Related Posts
Hi All,
Colgate Palmolive is hiring across IT.
> SAP Professionals
> Data Scientists
> Data Engineers
> Full Stack
> Security
....
Kindly go through the link :
jobs.colgate.com/search/?createNewAlert=false&q=&locationsearch=india
If you find any job that interests you, feel free to Message here and i can refer you.
Key Perks :
> Best in class work life balance
> WFH option depending on your role
> Good Incentives and pay.
Job Location : Mumbai
Rising Star
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
Questions: (1) will the chairperson likely remain in that position for the foreseeable future? (2) how is the chairperson selected in your firm? (3) is compensation at your firm, decided by a committee or by the one person without approval of other partners? (4) if the chair person is an elected position for a certain term, are you in a position to run for the chair position or another position on the management committee? (5) are there other partners who have significant books of business that believe that they are under compensated? If so, is there an option for the partner to believe they are under compensated to bring this issue to the partnership for a vote or a change in the way that compensation is handled?
These are all questions I think you should consider before making your decision to jump to another firm. If you have a significant book of business, it will make a transition to another firm easier. That said, once you move to the other firm, you will have a period of time in which you will not have influence with others regarding the management of the firm.
At your current firm, if enough of the partners, do not think they are being compensated correctly, the chairperson will ultimately have to address the issue to prevent flight from the firm. However, there may be partners who think they are being compensated fairly, and who do not want the structure to change because changing the structure would mean that they individually would be compensated less.
In deciding whether to jump ship, I think you need to decide what leverage you have, and whether or not, you can work to get the compensation structure, modified, or get yourself elected to the position that would allow you to influence and or change the compensation structure. Additionally, I am not sure what you mean by other issues, but you may need to factor in the "other issues" and whether those "other issues" are substantial enough that they affect your working environment.
Thank you for the response. The chairperson would likely continue in the role. I believe we’ve already started to see flight from the firm. The other issues relate to specific problems identified by the management committee (I’m on) such as over staffing, practice areas that are not profitable, lack of training for younger generation, and others. These were identified (using a facilitator from outside the firm) but there’s been very little follow through. Ex. People that were identified to ask to leave the firm are all still in place. In any event, thank you again. I’ll give all of this more thought.
Do you need to be in a firm that size? I found significantly more control and satisfaction in much smaller firms.
With my client base I do need to be in a firm with a bicoastal presence
My suggestion after 40 years of practice over 12 firms — consider if you are generally happy and satisfied in matters OTHER than compensation. I have spent years at extremely profitable firms where my partners were total assholes and I was miserable. It wasn’t until my last firm that I felt satisfied, unburdened by politics and at home. (But it took me 35 years to find that place.)
A former law partner of mine observed that there are, culturally, two types of bad law firm firms: (1) bad firms filled with bad people, and (2) good firms filled with bad people. In the second case, you’ll find many friends; hiding among your partners are many good people with good practices and strong practice skills. In the first case, you’ll find that the well is poisoned — you cannot change the culture and those who insist that the firm is fundamentally “good” are diseased, mean spirited and selfish. In the second case, you’ll find MANY good people and the opportunity to change the environment.
Remember, however, that law is not a nice profession. We work against our peers at other firms and, frequently, we work against our partners when we compete for the same dollar. In private practice we are not working for the public good — we are serving private interests.
Ask yourself if you’re happy and satisfied. Unless the comp is patently disproportionate and unfair, consider your general happiness. It’s more important than you may think.
Finally, if you haven’t moved before, consider that you WILL lose clients in the move. It’s a given and you have no control over who will stick with you and who will jump ship.
Feel free to DM me. I believe that I have great experience because I have made virtually every mistake a law partner can make. (Incidentally, about 3/4 of those 12 firms are in the AmLaw 25. So for those who would say that I don’t know what a real, “high-quality” law firm is like, not so!
To me, the question is whether you’re happy. I was in BigLaw 28 years and after trying unsuccessfully to fix problems like you, I moved to NewLaw firm with almost 200 lawyers. And now so happy. No more bureaucracy, office politics or mismanagement. And to top it off - compensation is much better because it’s objective merit based rather than subjective, politically driven. If you’re happy, stay. If you’re not happy after being unsuccessful in changing the firm, you may wish to explore options. Life is too short to be unhappy 🙁
Thank you for this. You are certainly right. It’s difficult bc there really are significant pros and cons. I have moved a couple times looking for the place I could call home and this place has come as close as any.