How the Hiring Cycle Has Shifted for the In-House Legal Market
15+ years ago the hiring market for in house lawyers was fairly predictable and cyclical in nature. Today, it's a different ballgame.
September 11, 2019 at 05:51 PM
4 minute read
Q: I'd like to make a move in-house, but don't know the best time of year to start my search. Is there a predictable hiring cycle for the in house market? If so, what is it?
15+ years ago the hiring market for in house lawyers was fairly predictable and cyclical in nature. Most of the hiring activity occurred in the first quarter (Q1) of the calendar year when legal budgets were created and authorized. Hiring might trickle in to Q2 but by August, the first lull was in full force. September and October usually saw moderate activity with replacement hires, but by the time the holidays rolled around the crickets were chirping. Employers and candidates hunkered down until the New Year when the hiring cycle started again.
Today, it's a different ballgame. And the hiring activity remains generally constant throughout the year. Budgets are still set in Q1 and the beginning of the quarter still kicks off the hiring season. But hiring continues throughout the year. There is a modest slow down in August, but as a whole there's far more activity than in years past. The following months are more active with new opportunities arising and interviews pushing through the holidays. So what accounts for the change? There are a few primary factors:
1. Expanding In House Legal Departments.
With the fast expansion of the in house legal department and desire to hire lawyers much earlier in a company's lifecycle, legal budgets are growing and companies are hiring lawyers in droves. They are also expanding the practice areas housed in the department – which necessitates additional heads. Given this increased coverage, the timing of these hires can be reactive: in response to the needs of the organization. So new headcount arises throughout the year.
2. Lawyers Are Mobile.
Today's lawyers are more mobile than ever. And the profession…and hiring managers are more socialized around it so changing jobs is no longer a straight line to career suicide. Today, the average lawyer will switch jobs every two to four years. This kind of movement creates a lot of empty chairs. In response, replacement searches are conducted to fill those chairs. Many of these hires cannot wait until the beginning of the New Year. So Legal starts the search for such positions immediately. This dynamic can happen at any given point of the year and contributes to the year-round hiring activity.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCalifornia’s Workplace Violence Laws: Protecting Victims’ Rights in the Workplace
6 minute read'Nothing Is Good for the Consumer Right Now': Experts Weigh Benefits, Drawbacks of Updated Real Estate Commission Policies
FTC Issues Final Rule Banning Most Noncompetes, but Immediate Legal Challenges Ensue
6 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250