Family Law
She loved her work and the people she worked with but needed to alter her main career path to earn more money to support her family.
PROLOGUE
For the story of the path taken by CS to become an attorney representing clients who could afford to pay for her services providing legal advice and court representation for matters involving divorce and child custody issues, please refer to the separate career story category “Law – Public Service Attorney” which describes CS’ family background, education, conflicting career advice from mentors, her initial disillusionment with the prospect of becoming a lawyer but her eventual career satisfaction while assisting people through critical family law problems.
QUESTIONS TO ASK WHEN CONSIDERING A JOB CHANGE
When someone already employed begins to question whether to continue with that job, several questions should be considered – by yourself and with advice from mentors:
(1) What is / are the problem(s) with your current job / career?
CS’ analysis – Her sole problem was “economics.” CS loved the work she was doing as an attorney assisting clients through life-altering family law issues. She enjoyed the support and camaraderie of her co-workers. She sympathized with the critical needs of her clients caught up in divorce, child custody, child abuse and tenant eviction problems. So the sole concern of CS was the need to earn more money than was available within her public service agency (“Legal Assistance”) in order to provide for the rising expenses of her family, recently including her first child.
(2) Will a different job or career solve the current problem – without creating a new problem?
CS’ analysis – Continuing in the same general line of work (an attorney providing legal advice for family law issues) would not require learning new skills so finding a business model which provided more income would solve her single problem at her current job.
(3) What are the available options to pursue instead of remaining at the current job?
CS’ analysis – There were three options:
(i) change careers
CS’ analysis – She had found career satisfaction so “if it ain’t broke, don’t try to fix it!” In addition, she had already invested time and money in seven years of higher education and then another five in the legal arena so a total career change would render all of her preparation and experience likely wasted. CS would stick with what she knew and liked to do.
(ii) employment by others
CS’ analysis – Working as an employee of a single lawyer or a group of lawyers would provide a stable income and substitute help to service her clients if CS needed time away for sickness or vacation. Potential disadvantages of yielding some control of her business to others with whom she had no long term business relationship was outweighed by the advantages of being an employee (known in the legal profession as an “associate” in contrast to the law firm owners, known as “partners”). And hopefully an initial associate relationship could someday lead to becoming a partner, which in a large law firm is often a 7 year process.
(iii) self-employment
CS’ analysis – Working for yourself as the business owner has many potential advantages including you make all the decisions, keep all the profits and have no problems with business partners because there are none. However, disadvantages include having to make all the decisions, likely no profits for awhile (until income meets and then exceeds expenses) and no co-workers to cover for your absence unless you hire an associate attorney with that related expense and required supervision.
ONE ATTORNEY’S DECISIONS TO ALTER HER CAREER PATH
As noted above, CS decided to alter – not completely change – her career path; she would stay within her legal career but proceed through the two options (employment by others or self employment) in the order she chose: Plan A – seek employment by others but if unsuccessful, proceed to Plan B – start her own law business.
FIRST ALTERED CAREER PATH
Because CS had no experience running her own business and preferred to have a stable, increased income from the very beginning of her career move, she decided to seek employment by another lawyer or possibly by a group of lawyers (a “law firm”). So CS called a solo lawyer who she knew and respected from several years of dealing with him as an adversary and whose law practice was also devoted exclusively to family law matters, to see if he was interested in “combining forces” under the business umbrella of his already well established law practice.
CS assumed that he would recognize her as someone with respected experience beyond needing supervision. Indeed, he was interested in discussing her potential employment. Several meetings followed but ultimately he decided against hiring CS for no specifically announced reason other than “after consideration, I’ll just continue to work by myself.” Years later, CS pressed him for an honest answer, which he confessed: “My wife was opposed to me working with a female attorney.”
FAILURE TO SUCCEED WITH A JOB INITIATIVE DOESN’T DOOM A CAREER
CS was severely disappointed by the rejection of her initiative and now, years later, realizes that she might have considered seeking employment with a different lawyer or group of lawyers but she probably feared a second rejection so she promptly moved to her Plan B: opening her own law office.
TAKING A REASONABLE RISK
Editor’s note – The key for eventual success in taking a risk is to only proceed if it’s a reasonable risk, which includes these considerations:
(1) Experience with the new activities – CS had 4 years’ experience, most of it without needing supervision, handling all aspects of family law. This was more than sufficient. What she lacked was experience hiring a secretary and managing all the administrative details of a business (finding an affordable office, negotiating with a landlord, leasing office equipment, hiring an accountant, purchasing insurance, advertising, etc.)
(2) Protection from start-up problems – CS had saved enough money and was approved by a bank for a loan which would cover the projected time before income met expenses.
(3) Projected finances (income and expenses) – CS believed her work with family law clients had already earned respect from clients and other lawyers who would likely refer new, paying clients. She would select a modest office and keep expenses as low as possible for as long as possible.
(4) Consideration of likely problems with their solutions – CS projected her only problems would occur in managing a business (solution: hire a secretary who could do basic bookkeeping, supplemented by an outside accountant as needed) and providing attorney back-up if she was unavailable (solution: stay healthy and avoid vacations until the business can afford to hire an associate; in the meantime, courts will reschedule hearings if an attorney is ill).
(5) Criteria to continue or quit – CS would have to quit and seek employment by others if and when her personal savings and bank loans were insufficient to cover required expenses.
CS’ mother listened to her daughter’s Plan B, including CS’ related concerns, and advised: “What is the worst that can happen? You may fail and have to find a boring job until you can find an interesting job! So go for it!”
BUSINESS SUCCESS MAY LEAD TO DIFFERENT OPPORTUNITIES
CS accepted her self-created personal challenge to create a new business. An office with reasonable rent was secured. A secretary with bookkeeping skills was hired. An insurance agent and an accountant were identified. Announcements of her new law firm were forwarded to all former clients (ironically, none of them could have afforded to hire her now but hopefully they might refer others who could afford to pay her hourly rate.)
With CS’ community contacts developed through living in the area for many years plus her extensive volunteer attorney work and referrals from respectful fellow attorneys, CS slowly but steadily built her client base and within six months, income met expenses. By the end of her first twelve months in business, income exceeded expenses, thus yielding profits to begin to pay off loans and restore her savings.
Meanwhile, the situation in other local law businesses was continuing to evolve as some law partners were often on the lookout for solo attorneys who might be persuaded to join their law firm in order to provide additional client services and enhanced income for the law firm. Thus one day, CS received a call from a lawyer she had worked with years ago when both were staff attorneys at the Legal Assistance agency. Would CS be interested in joining his law firm partnership?
RECALL QUESTIONS TO ASK WHEN CONSIDERING A JOB CHANGE
(1) What is / are the problem(s) with your current job? – CS was enjoying most aspects of her own law business but being the only attorney available to service all her increasing clients’ needs created scheduling problems and little time off-duty time to rest.
(2) Will a different job solve the current problem(s)? – without creating a new problem? Joining a partnership of lawyers would reduce management responsibilities, provide client coverage for her absences and potentially steadier and increased income.
(3) What are the available options to pursue in a possible new job? Compensation and degree of overall management would have to be understood in detail and acceptable. Most important is what do you know about the background (business experience and reputation for fairness and honesty) of your prospective business partners? CS was confident to proceed with joining a new business partnership because she totally trusted the judgment of her long time professional friend who was already established within the new group; she believed the business details could be worked out to mutual satisfaction.
SECOND ALTERED CAREER PATH
CS’s partnership with her new law firm worked well for several years – until it didn’t when one of the law partners persuaded enough of the other partners to demand significant changes in determining compensation. That story would fill a book but in brief, CS agreed to the revised partnership agreement in the hope that it would result in less office stress and essential fairness; she was comforted by the continued partnership involvement with her long time professional friend plus new friends within the partnership.
Ultimately, the one block of partners created such tension and animosity with other partners that the partnership disbanded. Several partners departed to different law firms. CS remained in her office with a new partnership agreement for several more years until she decided it was time to consider once again the old Plan B: owning her own law business.
THIRD ALTERED CAREER PATH
Again, CS considered all the questions one should ask when considering a job change:
(1) What is / are the problem(s) with your current job? CS reached the limit of her patience having to periodically deal with issues involving compensation and management, which she could not control.
(2) Will a different job solve the current problem without creating new ones? CS now appreciated the advantages of owning your own business and working with a small group of similarly minded partners or associates who would readily agree upon major issues and shared responsibilities.
(3) What are the options to pursue instead of the current job? CS thought briefly (less than one second) about joining a different law firm but in view of her previous, successful experience in owning and managing her own law firm, she was confident this was her best option. She knew the problems and how to solve them, principally by hiring or co-partnering with someone she could trust to share her values on the basis of their previous experience working together.
Thus the final evolution of CS’ career path, starting with Assistant Dean at a law school, then to public service attorney dealing with family law issues, next to solo private attorney, different law firm partner and returning to her own law firm dealing with family law clients continuously for several decades.
PERSPECTIVES
As the original Dean of CS’ law school advised each first year law student: “The law is a jealous mistress” meaning that clients have unscheduled problems and you’ll need to work with them on more than a Monday through Friday, 9 to 5 basis. You will also need to constantly stay informed of new developments in the law.
It is very rare (actually unheard of since World War 2 days), for a new lawyer to start a new business as a solo practitioner. Indeed, it would be unwise to do so, without sufficient experience in client advice / representation and managing a business. So lawyers who wish to advise and represent clients (many don’t – they proceed to work for corporations or the government) join either small or large law firms as an “associate.” Some associates stay with the same firm forever but it is normal for associates and even partners to make several moves to different law firms during their legal careers.
CAREER SATISFACTION
CS’ career path is not unusual. While on the surface it would appear that she took several business risks to alter her career path (solo to partner to solo), the essence of her career was actually consistent: assisting people through their critical family law issues while always seeking fairness and respect in her professional relationships with co-workers, clients, adversaries and within the court system.
The eventual profitability of CS’ career in the private sector enabled her to make financial and professional service contributions to many non-profit, community service organizations and occasional pro bono clients who could not afford her services.
There are many, many people who can – and do – look back at the positive difference in their domestic tranquility as a result of the legal advice and representation provided to them by CS. Editor’s note – CS won’t acknowledge the truth of the preceding sentence but this editor has heard it from multiple sources, including Judges, her adversaries and clients.
