See More Recent Picks from Corporette®:
This post contains affiliate links and Corporette® may earn commissions for purchases made through links in this post. For more details see here. Thank you so much for your support!
We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Workwear sales of note for 6.02.23:
- Nordstrom – The Half-Yearly Sale has started! See our thoughts here.
- Ann Taylor – $50 off $150; $100 off $250+; extra 30% off all sale styles
- Banana Republic Factory – Up to 50% off everything + extra 25% off purchase
- Boden – Sale, up to 50% off
- Cole Haan – Up to 50% off select styles; extra 20% off sandals & sneakers
- Eloquii – 60% off all tops
- Express – 30% off all dresses, tops, shorts & more; extra 50% off clearance
- H&M – Up to 60% off online and in-store.
- J.Crew – Up to 50% off “dressed up” styles (lots of cute dresses!); extra 50% off select sale
- J.Crew Factory – Up to 60% off everything; 60% off 100s of summer faves; extra 60% off clearance
- J.McLaughlin – The Sale Event: extra 30% off
- Loft – 40% off tops; 30% off full-price styles
- Sephora – Up to 50% off select beauty.
- Shopbop – Up to 60% off sale
- Sue Sartor – Lots of cute dresses on sale!
- Talbots – 25-40% off select styles
Other noteworthy sales:
- CB2.com – Up to 40% off; pop-up sale up to 30% off
- Joss & Main – Up to 60% off, plus an extra 20% off with code
- Tuft & Needle – Save up to $775 on mattresses (Reader-favorite brand; Kat really likes hers!)
- West Elm – Up to 25% off in-stock furniture; up to 60% off clearance
Some of our latest posts here at Corporette…
And some of our latest threadjacks here at Corporette (reader questions and commentary) — see more here!
- Favorite comfy pants for an overnight plane ride?
- I’ve got a nasty case of tech neck…
- What’s a good place for a relaxing solo escape?
- What’s the best commuter backpack?
- I’m early 40s and worry my career arc is ending…
- I canNOT figure out the proportions in this current season of fashion…
- How is everyone wearing scarves in 2023?
- What shoes are people wearing to work between boot and sandal season?
- What’s a good place for a relaxing solo escape?
- What are some of your go-to outfits that feel current?
- I need more activities that are social, easy to learn and don’t involve extreme running/jumping/etc.
If anyone wants to dress up as Meghan Markle next Halloween, this is perfect for it — this HAS to be a knockoff of the Givenchy, right?
I was just thinking the same thing! Perfect knockoff.
That was my exact thought. The Markle Sparkle!
I thought the same thing!
Thank you for linking to “What Meghan Wore”. Added to my bookmarks for weekend afternoon amusement!
There is also a What Kate Wore and What Kate’s Kids Wore :).
Love this dress!
I like this but the back is terrible. Hate plunging backs.
This is so wonderfully Troop Beverly Hills.
Not as much as this: http://slickitup.com/suits/expensive-homosexual-jumpsuit-limited-edition.html
I need help finding dress pants. The issue I have is they are either too tight in the rear and very inappropriate for work, or because of my small thighs, there is a bunch of extra fabric in the upper thigh area, making me look shapeless. I’ve never found an in-between that is just right. I desperately need some new pairs and I’m getting so frustrated. Any recommendations? What are everyone’s favorite pair of pants?
I’m a pear, so I am Team BR Logan pants.
BR has lots of dress pants in different cuts — one will work for you.
This might not be your issue, but I was buying the “curvy” fit line of dress pants, because I am a pear. And then saw a pic of myself in them and realized they are so baggy in the thighs because I have thin thighs. I tried on the regular fit and it fits me so much better in the thighs.
anon a mouse
AT Loft Julie fit. You can get the Julie fit which is curved through the hip, but then skinny or straight legs, which might solve your thigh issue.
I work at a very small organization and I frequently have to work with our accountant (who works remotely so this is all done over email). He is constantly screwing things up, or not doing something that I asked. And the thing that kills me is that he won’t tell me WHY. I have to discover the mistakes, or discover something he failed to do, and then follow up with him to ask why something didn’t get done, and wait for him to get back to me. It’s happening weekly. I’m about to pull my hair out. I use extremely clear and direct language in my emails. I’ve told my boss. I don’t know what else to do. Aggghhhh
Have you had meetings over the phone discussing it with him?
This person shouldn’t be your accountant any more.
+1. Unprofessional, unhelpful, un-hired. Bye.
Tell your boss again. Bring a prepared list of occurrences over time and be able to tell your boss that this is a sample of the X number of times you’ve had similar issues. Bring email examples for at least a few. Make your case to get this guy fired.
I work remotely like your current accountant. I get new clients because of former accountants like your current accountant.
Hugs to you. It is VERY frustrating dealing with loosers, especially over the phone. Morover, men do NOT even admit when they make mistakes and try to cover it over like dogs who poo, then scratch their feet to cover over the poo. However, the poo is NOT EVER covered and it continues to smell. What you should do (and what I did with Mason), is to coach him, but simultanously tell the manageing partner so that when it is time to have him leave, it is not a surprise b/c your manageing partner will be on board to give him the boot.
What does asking him “why” do for you? Is it making your situation any better? Because it sounds like a real PITA to wait for him to explain himself and I’m not sure you’re getting value out of it. Just tell him to fix his mistakes and not make them again. And if you have any power over his hiring/firing, use it.
Use the power of clear and concise communication to write an email to your boss with clear examples and screenshots of at least three items that failed to be completed as directed. This will go much further than “he didn’t do what I asked and failed to take responsibility”. This is actionable and your boss will not be able to ignore it.
Talk to me about titles. If the job is first lawyer at a small company, what title(s) might be appropriate? Trying to gauge what might be good if they don’t go for “General Counsel.” Thank you.
If they don’t go for “General Counsel” in this case, I would consider it a huge red flag that they won’t respect the legal function. If you are THE lawyer, and you are expected to advise on material risk, you need the GC title, and IMO you need to report to the CEO. Any company that gives you a lesser title and/or you report to anyone other than the CEO will be a headache client that won’t consider or respect your advice. Clients who don’t respect legal advice/legality bring risk to the lawyer (see Michael Cohen).
+1 I’ve seen lawyers with only 5 or so years of experience get the GC title just b/c they were the only lawyer and thus providing general legal function for the org./company.
Vice President-Legal Affairs? Chief Legal Officer? I think it depends on how expansive your role is beyond legal advice. Are you at a decision-maker/c-suite level?
If it’s a tech company, “Head of” is a standard title in that world. I have a friend who was the first actuary hired by a tech company. Rather than “chief actuary,” which would have been his title in a traditional finance/insurance company, his title is “head actuary,” which we find kind of funny.
GC now, former Corporate Counsel
I disagree with the below posters. It really depends on the company. I’d recommend Corporate Counsel as an alternative. It gives room to grow and you can grow into the GC title.
OP here. That’s interesting. I’ve been corporate counsel elsewhere for about 4 years, so I’m not looking for a pile more responsibility without a great title. Is it a red flag to report into the CFO? I agree eventually it should be a role directly into the CEO, but at a startup is reporting to the CFO unheard of?
Sorry but listen to the people above, it is a red flag and a nightmare to report to someone lower than the CEO. To have the right power level, the GC needs to sit in the c-suite, not report to it.
A friend of mine reports to the CFO as corporate counsel at a small company. She is enjoying the role but definitely stresses the hardships of reporting to someone who approaches things with a very different mindset. She is also learning a lot, but you have to feel strongly about standing up for yourself when it comes to legal advice. I work in a bigger department and my GC has been invaluable in having my back when I tell the head of department X they can’t do XYZ for legal reasons – I’m not sure I would like my job as much if I didn’t report to him. It can be really hard to explain the law to people who don’t really understand the law and generally find it to be an annoyance.
Op here again. Thanks for everyone’s input. I’m in a larger company now where the GC doesn’t really have anyone’s back, so I wonder if it might be good to report to a CFO with a dotted line to the CEO until I get my bearings with culture, better understanding of finance and budgeting, etc. I’m stagnant right now despite having asked for more learning and observational attorneys. Lots of promises and no follow through. I have no problems standing up for myself and surfacing challenging legal issues, so I think the CFO would have to understand the concept of independence vis-a-vis the board especially. I just wonder if having a buffer might not be terrible for a first timer GC. Really curious about everyone’s thoughts.
opportunities – not attorneys!
Only if you want your advice diluted and translated for you, and you don’t want a real seat at the table.
What makes you think that buffer would ever go away? I think you’re setting yourself up to never have the power you need in that role.
+1. I have seen plenty of titles like “VP of Legal Affairs” or something that matches the titles of other executives who report to the CEO. But IMO, it’s a HUGE red flag to have the top lawyer report to anyone besides the CEO.
OP, I work with many small companies and GCs, advising them on legal department management issues. It’s very common for the first lawyer in a small company to report into the CFO first, but it creates a lot of issues for the company and the lawyer. Legal risks and issues never get top billing, Legal from the beginning is viewed as a cost center, and CFO may even do the roll-up and reporting of legal issues and risks as part of quarterly presentations. Technology investments, growing the team, selection and use of firms all get extra scrutiny. Dotted line to the CEO with direct line to the CFO is great in theory, but very hard to implement in practice.
Title and reporting are two very different negotiating issues. For title, VP of Legal Affairs, CLO, VP Legal, GC are all very common. If I were you, I would be willing to budge on title, but not on reporting structure.
So bottom line – I agree with other posters. Advocate for the CEO reporting line first.
Thank you, all, and especially Manageress. Really good food for thought. I will see how our conversations go. Important to remember and remind myself that job offers are not necessarily things we must accept.
I have a client where the GC reports to the CFO, not the CEO, of a successful start-up. The CEO is an entrepreneurial spirit who likes to deal with big picture stuff and delegates all detail stuff to others. It seems to work well for the GC, who has the ability to pick up the phone and call the CEO if needed, but who has the CFO to help the GC make sure stuff actually gets done. So, it’s possible, but depends on how the business is actually run.
I agree there are instances where this can work. Occasionally, a CEO ends up with way to many people reporting directly to him/her, and if they are bringing in a first lawyer is not keen to assume responsibility for another direct report.
If you are going to consider reporting to anyone other than the CEO it’s important to have an understanding upfront that you will still have regular contact with the CEO (basically a dotted line) and that you will be considered part of the executive team for planning/leadership discussions. It’s also critical to get a good feel for who you will be reporting to, what their risk tolerance and expectations are, and how supportive they will be of the legal function in general.
I am the sole attorney at a 400MM rev run rate, growing at 5-10% a month startup. I was a midlevel when I went in-house and deal with all the things (Employment, Imm, Commercial Contracting, Corporate (equity and dept, corp gov, board relations), IP and real estate. I report to the COO. We don’t have a CFO. I sit next to the head of Finance and work very closely with him much of the day. I sit directly outside the CEO’s office and have an open door. I am not yet in Leadership Team meetings (new here), but will be soon. This works only because the COO and CEO are co-founders, have worked together for a decade at prior companies (our company is ~5 years old) and are truly best friends. I cannot see it working in other situations. IME, it’s pretty normal for Legal to report to the CFO in larger companies, but CEO in smaller companies. That said, if your CEO is not a details guy, CFO is preferable. There’s no one answer to this.
My title is corporate counsel. I’m going to ask for Head of Legal once I’m proved. We will get a GC above me as we prep for IPO readiness.
Bit of downer topic, but how do those of you without kids think about preparing wills and your estate? My husband is obviously the beneficiary on all of my accounts now, but not sure what happens if we are both gone. For various reasons, our preference would be that none of our other family members get our estate. We haven’t really thought about it, but we’d probably donate much of our money…but if we do that, who is responsible for doing things like liquidating our stuff (and again, can’t depend on family to do this)?
If I was in this position, I think I would check into having my financial planner as the executor.
Call whom you’d be donating to — they might already have experience with this. I am thinking you’d probably choose an existing college or university, or a large, ongoing charity that you’ve had experience with (think World Wildlife Fund or American Red Cross or even your church that’s been in existence 10+ years). They have people there or have experience in “planned giving” and can give instructions to you in how to write your will or if someone there (their attorney? Their local probate court?) can serve as executor.
-1 Your lawyer should do this legwork, not you. Your lawyer knows exactly what is needed and won’t have to deal with the sales pitch from the planned giving folks.
Securities Regulator Here
Federal and state securities laws prohibit a financial planner from acting as executor for a client except in two scenarios: (1) the client is a family member of the planner or (2) the planner has a personal relationship with the client that did not arise from the planner-client engagement.
There was a thread earlier this week about finding a professional trustee to administer your will. For retirement accounts, you might be able to ask the holder of the funds (Vanguard, etc.) how to designate a charity as your contingent beneficiary (after your spouse).
+1 — you can do a lot by contract (naming United Way as a contingent beneficiary if your spouse dies first). But really, truly, please: talk to an attorney re a will/living trust.
Your executor is charged with distributing your stuff per your will. It isn’t like they have a choice. And if you don’t write a will, the next of kin of the surviving spouse will share everything.
This. Executor has a (judicial? fiduciary? both?) responsibility to settle the estate and then distribute to beneficiary, as named by the deceased in the will. I’m not in law, but I did just serve as executor for FIL’s small estate… not for nothing, it’s an incredibly sh!tty process, even with a good estate attorney.
Can you just name any ol’ person then and stick them with that responsibility? Or how does that process work? (Obviously IANAL)
A person named as executor in a will may decline to serve. It’s best to name an executor and one or two alternate executors.
Those with stronger legal backgrounds will I’m sure have better advice, but years ago what used to explained to service members deploying to war zones was you need to set up an estate with someone to oversee it and the children as beneficiaries of the estate. If you leave it to minor’s the chances of it ending up with the family you don’t want to have it are high. Similar with designating guardians, and the person who oversees the estate and the one designated as the guardian don’t need to be (and arguably shouldn’t be) the same person. Random things the military taught me I’m always trying to vet out. That and the very many ways to pass a drug test…
We don’t and won’t have kids, but plan to leave our estate (the bulk of it) to our niblings. That said, if we didn’t have any or had strained family relations, I would leave money to my friends kids – there’s a lot of wonderful little people in my orbit who I know could use some help someday.
We’re in the same boat, and half of my stuff will go to my sister, half to my best friend, who has been a better sister to me than any blood relation could ever be.
Prime “targets” for the executor title: the primary beneficiaries (or their parents), a close friend (they can get paid for the role), or a local trust company.
Small Firm IP Litigator
This. Both my husband’s immediate family and mine are complete no-gos on being an executor or being left anything because they are one of irresponsible, not trustworthy, or incapable. We made my godfather our executor, and named a close mutual friend as a contingent executor. The beneficiaries are a few friends and a few more distant relatives we are actually closer with than immediate family.
But definitely get an estate planning attorney. I was surprised to learn that it was wise for us to set up a trust. I thought those were only for (very) wealthy people. Not so in our state.
I would set up a living trust. You can find an estate attorney who will set up the trust, your wills, your advance healthcare directive, and your power of attorney for financial matters as a package deal, not too expensively.
anon a mouse
I picked my most responsible friend and talked to her about it. The will specifies a % of the estate that would go to her as an executor’s fee.
Talk to your lawyer about the options. List contingent executors.
+1,000,000 This is the advice that you pay your lawyer to give. If you aren’t getting good advice on this front you need a different lawyer. Source: estate planning attorney.
Thanks, everyone! I think the consensus is: I need to get an estate planning attorney. It’s probably too late in the thread to ask, but any recommendations for how to do this? I’m not a lawyer and don’t actually know any lawyers either.
Ask local friends and acquaintances if they can recommend anyone. Or ask for recommendations on NextDoor or neighborhood equivalent.
Google it. Look for local estate attorneys. They’re often single person shops.
I’m an estate planning attorney. Ask co-workers for recommendations, and if you don’t turn up any good names, check the ACTEC website (The American College of Trust and Estate Counsel) for names of respected estate planners. It’s at actec dot org. You can search for attorneys by region.
Question- why does everyone not recommend going to law school? Or recommend it only if you know what “practicing law” means and like it? I’m curious because I definitely did not know what practicing law was but now, 5 years out of law school, I’m not sure I would tell my old self don’t do it only if you really know what practicing law means. I sure didn’t – and if someone said that to me I would not have gone to law school and would not have had the career that I have. And, if it matters, I did not go to a T-20 law school (Top 100 school near a big east coast city).
Because it is very, very expensive.
+100 on expensive. There are plenty of other things I could have done that would have made me come out far, far ahead of starting my career behind people who started after their bachelor’s and with significantly less debt. I have less than 40k left on law school debt, no college loans, and bosses who tell me I’m “talented” for being a lawyer, and yet I would still not redo this if I could redo this.
Because law school is very expensive and taking on a lot of debt for murky reasons is unwise. I think law school is great for lots of people but you really need to think it through. Like, on here I often see “don’t go unless it’s HYS or free T-14.” I think that’s absurd and in my practice area I work with people who went to local tier 3 law schools all the time. But those people are often making 80 or 90k, so maybe think the finances through b
A lot of law jobs are with govts (good health plans, maybe good retirement benefits, low pay). A lot more are with smaller firms (often: 2K/month health plans for family coverage; maybe just a non-matched 401k, lower pay).
Our secretary (high school + community college) makes more than many small firm lawyers (but without the $150K in law school debt). Her health insurance is free (family coverage is subsidized) and she gets a 401k match. And doesn’t have to work lawyer hours.
With low pay, you have to love being a lawyer. Not all lawyers are high-debt, low-pay, but a lot of people are and you never know where you’ll land.
Because it’s so expensive and the job prospects still aren’t that great, especially if you don’t go to a top law school. Yet so many people I went to school with who went straight through from undergrad and had no work experience still assumed you could graduate from a decent law school and waltz straight into a job with a starting salary of $100k+.
Because everyone goes into law thinking they’re going to be the exception and not the rule, and as a result many regret investing that kind of money into amcareer they hate and don’t earn enough at.
You kind of have to consider the source. Lawyers tend to be pretty risk averse people. Going to law school is very risky – you’ll likely take on a ton of debt and you’ll have limited career prospects unless you’re near the top of your class (which, statistically, you likely will not be). And even if you get a job, the profession has a super high burnout rate so chances are good you won’t like it anyway. Basically you’re asking a group of risk averse people whether you should take on this really risky activity. Don’t be shocked when DON’T DO IT is your answer.
OP here- I wasn’t on the top of my class. I had a 3.2 GPA. But I worked my butt of in trying to get internships and networking with people. I always tell people that you have to work very hard in law school to make connections and get decent grades. My husband went to law school and did not have good grades. He started out in a temp job and received an offer there. He worked his butt of and now he makes 150K. Even though he has 150K loans, he would not nearly be making as much as he does right now without taking on those loans. I feel/think that law gives you the tools to earn more and make a good living. Yes, opportunities do not come easy, but they are there.
Well, it appears that you are the exception, not the rule. Glad you’re happy with your career. There are many, many threads here discussing in detail the many valid reasons people recommend against going to law school. Review those and you should find your answer to you question.
I am not such a person. When people ask me about law school, I say YES, go for it, but know you have to work your tuchus off to be successful. Too many people my age grew up on Ali McBeal, where the women all just dressed wonderfully, and had great opportunities with men, but that is NOT how it is in real life. No one would do a show where all you would see is people writing breifs and billeing their cleints, with no boyfreinds and little opportunity for s-xueal adventures. That would be dull, but that would be me. FOOEY! That is why I want to be MARRIED and live in Chapaqua! YAY!!!!!
I don’t advise against it on a blanket basis. I definitely am the person who went to law school because she didn’t know what she wanted to do with her life and had a non-marketable degree, and I knew that I had the type of skills that could make me a successful lawyer based on what I saw in terms of what lawyers at large firms did. I didn’t know if I would like it, but I thought I would be good at it, and I figured that was a decent basis for the decision. And ten years post-graduation, I’m a partner at an AmLaw 50 law firm. I truly never imagined this was how my life would end up, but it’s been great.
The people I worry about are the people who seem to not have a good grasp on what lawyers do. I worry when people tell me they want to be lawyers because they like to argue, or because they love the constitution. I worry about people who want to be lawyers because they are passionate about a particular cause (but don’t have the skill/aptitude for actually practicing). Basically, I worry about anyone who doesn’t seem to have a sense of actual practice or who just thinks lawyer = big salary.
That makes a lot of sense. I would say that I went to law school because I felt it would open up opportunities for me. I did not know what it meant to be an actual lawyer. I came from a tech/science background and therefore did not even fit in when I first started law school because everyone else “loved the constitution” and “liked to argue.” But I do think that law school opened up opportunities for me that weren’t there. And I juxtapose with my husband who was a pre-law major and was one of those who “loved the constitution.” Law school was an awakening for him, but he grabbed the opportunities that came and worked his butt of to excel. He would not be where he is without his law degree.
Well sure it opens up opportunities in the sense that you cannot be a lawyer without a law degree. You’re not wrong that going to law school opens up opportunities, and for some people, those opportunities may be in the form of high paying jobs. No one ever said otherwise. But what going to law school also does is close doors. It closes doors on other types of jobs that don’t pay you enough money to service your debt. (Sometimes it also makes you less attractive for non-legal jobs because people believe you’re over qualified. It also closes doors in the sense that there’s an opportunity cost to going to law school.) The problem is that people believe it will always open more doors to financial security than it will close. That is not true. You and your husband obviously worked hard and made it work, but the reality is that it is not a good investment for many people *even if they work hard.*
Because people are delusional? Sorry but all you have to do is go to any T14 and in under 10 years in biglaw (not even as a partner), you can walk out with a million dollar net worth even with debt. What other profession allows that? Maybe I-banking but the structure there is huge bonuses once you become a VP or MD and most don’t make it to that level — most are pushed out in the associate stage 2-3 years out of school. Maybe tech – but not everyone has an engineers mind or the ability to get hired by Nvidia or Google – because your small companies don’t pay like that. Medicine – yeah they start making their money after age 30-35. Personally I think the turn off to Law is that 99% of people went in because they had nothing better to do, liked to argue etc. And then to make $/pay off debt they had to do biglaw/midlaw and then were utterly shocked that an interest in business is helpful when all your clients are corporations. So they miss their days debating about history or whatever – which no one is going to pay you for.
What about the people who don’t go to T14 schools? What would your opinion be then?
I think there are a lot of incorrect assumptions here. I went to a T14 school and not everyone who wanted a job in biglaw got one. And those who did get a job in biglaw, not all of them make it ten years in biglaw (and no, not all of them chose to leave, plenty get pushed out or laid off or told to find something within 6 months), those who stay in biglaw don’t necessarily get the headline compensation you see on above the law, plenty don’t get their full bonus/annual class promotion, plenty of the biglaw firms paying “top compensation” actually aren’t paying top comp to all associates once you dig into requirements, etc. surviving ten years in biglaw getting the full biglaw salary is again the exception and not the rule. Most people who start in biglaw don’t make it 4 years let alone 10. Sure other professions may not be as lucrative on paper but they also don’t require 6 figure debt and foregoing 3 years of salary/experience
Small Firm IP Litigator
Former biglaw senior associate here. Even if you do survive, it is an important point that biglaw firms who purport to pay top comp don’t actually pay it. It gets harder and harder to make your hours (which is what is required to get large bonus) as you get more and more senior. Your group can also have a slow year, and you get no bonus. Some firms, like my old one, had a policy of pushing you down to a lower hours track the next year if you failed to meet your hours resulting in about a 15-20% pay cut, regardless of why you didn’t hit your target and without taking into account contributions like biz dev. All of this, combined with the lack of development opportunities and high billable rates making it super hard for young lawyers to bring in work, made me leave.
People also assume that you always make more money in biglaw than you do at small firms. I did, and was pleasantly surprised to find out I was totally wrong. I make more now that I did in biglaw, work less, and like my job much more. My base is lower, but annual bonuses are tied to (1) firm revenues and (2) your performance (like normal companies) and since we are a successful plaintiff-side firm, they are quite generous. And my medical/dental/vision insurance premiums are 100% paid by the firm, and I get 401k matching. I can count on one hand the number of weekends I had to do any work this year.
Pretty sure Anonymous at 11:35 has posted this completely delusional perception of the legal industry before. It’s numerically impossible and completely illogical to assume that “all you have to do” to work at a big law firm for 10 years is go to a T-14 school. I am floored that someone whose logical reasoning skills are this poor is a lawyer.
First, I went to a T-5, and not even everyone at my law school who wanted biglaw jobs got one. There is no way that everyone at a T-14 school can get biglaw, the numbers just don’t work that way.
Second, the vast, vast majority of people who go in to biglaw do not make it 10 years. Many get pushed out in year 3-4, many hate it so much and can’t stand to work there for 10 years, and many are not willing to sell away all of their late 20s and early 30s.
Third, even if you stayed in biglaw for 10 years, you would not have a million dollar net worth. Over $500, sure, that is possible. Maybe ever $750k if you are very, very lucky and the stock market is doing well. Over a million, no, not if you graduated with $250k-300k in debt, which is normal.
Because the actual “practicing law” is only what you do for a short period of time. You can’t just be in the courtroom each day on a trial and arguing your client’s case. That’s just a small part. (unless you’re a DA or PD, and then you worry about budget cuts and having enough resources generally and you get paid peanuts).
In my discussions with college kids who want to go to law school, they want to go because they “want to help people.” Which is admirable and great and awesome. There are just several other avenues and ways to help people that don’t require being a lawyer. These ways involve less school and significantly less debt. You don’t get to “help people” and make the big law money. (or, if you do, please let me know – i’d like to apply there)
I was the one who posted last night about starting out your law career not knowing anything, then you know things and can do your job somewhat or mostly independently, but then you have pressure to bring in business and train junior lawyers and deal with administrative and management stuff. So the window where you get to just “practice law” is relatively small. A long time, big wig equity partner at my husband’s firm recently was describing his day – he spent 5 hours filling out an application to continue to be on Wells Fargo’s list of approved law firms. Five hours. He then spent another three hours reviewing pre bills for clients, and another hour dealing with firm management stuff (going to a budget meeting, responding to emails). He’s a legendary trial attorney in our state, and he described his day as “trying to engage in the practice of law” but was thwarted by administrative matters left and right.
I’ve never had another career, so I don’t know if there are similar misconceptions between what X job looks like on TV and what X job actually is. I imagine this occurs in many fields. I just think a lot of them cost a lot less money and time to get into.
Because law school is a big commitment in terms of money and time. Most/the majority of my law school friends have either left the law or are plotting their escape. Why spend a huge sum of money and time (even if you have a full scholarship, you’re still foregoing 3 years of income and experience) if you aren’t certain you actually want to be a lawyer. Yes you can “do anything” with a law degree, but why waste your time and money if what you ultimately end up doing doesn’t require law school? FWIW I am the exception and actually love my job but would advise prospective students to really consider before going since I’ve seen that I’m the exception and not the rule.
But can you “do anything” with a law degree? I think there’s a perception out there, outside the legal community, that if you went into a non legal, non legal adjacent job, or a job that is outside the realm of the law you used to practice (I know someone who represented private equity funds on the legal side for a bank, now he works with that business unit in the bank – not as a lawyer, but as a banker) that the non-legal job is a “just for right now” job and you are too ambitious to be in that job. I.e., I think that people outside the legal field would see lawyers as overqualified for other jobs.
Totally fair point! I think there are definitely positions/people who have found their law degree “useful” for some other career (law schools LOVE to promote these people) but I agree they are again probably the exception and not the rule. In any case my point was more even if it’s true that a law dregree is “useful” beyond legal practice (which I think you articulated why this is likely not true in a lot of circumstances) why on earth would you sink three years and lots of money into something unless you actually definitely need it
I don’t know. My husband (also a lawyer) goes and speaks on panels at our undergrad and tells students “sure, go to law school. BUT only if you want to be a lawyer. you don’t need to go to law school unless you want to be a lawyer. figure out what “being a lawyer” means then decide if you still want to be one. then go to law school.” It’s a lot for a 18-22 year to wrap their head around (goodness knows I would have/did ignore that advice) but I think that needs to be the first point you discuss with someone looking to go.
I don’t think we have a disagreement. I think going to law school unless you want to be a lawyer is silly. You NEED a law degree to be a lawyer, so it makes sense to go to law school if you want to be a lawyer. Spending time/money on a law degree you don’t NEED seems like a waste (i.e., if you don’t plan on being a lawyer), regardless of whether you think (rightly or wrongly) that it may open doors or prove useful in other ways. What I was trying to say in my original post but didn’t do a great job at is that sure going to law school may give you some non legal opportunities but there are usually easier/cheaper way to get those opportunities. One obvious example is I know some former transactional attorneys who have transitioned to PE/investment banking and their law degrees “gave” them the initial in to those jobs, but it would have been cheaper/easier for them to get those jobs going another route.
The the knowing what “practicing law means” is because so many people have a distorted idea of what lawyers do. They think its all arguing in front of judges, and solving crimes. Or being the big man about town. Its like how in American Psycho, Patrick Bateman works in M&A and makes tons of money but NO ONE including his secretary knows what he is doing to make the money.
Worse, is that a lot of people, especially young liberal people, think they can become a lawyer to save the world. Think about all the jokes in pop culture of people going into Environmental law, and then working for the big bads to get permits to drill in Alaska.
Also, Law schools will accept lots of students who are just not qualified to be lawyers. Thankfully when the law jobs market shrank in 2008, the law student body also shrank, and lots of would be lawyers went into Business or medicine instead. This left a brain drain in the market, where the mediocre schools, outside the top 50 will accept test scores they never would’ve accepted 15 years ago. Bar passage rates are below 50% at lots of schools, and this means law schools are taking $200,000 from kids, not preparing them for the industry or the lifestyle, and leaving them with two useless letters next to their name instead of “Esquire”.
I spoke to a girl who wanted to go to an out of state law school because they specialized in “Animal Law” and I was like, first of all, wth does that mean??? And what does specializing in that mean? Laws of the Horse (law joke), are super simple and you don’t need to specialize in them. Worse she said she wanted to help out people who work with animals in her local agricultural areas. That is labor law!
The bottom line with all of this stuff is that there are other jobs out there where you can help a lot more people. Social work, policy work, research, academics, be a school teacher. And you will probably make more money than most attys. Because yes, lots of attys break 1/4 million a year, but most don’t break 6 figures.
Worry about yourself
From a talent acquisition standpoint, recruiters and hiring managers are hesitant to talk to candidates with JDs for non-attorney positions, especially if they’re relatively fresh out of law school. They tend to want a higher salary than the position is budgeted for (because an advanced degree isn’t even a preferred qualification for the job), and there’s often a concern that they’ll either expect to eventually become an attorney in the company’s legal department, or they’ll leave the second another company wants to hire them as an attorney.
I work in a small centre and am a 7 year call. Many people who started with or after me (especially women) have left the profession for less demanding work or can’t find work in the profession. A significant number of women lawyers won’t make to ten years call or will make it but earn less than a receptionist. Something to think about
I’m in the mood for some New England classic prep escapism. Any books, movies, blogs etc to recommend? Classy Girls Wear Pearls is fun so anything in the same vein would be appreciated!
Secret Society Girl – it’s a four book series about a college junior who gets “tapped” to join a secret society (obvious from the title – ha) at a HYP type university. Total escapism and an easy read.
Love Story (the movie).
I wanted to be Ali MacGraw when I was a teen (actually, still do)
NOVA Traffic Court Lawyer?
Does anyone happen to have a recommendation for a traffic court lawyer in northern VA? A friend asked – when I was at a firm I’d email around folks there, but now at the government, no one seems to do it. Thanks!!
Just find the person or firm who advertise themselves as traffic court specialists and hire them. They will be the ones who do the highest-volume business and know the system and can get the best result.
That was my initial thought process, thanks for confirming!
New York ladies!
I visited NYC recently with my kids.
Back at home on the west coast, my daughter was talking about the works of art she saw at “the Met,” meaning the Metropolitan Museum of Art. One of her teachers scolded her and told her that “the Met” only refers to the opera.
I’ve heard the opera called The Met of course, but I’m pretty sure I’ve heard people call the museum The Met too. In fact, just googling The Met brings up the museum, where they refer to themselves this way.
Which is correct? Are there two “The Met”s?
The art museum is the Met.
I love your username for this!
+1, that was such a great book.
It’s both, but in the absence of context I’d assume The Met refers to the museum. Teacher is definitely wrong.
Also this seems rude on the teacher’s part. Kid is talking about enjoying art, and teacher is scolding kid for not knowing about the opera in a city she doesn’t live in? Really?
Yes exactly! Kiddo was not wrong, but even if she were, what an awful teacher to “scold” her!
Yes to all of this. The museum is totally The Met and the teacher is being a jerk.
They are both “The Met” but 99% of the time someone in NY refers to the Met they mean the museum, not the opera.
Has she never heard of the Met Gala?
It’s both. Teacher is being ridiculous.
Teaching is showing she doesn’t know……
Per Joey, the Met refers to a single player on the team that isn’t the Yankees. Joking aside, that teacher is both rude and wrong. People generally mean the museum when referring to the Met (but also use the Met to refer to the opera). Can you scold the teacher for shaming a kid for talking about their love of art? Even if the teacher was right, shouldn’t teachers be encouraging love of art?
Hahaha, I thought of that Friends bit immediately.
also, it’s the met opera, if you say the met everyone assumes the museum. what a lame teacher. i wish i could put in the eye-rolling emoji times 1000.
Your daughter is right. Please see the NY Times Crossword for Dec. 11, 20 Down.
I’ve got a relative in Denver who is looking for a career coach. Anyone have a recommendation? He has always been in managerial roles in various industries but its been a long time since he’s been out there applying and needs help marketing his skills, drafting his resume, researching options, etc. He’s 42 and didn’t go to college in the area so career services through school are not an option.
If he’s open to coaching via phone, which I did and found very helpful, have him check out Pivot Consulting. She’s excellent, with broad experience and great guidance. See pivotchange dot com.
Am looking for suggestions for an executive leadership course. I am in Global Marketing in the Medical Device industry and have a PhD in the basic sciences by way of training. I would like to take an executive MBA course to pad my resume and for my next step forward, however, given the economy, the company leadership would not sponsor it. They would be willing to pay $10 -15K for an executive leadership course. I have been looking for something along the lines of management excellence, and would really appreciate any suggestions that the hive may have.Which institution/course have any of you taken that you would recommend?
Both Harvard and Stanford have good options.
But they are usually closer to $60K because companies pay for them. I’d look into shorter e-courses. They don’t carry the same prestige as eMBAs, but you will glean the same skillsets. GL!
Following. Also a science PhD by training and currently director at pharmaceutical consulting firm.
I feel like Georgetown offers one. I’m having memories of ads on the metro. Maybe George Washington?
I have kind of an odd relationship question. I’ve been seeing a new guy for a couple of months and things have been going great. He’d sort of floated the idea of exchanging pictures and I’ve been very clear that under no circumstances will racy pictures ever be taken of me. He said he was surprised because he didn’t think I was prudish otherwise.
He then said he “assumes” (which sounded a lot like asking…) I’d never want to do anything on camera… live-streamed. I was pretty shocked. Like no of course I would never do that. He said he has a couple of times, including with his most recent ex. He said it isn’t recorded it’s only live so what’s the harm? I’m totally skeeved out by this. He let it go and I’m not afraid he’s going to push it or anything, but tbh idk if I want to date someone who’s done p*rn. It’d be one thing if it was a youthful mistake, but no he was over 35 last time and he’s still interested in doing it. He doesn’t see it as doing p*rn, he sees it as “just cam” whatever that means. He denies that it’s recorded or that it would ever come back to him in any way. I’m totally shocked and don’t know how to process this information. Help?
I don’t like that he called you prudish. I don’t like that you are judging him for what he’s into. I don’t think that you are well-suited to each other at all.
Eh, you’re allowed to judge in your own relationship but agree, you seem mismatched and you’ll probably end up uncomfortable with this guy so I’d move on.
I mean, I think he is downplaying the risk that these images fall into a third party’s hands (or uses for revenge later, which I’ve seen). And belittling your concerns vs addressing them. You can screenshot snapchat, even kids know that, so why does he think that something in a 2-D format can’t become permanently available and get diverted? Happens to celebrities all the time (sadly) — we commoners are just lucky bad guys think we’re boring.
And, to judge, ewww
I mean she is allowed to judge him and whether he’s right for her. The whole “no judgment” but is harmful when it’s taken to this place of you should just accept anything in your own relationship.
I don’t need to kinkshame to judge this guy for being disingenuous (“it’s not recorded” suuure no one records it) and manipulative (“assume,” “just cam,” etc.).
That relationship doesn’t sound like it’s going great at all.
OMG OMG OMG. No no no. SEE YA. This is totally break-up worthy.
+1 sorry to say, but you’re totally dating a s3xcam guy
which is fine! but if you’re not comfortable and he really wants it, sounds like you’re a little incompatible in that region
DTMA yesterday. He is grooming you to drop your boundaries. No is a complete sentence.
excellent way to put it
I hate to quote the Chris Rock routine, but he is 100% right about men not going back once something is on the menu. Do this once and it will always be on the menu. Might as well quit him now.
This is kind of what I’m wondering. He says he’s ok with never doing that again but can I trust that? I mean he’s done this with multiple people…. Thanks to everyone so far, you’re really helping me to process this!
As a side note, just because he’s not recording the live cam doesn’t mean that people watching aren’t. Apparently that stuff shows up on other sites – there was a reddit thread on the front page this week that talked about it.
Oh I absolutely agree. I asked him about that and he was just kind of meh about it. He said the internet is a big place it’s not going to come back to him. I told him there’s no way I would ever take that kind of risk, I would be a nervous wreck for the rest of my life. I’d always be looking over my shoulder wondering when someone I know is going to find pictures or video. And best case scenario, just the idea of someone using my images without my knowledge or consent makes me feel really violated.
“I asked him about that and he was just kind of meh about it. He said the internet is a big place it’s not going to come back to him”
Geeze. Said like a dude who has never been harassed on the internet for being a woman, spammed with d*ck pics, spammed with requests for nudes, stalked, etc., etc…..Also that’s just naive and stupid. I second what everyone else has said about how this guy is not respecting your boundaries. Boy bye.
He’s being judgy of your boundaries so I’d dump him and move on. I don’t got time for that. I don’t care what he’s done in the past, just how he’s treating you now.
Wtf….he wants to put p0rn of you on the internet? No thank you. Boy bye.
The main issue is that you guys are not compatible, but as a side issue about the videos:
I work in computer based investigations and can tell you that is 100% accessible to others. Even if it’s not recorded, even if it’s only live, even if it’s not stored anywhere. I could pull that up on your device or his device in just a few minutes. And other people can too– this is exactly how celebrities get their photos hacked, as someone mentioned above.
Why are you calling this p*rn? I treat “consensual private images/video” as different than that. Or by “live stream” does he mean… to the public or paying audience?!?
BUT I agree you guys seem mismatched on that level in any event, and I’d break it off.
Not OP but live stream means to the public. This is definitely porn, although amateur not professional.
Thanks – responded to the OP below. Yikes, yeah no.
Yeah it’s to a public, paying audience hosted through some cam s i t e.
I personally wouldn’t be comfortable with recording us even for private use only, but I definitely wouldn’t have Feelings about that request. I have Feelings about being asked to do it for a paying audience, especially after I said I won’t even take a picture for private use.
OMG thank you for clarifying. My degree of horror has increased accordingly. Sorry. That would be a dealbreaker for me too.
“especially after I said I won’t even take a picture for private use.”
This is so key. He knew your boundaries and suggested something beyond them. There’s disrespectful, shady, possibly grooming behavior going on. It goes to the issue of trust and respect. I would not be able to continue a relationship on that basis alone even if he dropped it as an issue right now.
This sounds awful. I think his game is putting together a stream of girls, and his idea is what he is interested in (making money), not having a relationship with you that goes anywhere. You would just be girl number 15 or 17 or whatever is the next number.
This is my #1 fear once my daughters are old enough to have boys + phones in their lives — some guy she thinks it’s going well with pressuring her to do something like this.
Agree — no is a full sentence.
“Just cam”… my guess would be he’s downplaying how much of a thing this is for him. I would let this one go. This is pretty out there, and it sounds like you’ll be happier with someone who is more on the same page as you. As a separate point, livestreaming s*x is a huge deal even from just a privacy perspective and him dismissing your concerns is not promising.
And when I said “I could let this one go”, I mean “I would let this guy go.”
Also, I just saw your comment about the livestreaming being to a public, paying audience! This would be a dealbreaker for the majority of people, and you shouldn’t think twice about ending things if you don’t feel good about it. Honestly, even if I was into it from a s*xual perspective, it would make me question his judgment.
Argh, *could = *would.
Agreed that the majority of people wouldn’t be okay with this, so he’s essentially turning it around on her, normalizing the experience, and calling her a prude because it’s so ‘normal’ and putting her on the defensive. That right there is manipulative as h3ll. I’m more annoyed by this than anything else and I would drop him like a hot potato.
+1! I could maybe get over the nature of the request, but not the manner in which he asked it. If he was all like, I know not everyone is in to this, it’s perfectly fine if you say no, I only want to do what you are comfortable with, etc., I would be ok with the ask. But calling you a prude and acting like you are out of line with normal standards (even if that was true, which it is not) is not ok and a deal breaker for me.
Anon for This
I mentor a 1st year associate who is oversharing information about her personal life to certain staff members and making them feel uncomfortable. Management is asking me to speak with the associate. I am trying to help her – trust me when I say that this is real oversharing (giving details about her dating activities, her discovering she is bi-, etc.). It is inappropriate locker talk if you will and staff members have complained, but I don’t believe it is harassment. But we need to shut it down now. Any way of telling her this without making her feel embarrassed or rebuked?
Honestly, probably not. I absolutely think you can politely say “be mindful of the details of your personal life you’re sharing in the workplace, [x] really isn’t an appropriate work topic,” but I still think she’ll be embarrassed.
I would want to understand what my role is in speaking with her. Were you chosen because you’re her mentor and they want someone to approach her with a gentle touch? Or are you the Official Voice Of The Firm giving her a “friendly” warning about this? I think it also matters whether you’re an associate or a partner. If you’re an associate then I like BabyAssociate’s script above. If you’re a partner then I think you have to be a little more direct.
Really good points. I definitely assumed OP was a more senior associate.
I’m replying to my own post here – but it might also be helpful to think about to what extent implied homophobia might have a role in these complaints, and how you as a manager/mentor/whatever should approach that.
I think maybe she should feel embarrassed and rebuked. It would be more embarrassing to be gossiped about and not know you’re behaving outside the lines.
Yeah, the fact of the matter is she is being rebuked and there is no way around that.
And Anonymous at 12:18 has a good point about implied homophobia. I am going to assume that the issue is sex talk in general and the firm would react similarly absent the bisexual content, right?
I’m anon at 12:18. The thing is… I’ve seen plenty of (particularly young, female) associates talk about their opposite s*x Bumble dates to the staff and everyone just gets a good laugh. Maybe those conversations aren’t exactly appropriate, but no one would ever report them for it, which means straight associates don’t get chastised for talking about dating. But THIS associate is talking about same s*x dating, and people feel “uncomfortable” (in a way they don’t when a young woman laughs about her male dates). So now a bi associate is going to get chastised where a straight associate wouldn’t have. Not because the FIRM is biased but because the firm is responding to the complaints (that are biased).
Maybe OP’s firm culture is different and no one talks about dating ever… or maybe jr is going way overboard in her descriptions about her dates… but it makes sense for OP to at least think about it through this lens before she goes into this conversation.
Worry about yourself
Good point! It’s fine to expect people to use good judgment when deciding what details of their personal lives they share openly, what they share very quietly, and what they don’t share at all, but you can’t have a culture where people can only discuss their dating lives if they date the opposite sex.
This is a fair concern. But I read the OP as suggesting that she was giving graphic details about her date. Not I went out with this girl to X place, but I had sex with this girl during which she did Y and Z and I loved it cause A and B reasons
I got a less than ideal annual review yesterday. Basically I’m doing a good job but I didn’t meet an arbitrary cut off for reasons that were not especially well articulated and to the extent I understand them seem somewhat unfair. On some level it doesn’t really matter what it says because the result is I’m absolutely crushed. I feel like the last 8 years have been largely a waste. I have a significant client meeting today, with an evening event, and a major enforcement presentation tomorrow morning for the same client and I can barely keep it together. Any suggestions to get through today and tomorrow?
This has happened to me. Unfortunately no one will be upfront unless there is something concrete to share. And ….. It’s not about you. If it doesn’t make sense, there’s something else going on, or someone else they are picking to promote….. And use these events as networking opportunities. Promote yourself!!
They said you’re doing a good job. They made up some arbitrary BS to avoid having to pay you more money. I think this is kind of the game at this level? I’m sorry this happened but honestly this is not about you even a tiny bit.
You’re awesome. You have all these amazing things coming up BECAUSE you’re awesome. No one would’ve given you these opportunities if you weren’t great.
Ok, on the one hand, I appreciate you building up the OP. I think that’s great. I think we should be a positive environment. But, I do think it’s dangerous for us to always assume that if the “the man” or people in charge or whatever don’t give positive feedback, that it must mean they’re lying or trying to avoid giving you a raise or whatever. As someone in charge, sometimes I am remiss in providing specific examples of something my subordinates have done that doesn’t meet my standard, but I sure as heck don’t want them to walk away from my review thinking they are awesome and it must be me.
if the takeaway is “basically you’re doing a good job, but not perfect” concluding the last 8 years was a waste seems a bit much.
I didn’t conclude they were a waste – I said that is how it feels. I acknowledge that how i feel is not entirely rational. The issue is whether or not its rational I feel like the rug was pulled out from under me. Its largely an up or out system. I don’t think this review means I am definitely out but I do think it means the road ahead is much harder. I put everything I had on the table and it wasn’t good enough by some measure. It sucks. I’m miserable. But I’m an adult and I know I have a job to do. So I was just looking for suggestions on how to do that job today and tomorrow. I didn’t really need someone to kick me when I was down.
Thanks to the other res ponders. Its comforting to remember that this happens to other people.
I’m sorry. I have been there. Stay focused on your day’s tasks. Try not to indulge in replaying the feedback in your head over and over. Tell yourself that you are great and you are going to do an awesome job with the client today and tomorrow. Just focus on this week and not yesterday or the last 8 years or next week. Take deep breaths and focus on something simple that makes you happy and you can indulge in this weekend (a movie you can watch or going for a walk). You can get through this. Good luck!
Have you tried reframing it to yourself as the culmination of an extended interview for the client? They can probably appreciate your talents and hard work on their behalf. And maybe it will even lead to a real opportunity. You never know who’s in the room.
Sorry you are going through this, big hugs.
My Go og le and Ama zon searches are not helping, so I will ask here: any recommendations for a slipcover for a small loveseat, or maybe a really large chair? Most loveseat slipcovers measure 56-72 inches wide, and our seat is only 54 in wide. Thanks!
Have you tried searching for chair and a half slip covers? Could you get the 56 and have it altered? Or, price out what a custom would cost through a local upholstery shop?
Go on Etsy. These are impossible to source as the size varies a ton. Target may be a better bet too.
I haven’t done the math on any of their products for you, but I’ve gotten an actual slipcover and the protective pet cover (for my kids!) from SureFit and really like them (for what they are). In case they haven’t appeared in your searches yet.
Try Etsy? I haven’t searched there for your specific item, but for a while my search for a mini ironing board cover went with zero luck because the size offered at Target etc was a bit off. So I searched Etsy and found someone who makes it in the dimensions I was looking for.
Anon for this
Can anyone speak to a salary range for a firm recruiting director at a mid size law firm, MCOL? There is no salary data posted with the job listing and I truly have no idea what to expect. JD preferred.
Anon a Nalp
I have a salary survey done by a local NALP affiliate group in a HCOL area from 2016. It does not break down by firm size, but includes respondents from firms size 1-1000+. They list a few cities’ average salaries for director level roles, including Chicago and Philly (the two most MCOL on the list, whether its true or not; idk where they fall other than lower than SFO, NY, DC, which are the other 3 cities listed).
The manager level is more likely if you have no recruiting experience and are trying to move into recruiting from practice, usually. Unlikely to hire someone from outside recruiting into a director role. Those were 99k and 102k respectively.
Anon for this
This is helpful – thank you!
I’m looking for meal ideas for when my parents visit for Christmas. We’ll have 4 adults and 1 toddler. They’ll be staying with us for about a week. My mom is willing and able to grocery shop, help cook, etc, but I’d like to have a plan in place and maybe a meal or two prepared and in the freezer so we don’t spend the whole week focused on what we’re going to have for dinner. (So far, I’m going to make lasagna, and that’s all the inspiration I have.)
If you want something easy to stick in the freezer, a large pan of enchiladas is always easy. I like The Pioneer Woman’s recipe for beef enchiladas.
Chili’s good for a crowd.
My husband and ILs LOVE this pot pie I made after Thanksgiving. It makes 2 pies, and after Thanksgiving I even doubled it to make 4 and put the extras in the freezer. https://www.tasteofhome.com/recipes/turkey-potpies/ (If the filling seems a bit soggy after you’ve prepared it, leave it like that – the moisture evaporates some during cooking) You could sub any meat.
Poppyseed chicken casserole, made ahead and frozen, and a green salad
If your family eats meat, I think making a large protein (roast chicken, pulled pork, braised short ribs, etc.) is the way to go. Eat it with “traditional” sides the first night, then break down/stretch the leftovers for other dishes … tacos, pasta, chili, salads, sandwiches.
I personally find dinners easier to manage … it’s lunch where I always feel like it’s a scramble (partly because the day schedule is so variable), so I like to just have lots of leftovers available for people to help themselves.
Ina Garten’s pastitsio. Make in advance and freeze.
Smitten Kitchen’s pizza beans freeze great! I’d stock up on some nice deli meat and cheese for sandwiches for lunches (or if your mom wants to “cook” she could make paninis out of them). Make a freeze a couple soups in quarts now – if you don’t end up pulling them out for lunches or an emergency dinner that week, they’ll be great for you some other time. Keep some veggies, hummus, pita chips, as well as some grapes and other fruit around to throw on the counter as a snack or appetizer.
I need to find a way of staying abreast of current events without spiraling down into a pit of anxiety and despair. For reference, even the Washington Post homepage is feeling like too much for me these days. Can anyone recommend a daily news podcast that’s reasonably concise and non-terrifying/overwhelming. I’m looking to keep up with both US and world events, so something that covers both or one of each would be great. Thanks!
By the way, I realize the obvious answer here is to listen to NPR, but I find the politics podcast a little too long and in the weeds. And when I listen to NPR on the radio, I get annoyed by the human interest stories – I really just want the news.
Have you tried the 10-minute NPR podcast First Up?
NPR’s up first is a short podcast that covers a range of things, not just politics. I’d recommend that and/or The Daily (NYT), which focuses on one piece of news for the day. You can see a preview of what they’re discussing when you open up the podcast app, so if it’s something that sounds emotional for you, you can just skip it.
FWIW, I listen to NPR’s 5 minute news summary in the morning and evening–it’s updated every few hours. The 5 minute news is just enough to get by reasonably. I often listen to the Morning Edition and All Things Considered podcasts, too, but I skip the stories that are uninteresting and only listen to the first minute of the long-winded stories.
Third vote for Up First! 15 minutes or less, then I move on to podcasts I actually like :) File under “eating your vegetables”
The tone can be a little … much, but you might want to try The Skimm. Or perhaps The Week?
The Week is such a fantastic resource. I love that they cover all the viewpoints in such a straightforward manner.
I also like the NY Times Daily email as well. That’s a good one that also covers the main points of the day without getting too deep in the weeds.
The Daily, if you haven’t already nixed it. It’s about 20 minutes long.
The Skimm is perfect for when you’re unable to cope with looking at an adult newspaper front page but won’t get therapy for your anxiety and still don’t want to seem ignorant.
Srsly. If you can’t get through the day after looking at the WaPo front page, get help.
I dunno, today’s WaPo front page video would make anyone feel upset and anxious. Feeling overwhelmed by the news and trying to stay engaged is a fair concern.
Wow, what an unkind response to an innocuous question.
Thanks for all the responses! I will check all of these out.
I don’t know if Wikipedia’s Current Events page does a good job covering the topics, but it’s very easy to skim and can’t be characterized as exploitative and sensationalist. There is really no virtue in growing callous to the WaPo front page.
Interesting! I didn’t even know Wikipedia had a current events page.
Way late to the party here, but This Morning Show with Gordon Deal is the perfect middle ground. I also find NPR to be tedious. It’s concise and non-partisan. 5 minutes of highlights, a couple of in depth stories, a review of the highlights, and some fluff. It’s the perfect length for my commute, and I skip the in depth stories if they’re boring/overwhelming.
Does anyone have a recommendation for wide leg, black, full length trousers? I would prefer a cost of $200 or under. I have been seeing a lot of cropped styles but not many full length options. “Bailey 44 Boardroom pant” is close to what I am looking for but I would prefer them to have a zipper and closure in the front.
Talbots Seasonless Crepe Wide Legs are my favorite; they come in regular and curvy fits. There are a couple other wide leg styles on there as well. There also is a good sale today (in fact, I might order a couple more pairs tonight).
I’ve been having this issue where I’ll get an ad for Nordstrom on my Facebook and think “that dress is super cute” so I click on it, and there’s one size left. Anyone else have that? I realize its a very first world problem…
I’m having the same problem with Mod Cloth. There is this one skirt that I really want, and it only is in XS. BOO.
Just venting – why are some recruiting/HR/hiring departments so terrible at the application process? I applied for an in house counsel job in August on a whim. It looked interesting, I was qualified, I spent time working on my resume and application and submitted it. Over the next six weeks, I had two phone interviews and an in person interview. The phone interviews (they were scheduled to call me) started 7-15 minutes late with no advance warning that the person would be late, I had to ask who I would be talking to (I don’t think that’s unreasonable – am I talking with a lawyer or am I talking with a recruiter? My questions and preparation are going to be different) and they gave me about 48 hours notice about the possibility of the in person interview, and then changed the time of the in person interview at least once the day before the interview. The interview was a 25 minute drive for me, so it required some planning and letting people know at work that I’d be gone.
For the in person interview, it also went on for about 2 hours longer than was originally scheduled for and I spent an hour with the GC and the deputy GC, who both flew in from another state for this interview. I thought the in person interview went reasonably well and I was seriously considering the job if offered. I sent thank you emails and got personal responses back.
This was in October. I just learned TODAY that I did not get the job. 2.5 months after my in person interview. I sort of figured two weeks after the interview that I didn’t have the job, and based on my experience with this company and the interview process, I was sure it was going to take a while to definitively hear. But still, you’re a company of 45,000 employees, you have a dedicated team of people who do nothing but deal with applications and you can’t push a button to send a rejection email within a reasonable time after the person interviewed? /rant over.
Worry about yourself
Recruiters are not known for being detail oriented, and talent acquisition teams can be disorganized, poorly managed, and very chaotic.
But also, hiring managers can sometimes be the problem. They have their own jobs to do and their teams to manage, and their team is hurting for another person to lighten the load, that’s why they need someone like you! Recruiters sometimes have to chase hiring managers down to get their input on screened candidates, schedule them for interviews and debriefs, find out what’s happening with the req, etc.
But I agree with you, as someone in this line of work, it’s not okay to ghost a candidate like that.
Yes, this is the way it is in my field. How long has it been since you applied for a position? It is rare to even receive an acknowledgement of an application (at least in the field I am in).
Following up to yesterday’s question-my knockoff Ferragamo Vara pumps are Soft Style by Hush Puppies Women’s Tacita Dress Pump on Amazon.
Calling candidate- yes, let’s connect! Email me at masscorporette at the mail of g.
Apologies, I just need to vent. I am just sick and tired of dealing with admins and support people who refuse to do their jobs, especially when the attorney making the request is female. All too frequently, I’m told by a senior (male) attorney, “oh email Jane and have her do X.” But oh no, when I speak to “Jane” suddenly she has nothing to do with X and what am I talking about and no, no, no, despite Jane having handled X successfully for countless male attorneys. Even if such admins agree to do something, I have to follow up multiple times to see if it gets done, and I’m often lied to about why something wasn’t done. I do hours of extra admin work on top of my legal work and I just can’t take it any more.