Career Clinic: Is parenthood compatible with corporate law at a top firm?

er,

No. Large firm partners are almost without exception absent parents with bad marriages and force their underlings to adopt a similar set of poor priorities.

jack dee -15 Dec 2010 | 14:22

Doubtful...

It's pretty unlikely that your wife would find a job as a corporate lawyer conducive to spending a decent amount of time with her baby: deals happen when they happen and she would have to be there when they did.

She could try to enter on a part-time basis. This might be possible depending on her PQE, but she'd need to be aware that working 'three days a week' often equates to either fitting five days work into those three days or being continually bothered at home on her days off (and still only being paid for three).

I guess it depends on how much she wants what a top job would give her, and whether it's worth the trade-off as regards to seeing her baby. Personally, I don't think it's worth it (which is why I'm about to hand in my notice...), but that's a decision only she and you can make.

Anonymous -15 Dec 2010 | 15:18

No

Answer to headline question is no - these two things are not compatible and your kids will never thank you for missing them growing up whatever you might think. Next question please.

dozer -15 Dec 2010 | 15:35

No WAY in a top 20 firm. Life in most top 20 firms is pretty much exactly the same as life in the magic circle, and if there is any difference it's small. Once you get to 60 hours work a week it makes no difference whether you work 60 or 65 - either way you don't see your family.

She needs to go to a mid-tier/West End firm if she wants to see the baby again. If she wants a life she needs to compromise on the supposed quality of the work and how well ranked the firm is - and even then hope that the firm has half-decent human beings amongst its partners. Life in a West End firm might even be better with broader work and nicer clients anyway - having more zeros on the sale and purchase agreement you are drafting doesn't make it any more interesting. Working at a mid-tier firm won't rule out getting a job in Hong Kong down the road - it just means she'll need to move laterally as opposed to getting seconded.

Or she could just get a job at a big City firm and just resign herself to not seeing the kid for 15 years until it's a surly teenager resentful for not having a real relationship with its mother.

Magic Circle Associate -15 Dec 2010 | 15:52

2 babies later

Was once a senior corporate lawyer at a 'top twenty' law firm. Now have two babies. Yes, the corporate deals which some of the 'top twenty' law firms do will not grab the headlines in the way the deals your wife might have been involved in did, but I wouldn't assume that just because the firm is smaller the corporate deals are going to be more manageable in terms of time demands or her ability to delegate. Also agree with the above comment about the expectations of squeezing five days into three. Hovering over an email account whilst trying to tend to a baby in the background is not easy, and that is ignoring the even more difficult challenges of taking calls or doing difficult drafting whilst giving your offspring 'quality time' at the same time. I wish it was different but in my experience it is not.

. -15 Dec 2010 | 16:06

Some realism needed

Agree with most of the comments below. It's nonsense to assume practically any top 100 firm is a cushy lifestyle choice compared to where you have been working if you are doing corporate. Sure, you may get a few more evenings and weekends off, but it is still not likely to be the cushy number you seem to expect and if you are used to the larger salary you may find yourself wondering why you bother - and have to check your own documents.

Take with a pinch of salt those tales of (usually female) lawyers trumpeted as examples of combining work and family life. A number of these people are utterly deluded. Others are usually only able to get away with it thanks to an army of long-suffering understudies who spend most of their time explaining to clients why the boss is not at any meetings; listening to instructions most afternoons rattled out at breakneck speed on the way to the school pickup; arriving at work every morning to 25 emails tapped out at between 10pm and 2am after the kids are in bed; and generally wondering why their own lifestyle choices are so overwhelmingly subordinated to someone else's.

Young Fogey -15 Dec 2010 | 19:37

Perhaps, if you are willing to be a househusband

I know a female senior partner at a magic circle law firm but her hubby was a full-time stay-at-home parent so she could work on deals until 1am.

Anonymous -16 Dec 2010 | 09:17

of course it is

You get to work one day a week at home, you get paid days off work when your kids are ill, you can get in late for attending prize giving, you get to go home early due to "child care" problems and last but not least you can't ever be fired as the firm is terrified of you bringing a discrimination claim!

Bring on the babies!

the voice of reason -16 Dec 2010 | 10:52

I agree with Anonymous at 16 Dec 2010 | 09:17.

Actually, OP: you seem to think of the child as 'your' baby, but yet childcare seems to be 'her' problem. If you want to support your wife back into work, take a hit on the career and and step up with the childcare responsibilities yourself.

Anon -16 Dec 2010 | 13:38

What about her working 3-4 days a week as a PSL? And even better: you working part-time too? Why is childcare always considered to the mother's responsibility?

Helen -16 Dec 2010 | 16:53

Its not about childcare

The post is not about childcare issues - we are covered on that front and being in-house - I can work from home.

The question is whether if my wife returns to work as a corporate lawyer, whether she will get to see our baby. Do law firms in London have flexible working eg, come in early and leave earlier, work from home etc?

Poster -16 Dec 2010 | 18:27

Your post proves my point that it IS about childcare

You write about whether your wife will see the baby: what about YOU seeing it, what about YOU working flexi-time etc? Children need their dads too.

Anyway, I've posted already - work as a PSL and you can work reasonably regular hours. But corporate transactional work - forget it. Unless you do it on a project/deal basis where you work seven days a week for a few weeks, take a few weeks off and then back on etc. That may be an option.

Helen -17 Dec 2010 | 10:28

Family Rules the Day For Me

As a father, and previously an associate in the UK and Asia offices of a global firm, I advise you to give up on the ideal of having your cake and eating it. It cannot be done in the way you hope.

I would, however, say that its a question of priorities. What is more important? For me, it is more important to see my son grow up and I now work in a general high street firm, earning a quarter of my old Asia salary, but here, the cost of living is considerably lower so I have the same disposable income, but rather than living in a flat in the City, I live in a nice detached house in the countryside and that works for my family. Sure, there's less prestige, but that's the sacrifice.

I think you have to make a choice. For me, its important to spend good quality time with my family and given the chance again, I'd make the same decision.

Best of luck.

Me -17 Dec 2010 | 10:58

It seems to be a foregone conclusion that if your wife wants to work in corporate she will not be able to spend much time with your child. Therefore, you need to consider whether you and your wife are of the view that as long as one of you is around for the baby it doesn't matter which one of you it is. In this day and age we are lucky that it can be either mother or father, it used to always have to be the mother and no-one questioned whether the absent dads were distressed by missing out.

Is your wife the kind of mother that can take a step back from her baby? Some can, and can accept that the dad must be allowed to parent in his own way, others find it too stressful to leave the lion's share of the parenting to their partner and end up feeling cut out of the relationship and miserable.

Personally I went for the middle ground of both of us working part-time and therefore both getting time with the children, but I appreciate not everyone has the luxury of choice.

In-houser in the sticks -17 Dec 2010 | 11:06

just as we thought, we females, could have it all!

Hi,

From my personal experience the law is an ideal area of work for males and childless females. I've recently handed in my notice because I am neither of those. I hope your wife works out what it is that is really important to her and go for it. We only live once, there is no room for regrets. I wish you both luck because it is one of the hardest decision you will have to make as a couple. I made mine, my daughter is the most important thing in my life!

a mum -17 Dec 2010 | 11:39

From what I know of the matter, corporate in Hong Kong is hardly a walk in the park - I would expect midnight to be an early night in most places - surely this in the long term is a consideration as well? I understand the desire to want to go back to Hong Kong, but if your wife isn't keen on doing the 70-hour weeks when she gets there, then why do them now? Just a thought...

Lexie -17 Dec 2010 | 15:45

Law Firm Pressure Increasing

Corporate law is full on compared with other legal specialisms. Unemployment is growing for women. Why? UK not set up to leverage female talent and support working mothers. Other countries do, the UK doesn't. With the spotlight on efficiency and reliability, and with law firms being billings focused and under increasing pressure, I think you have your answer. Law firms need to change. Contact me for articles on female legal career success.

talentliberator -19 Dec 2010 | 06:29

long-term?

I am going through the same phase. What you do not say is what your wife's long-term goals are. Kids need a lot of time until they are about four years old - then school takes over. At that point would your wife feel that she gave up a more interesting career (and money) because she did not have enough help in their early years? (Someone above also asked about your willingness to share the childcare responsibility. Can you take a sabbatical to cover some of the time?) As they say, it is all about the quality of available childcare...

HELEN -19 Dec 2010 | 15:04

Hmmm....

A lot of the comments above seem overly negative to me. Of course, working in corporate is not a cushy life but I don't see that it is all 70 hours weeks (if it was, presumably associates would be billing about 3,000 hours a year which in my experience is not the case!). I am a father at a major law firm and get back to see my kids most evenings and then do work from home.

I also don't think you can generalise about magic circle and other law firms. It depends a lot on the particular team, how busy they are and attitudes to flexible working. Indeed, a lot of magic circle and leading international firms are under pressure to look more flexible so may actually be a better option.

However, do you really have the luxury of much choice? If your wife was laid off, there are not so many jobs in London that she is going to be able to pick and choose. Have you thought about going straight back to Hong Kong where she offers something extra? Also, extra domestic help is much more available and although hours can be long, it is a bit more up and down and international firms are used to people working from home for some of the time.

Anon -20 Dec 2010 | 03:38

You can't "have it all"

Obviously you can't practise corporate law at a magic circle firm, or even a City firm, and expect to have the sort of work/life balance that allows you to be there on any significant level for your child. Surely no woman has a baby expecting to be able to return to a prestigious and high-earning job AND play Mummy?

My work/life balance as a litigator at a well-known regional firm is certainly better than that of friends who are at City firms, but even outside London it is not realistic to expect to have a job that allows you to be home for bedtime every night, if you want to be in a client-facing role. I'm a single parent of primary-school-aged children and even having made the 'sacrifice' of working at a less-prestigious firm (for less money and in a less interesting location than London), sometimes I find it hard juggling nativity plays with court dates.

You can't have it all - it's as simple as that. Sure, the Nicola Horlicks and Helena Morriseys of the world have large families and high-profile careers, but they also have round-the-clock childcare and/or a house husband. As a working mother, if you want to get to see your child's milestones, you have to take the hit on your pay packet and career development for a few years. In 20 years' time your wife won't be regretting the fact that her career wasn't as stratospheric as it might have been, but I'm sure she'd regret having spend your child's infancy working late night after night.

Working (single) mum (lawyer) -20 Dec 2010 | 14:35

What about Posh Spice?

Hugey -20 Dec 2010 | 17:02

It doesn't matter

She will struggle to find a role in a top 20 firm in any case. She's been out of the law for over a year and her last role was out of London.

Her best bet is to try to find an in-house role, perhaps where she can use her language skills, or a PSL position. These are also highly sought after, however.

Good luck to you both. She's better off out of a top 20 firm if she wants to enjoy family life.

Anon -20 Dec 2010 | 17:32

You can have it all

Some pretty depressing stuff here from people who have tried and failed. The answer is you can have it all providing:
a) your wife is very good
b) you find the right department
b) run by the right partner
d) in the right firm

But there are so many examples now of women proving you can work flexibly and be a client-facing fee earning lawyer that some of these comments are just b***cks. It's still difficult but 10 years ago it would have been impossible.

Remember the employers who understand the most about diversity and flexible working are the banks (because they have to) and the multinationals (because they have understood the business case). Those are top 20 law firms' biggest clients so nearly every law firms wants to try and do the right thing - and these days some even believe in flexibility as well.

So simple answer to your question is YES.

Ben Black -04 Jan 2011 | 14:27

Know what you want and seek it out...

The comments so far are fascinating and all have some value - whichever side of the yes/no debate the contributor comes down on. Your partner needs to be clear about what she is looking for, how much flexibility she can offer, where are the lines which can't be crossed etc and then seek out an employer who wants to make that work. I think the top twenty thing may be a bit of a red herring as a critical mass may be helpful in enabling a flexible approach. One thing is for sure - flexible working is here to stay and a jolly good thing to. Giving people what they (responsibly) want makes business and political sense.

mature reflector -04 Jan 2011 | 17:44

Try HK now

I am not sure about the balance being better (probably isn't), but the HK market for lawyers with language skills is fairly good right now. She may be able to leverage some flexibility due to the market conditions in HK if you move now.

Incidentally, was she happy when she had her top 20 job? I did that for a while, and had second thoughts after I stepped away to deal with my own family issues. Looking back, I realize that it was a pretty miserable period. The work I do now is not as interesting, but I do leave the office at 6:30 every night, and have time for other things in life. Whenever I get the pang of wanting to work on some mega-merger, I remind myself that it would interfere with the things I love doing now and that desire quickly subsides.

expat -05 Jan 2011 | 02:39