I’m in an FDA regulatory group in DC and I have friends in the same practice group at another firm. It’s hard to compare it to other groups without experiencing those groups firsthand. We do some work supporting corporate groups and generally the lawyers on the corporate side are more demanding and have expectations that we don’t have in our group. We are definitely very busy and have to work on weekends or pull late nights sometimes, but it’s not the default expectation. Holiday and vacation time is respected unless there really IS a fire drill.
But, big law is still big law, no matter what. There is no such thing as WLB. A family member was asking about my social life and I honestly said that I don’t have one. I personally don’t have the energy for it even when we have slower weeks. I have to use that time to physically and mentally recover from the intense weeks and to take care of real-life things that usually fall by the wayside. I also need a lot of sleep to feel refreshed and productive. I think big law is a better fit for some people than others. I’m not sure that it’s wise to try to suss out the “better” practice groups for WLB. It’s more a matter of what you can handle and make work.
Also wanted to add that everyone in my group is great to work with and for. So, my experience of lack of WLB is not due to dealing with screaming partners or anything. I can’t even imagine putting up with big law if I had to deal with screaming partners or cutthroat associates.
Also a DC firm FDA regulatory lawyer. Agree with all of this, and wanted to add that, unlike how I understand lit and corporate groups to be, we don’t really have a lot of “easy” billable hours, like doc review or basic diligence. Lots of headache-inducing complicated legal questions, and fewer hours you can simply churn away at. I think that makes FDA regulatory work challenging from a WLB perspective even if we aren’t necessarily billing crazy hours. I imagine this is also the case for other regulatory practice groups, but don’t know that firsthand.
In your experience, how the exit ops for your practice group? Anecdotally, I have heard that pharma and biotech companies have a great need for such attorneys. After how many years of practice do you think it is possible to go in-house with a nice or at least somewhat decent (i.e., $150K or above) salary?
Covington and Hogan, in that order. Sidley is very good at pharmaceutical regulatory work but doesn’t really do any food/cosmetics regulatory work. There are also some boutiques (Keller & Heckman, Hyman Phelps & McNamara, etc.) that are very good at FDA regulatory work, but I don’t know if they hire people out of law school.
Counterpoint that at least at my firm a lot of the FDA work is deal support, so as a junior you end up doing a lot of diligence, which is an easy way to bill hours (though there’s steep learning curve). I’m a junior but it seems like if your group is small even the seniors end up doing a fair amount of this too.
My first in-house FDA regulatory law role was in a non-DC/non-NYC company. Consider looking in pockets of areas where there are healthcare/med device/biotech companies (such as San Diego, Bay Area, Research Triangle, Seattle, etc).
In your experience, how the exit ops for your practice group? Anecdotally, I have heard that pharma and biotech companies have a great need for such attorneys. After how many years of practice do you think it is possible to go in-house with a nice or at least somewhat decent (i.e., $150K or above) salary?
While you typically need at least three years experience to to get a greater variety and amount of exit opportunities, it’s definitely possible to make a move sooner. I’ve been talking to recruiters about companies open to associates with just one year of experience. The pay range is $150k to $180k all-in. Obviously, pre-law school relevant experience or other qualifications (e.g. a Ph.D.) helps.
Can you meet your billables? Do you find making partners in this area more difficult?
It’s generally possible to meet billables. Certainly less precarious if the firm’s billable requirement is around 1900 or 1950. It’s probably a little easier to make partner. Experience at the FDA helps (and is encouraged by firms).
This is great to know. In terms of in-house positions, what are the titles typically? Haven’t seen any “FDA counsel” titles, so I’m guessing maybe something like “corporate counsel”?
This is great to know. In terms of in-house positions, what are the titles typically? Haven’t seen any “FDA counsel” titles, so I’m guessing maybe something like “corporate counsel”?
Various titles with “counsel” in them - just plain counsel, associate counsel, associate general counsel, assistant general counsel, senior counsel and so on. The job description is what will mention FDA.