger the claim, the less effective the firm.
Happy CLOs Are Poised to Hire More in 2010
According to the results of the Association of Corporate Counsel's 10th Annual Chief Legal Officer Survey, CLOs are not only happy with their job, but want to share that happiness by hiring more in-house counsels in 2010. More than 90 percent of CLOs that responded to the Survey indicated that they were happy with their jobs (up 2% from last year’s Survey). Even with the recession and a heavier workload, chief legal officers said they still like their jobs. It’s still good to be in-house. And, it looks like that happiness is going to spread.While these are positive news in an otherwise still gloomy market, this does not mean that the in-house legal market has turned the corner.
In-house legal are still operating under tough budget constraints, and while a 5% increase over last year is good news, it will not serve to make much of a dent in this saturated market
Who Will They Be Hiring?
In particular, over one-fourth (28%) of respondents plan to hire lawyers to do commoditized work, and 21% of these respondents plan to hire specialists.
In addition to the increase in hiring plans, the survey found that the number of law department attorneys based outside the U.S grew this year. This increase can be seen in Western Europe and Canada, where the number of in-house attorneys rose from 1% in 2008 to 7% in 2009; and also in Asia/Pacific, where there was an increase from 1% in 2008 to 2% in 2009.
Why Are CLOs Looking to Hire More?
The recession has forced companies to take a critical view of how they operate. While CLOs will be increasing in-house hiring, they will also be decreasing spending on outside counsel. More than a third (34 percent) said they've cut spending on outside counsel. At the end of the day, they have figured out that they can operate more efficiently by bringing more work in-house, spending less on outside counsel, and boosting spending on alternative fee arrangements, the survey shows.
Could This Be a Long-Term Trend?
That remains to be seen. While this is not a significant increase in hiring, this may be a sign of more positive news to come. Moreover, the recession has forced companies to try on a new model, and they may like what they see.
Newsline – 02/22/10
- What the New White House Counsel Made Last Year. New White House counsel Robert Bauer made just under $1 million last year as the head of the political law group at Perkins Coie, according to a financial disclosure form he filed this month. Bauer reported $958,788 in salary and bonuses from the firm, where he was a partner in its Washington office. That's almost 20 percent above the firm's 2009 profits per equity partner of $802,111, as reported this month by The AmLaw Daily. He also reported $14,000 in speaking honoraria and a $7,500 fee from teaching at Yale University last spring. Bauer, who started at the White House in late December and succeeded Gregory Craig, reported household investment assets worth between $2.38 million and $5.55 million. It’s a good thing that Bauer has such a nice nest egg stashed away, because he is now slated to earn about earned $172,200 per year - the highest salary paid to any of the White House counsels, and what his predecessor Craig earned last year (see our previous Blog post "What Do White House Lawyers Earn?"' It’s not bad by any standard, but these attorneys are clearly not in it for the money. Craig had also left a very lucrative private practice with the Washington, D.C.-based law firm of Williams & Connolly, where he was earning $1.7 million a year. It is refreshing to see attorneys motivated by other things besides the bottom line when making a career move. The National Law Journal
- Levi Slashes its Outside Counsel. Levi Strauss has been busy making cuts, and we’re not talking about jeans either. Last spring Levi Strauss & Co. cut the number of outside law firms that it uses down to just two — one of the most sweeping reductions yet by a large company. The lucky survivors were: Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe to handle all of the worldwide legal work, and Townsend and Townsend and Crew for its global intellectual property matters. General counsel Hilary Krane said that in addition to yielding improved work at lower cost from her outside firms, the deals have also had a side benefit: better performance from her staff attorneys. While this may come across as sweeping reform by a clothing giant, this may signal a new trend for companies: fewer outside counsels to assist better-staffed in-house legal departments. Corporate Counsel
- SEC Says BofA GC Didn't Get Fired Over Legal Advice. The Securities and Exchange Commission is going against the generally accepted speculation that former Bank of America general counsel Timothy Mayopoulos was fired because of his unwelcomed legal advice regarding the merger. In a court filing on Wednesday, the SEC says Mayopoulos got fired to create a position for Brian Moynihan in an effort to keep him from leaving, according to stories in the New York Law Journal and the Wall Street Journal Law Blog. Moynihan served as general counsel for 44 days before taking over as CEO. The SEC position reinforces congressional testimony by Moynihan that, before his appointment as general counsel, he had planned to leave Bank of America because he was not pleased with the position he would get after the merger. Yeah, right! The SEC’s conclusion lacks fundamental logical credibility! Here's the story: GC gives advice executives do not want made public, GC gets escorted out of the building 24 hours later, and is subsequently treated like a pariah. Despite receiving excellent reviews during his tenure at BofA, Mayopoulos was given little love after he was told to pack his stuff and leave. When Mayopoulos reached out to two of the bank's executives to obtain references to try and find a new job, he was snubbed by one and got a cool reaction from the other. Th internal dialogue was probably something like this: A reference? Yeah, you did a great job for us, but I'm not sure we can do that for you. You know, rules and all. Good luck though. I'd hate to see how Mayopoulos would have been treated had he not done a good job. ABA Journal
- Ford Gets Mileage Out of Fewer Lawyers. When Ford's sales collapsed — from 2006 to 2008, and the company lost a cumulative $30 billion, something had to be done. The response: Laying off a third of its 300,000 employees worldwide. The Company’s In-House Legal Department was no exception to these cuts. Ford's general counsel David Leitch made the painful move of slashing his staff by 40 percent, from 200 lawyers to 120. His department continues to perform at the same level, he said. And it hasn't increased its use of outside lawyers to make up for the loss of in-house attorneys. However, while Ford’s attorneys “have adapted, and are more efficient and effective than they ever thought they could be" when the economy turns around, Leitch will have a new challenge on his hand. If your car takes on a lot of mileage, it’s bound to break down sooner rather than later. If you want your car to keep performing at a high level, you’ll either need to ease up on it, or get a new one. The same can be said about employees who’ve been asked to “do more with less,” over a long period of time. His overworked counsels will probably be the first to look for greener pastures, and he will need to either up his internal numbers or use of outside counsel to keep up with demands. Corporate Counsel
Awards
Affiliates
Links
In-House Jobs
Categories
- In-House Careers
- In-House Compensation
- In-House Diversity
- In-House Ethics
- In-House Headhunters
- In-House Human Resources
- In-House International
- In-House Job Hunt
- In-House Jobs
- In-House Legal Costs
- In-House Legal Market
- In-House Life
- In-House Litigation
- In-House Management
- In-House Outsourcing
- In-House Survey
- In-House Transitions
- In-House Vendors
- In-House Women
- Layoffs
- Uncategorized
Archive
- April 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- October 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- July 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008