We’ve mentioned this product a lot over the years, but again, I don’t think we’ve ever done a Coffee Break just to feature it. Readers here turned me on to it, and it’s one of everyone’s favorite things: the Jockey Slipshort.
Not feeling like wrenching yourself into Spanx (or don’t need to)? Still want something to prevent chafing between your thighs, ensure against a Marilyn Monroe-on-the-subway-grate moment, and otherwise add a bit more modesty and anti-static to your summer skirts? (They can also be great if you bike to work!)
Let me introduce your new favorite thing, the Jockey slipshort. The old standard is the pictured product, Jockey’s Skimmies — it also now comes in a shorts length, a “cooling” fabric, and an anti-wicking fabric, as well as a few more options. I’ve seen readers debate whether or not to wear underwear with them — you do you, but for my $.02 I am strongly on Team “Wear Underwear With Your Tights, Pantyhose, and Slipshorts.”
Ladies, what is your favorite in the slipshort line? They’re available at stores like Amazon, Zappos, and more for $9-$20. I usually like mine black, but 6PM does have a red pair similar to the pictured pair for $9.99 in sizes S-2XL. Jockey Skimmies Slipshorts
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.
Update: We’re adding these shorts our Workwear Hall of Fame because they are still beloved by the readers and coming out in more colorways and styles, including recently a wide range of nude-for-you colors.
Need shopping help! Going to an evening wedding in NYC in April – dress code is formal and I need a dress. Would prefer that it not be long and would like some coverage up top (sleeves would be fine though not required). The kicker is that I’ll be 16 weeks pregnant — second kid so while I am not obviously showing, I’ve definitely going to need something that is forgiving in the stomach. Help!
I know you say not long, but look at this gorgeous creature:
That is stunning.
Speaking of long gowns and RTR, is this ok for a black tie optional wedding in August? It’s not revealing at all, but not sure if the cut-out makes it not wedding appropriate.
Or other suggestions? I feel like pastels and florals are too spring-y, I don’t want to wear black or red, the bridesmaids will be in metallics so I want to avoid those, and most gowns in dark colors I’ve found look too winter-y or somber.
Yo what are weddings for, if not formalwear with cutouts and necklines that are too low for the office (not that this dress has one) and showing some skin? You’re going to a social event, not a business convention! Love that dress too, rock on with your bad self. I’m happy to do some extra RTR research for you, since long dresses are my crack, but I think you’ve got a great option there.
https://www.renttherunway.com/shop/designers/jill_jill_stuart/lovely_duo_gown (obsessed with this dress)
https://www.renttherunway.com/shop/designers/ml_monique_lhuillier/fuchsia_gown (non-precious floral)
Thanks! I love the Jill Stuart gown but don’t think it will work with my coloring.
They have a navy and burgundy version as well. Might be a little too wintery for what you’re looking for, but worth a look.
I think the cutout is fine for many venues, but would likely be out of place in many houses of worship.
I just picked up something very similar from Nordstroms for not much more! I’d check them out. There’s a bunch of printed Eliza J and P dresses, and the one I got is incredibly forgiving of tummy and waist.
Renter unwary has a whole ‘bump friendly’ filter. Something like this wouldn’t be out of place at any NYC ‘formal’ wedding, ime.
Navy is a good year round color for this sort of thing.
Haha gotta love autocorrect – “renter unwary” as a correction for Rent the Runway.
I love that badley mischka dress! Wish I had an event to which I could wear it.
Haha, that’s what I get for not proofreading. Though maybe Renter Unwary is a better name…
Related question. “Black Tie” dress code – is floor length dress required? I thought yes but recently two people have told me they are going to black tie events in short dresses. I mean, people can do whatever they want, but am I wrong in equating black tie and floor length?
No, you’re not wrong.
You’re not wrong but I’ve found it has become very common to go with upscale c*cktail dresses for black tie events – I’m wondering if everyone mentally inserts “black tie optional” into the event regardless of what’s actually written. It’s frustrating because black tie is a comforting and very clear dress code to me, and it’s being changed somehow.
You’re wrong depending where you live. In Texas, cocktail length works fine for black tie unless it’s a late event or particularly formal. Especially with a younger crowd, you’ll see more short dresses than long.
That doesn’t actually sound like I’m wrong but that people in Texas ignore the rule – i.e., you say “particularly formal” – what’s more formal thank black tie (other than I suppose, white tie?). Like I initially said, people can ignore rules and do what they want, but the question was whether black tie meant floor length…
Traditionally you are correct. But the modern trend is for black tie to simply mean sparkly c*cktail. So I don’t think that people are ignoring the rule, just that the meaning of ‘black tie’ is changing. In other words when a couple requests ‘black tie’ on their invite they usually understand that to mean sparkly c*cktail dresses and/or long gowns and that’s what most people wear (with older women usually in gowns and everyone else in knee length).
Earlier this month I applied for an internal position that would’ve been a great move for me career-wise, under a manager I have a great rapport with. I was told today that I didn’t meet the qualifications for have an interview, but a slacker on my current team who doesn’t meet the most basic qualification (requires a 4 year degree and he didn’t go to college) hounded HR hard enough that he got an interview.
Yay, Kat. I LOVE Jockey Slipshort’s b/c of this VERY reason! On weekend’s, I go out with short dresses, and do NOT want men on the subway to put their hand’s underneeth where they could get to my tuchus (or worse). So by wearing slipshorts, they can get NO WHERE! It is like when I was in college, and went on date’s. Men constantly wanted to go for gold, but by wearing my Danskin, there was NO way they could worm their fingers where they did NOT belong.
As for the OP, hug’s, but this is the busness world where we see alot of sexism. Men get where they want to by worming their way in; we must do that to but men think we are to pushy when we do that. I would complain to HR if I were you b/c the slacker should NOT have gotten the interview. But if he is a slacker, he should NOT get the job. FOOEY on male slacker’s. FOOEY on Sheketovits, who was (and is) a SLACKER! YAY!!!
Can you push back on the “no interview for you” decision? This seems like a pretty clear example of rules getting bent for some but not others. Good luck!
Def push back!
Talk to the manager and ask him or her to recommend you to hr if they feel you may be a good fit.
Posted last week about how to bring up a two week preplanned trip to a new boss. I talked to the manager this week and everything is good to go, no issues at all! Now just waiting for my background check to go through so I can get a start date.
Any tips on how to find an agent to sell your house? Do you call around to get bids for the best (i.e. lowest) commission cut? Our first call will be to the agent who helped us buy the house several years ago, but I imagine we should shop around, I just don’t know how to do that.
IDK — you want a good agent, not a cheap one. A house is the biggest asset you probably have!
See who actually sells houses in your area and has a rep as a good negotiator and a closer (so: talk to their clients, esp if you know sellers). You want someone who knows when to call someone’s bluff if the other side is crazy and who gives you really good advice (like the initial pricing, probably the most important thing you’d need advice for, and what to fix / how to stage).
I always figure that the other side will have a good agent that I’ll have to pay 3% to, so why not pay 3% to mine and get the best agent I can?
As someone who bought their house from people who went with the ‘cheap’ agent, definitely pick the best one you can. See who has the most sales in your neighborhood (realtor.com has a ‘recently sold’ selection), ask friends and neighbors who have sold if they were happy with their agent, etc.
(Note: their agent was luckily bad at pricing, which meant that husband and I got a GREAT deal on a house that was priced wayyyy too low for the neighborhood.)
Go with the good agent.
But how do I know who the good agent is?
Get recommendations from friends/colleagues who have recently sold a house and who were happy with their agent (especially if they had a difficult sale/difficult buyers). Then, go online and take a look at websites and see whose looks professional. After you whittle it down to a couple of agents, interview them. They should be willing to come to your home and they should bring samples of their marketing materials, explain to you how they and their group/brokerage work, what their commission is, what the process and steps are, etc. Ask any and all questions you have at that time. If they are pushy and insist you sign something that day, pick someone else. You also need to click personality wise with the agent, so the interview is really important IMO.
If the person is willing to discount their commission, think about what corners they will take in selling your house. Agents who are worth it and who are well-respected don’t cut their commissions just to get a listing. They aren’t desperate.
One additional thing, the agent should bring comps with them to this initial meeting and should be able to show you that they have put some work in. I worked for a real estate group full of awesome agents, and we did all of these things any time we went to a listing appointment. They had been in business as a team for over 20 years and clients raved about them.
I’m going to disagree for some markets.
My agent discounted his commission right away. In my HCOL area, 5% is pretty normal. I think my agent offered at 4.8% (I was also going to buy a new place with him as buyers agent) and I ended up paying 4% (he also ended up representing the buyer). As my buyers agent, he even convinced the sellers agent to take a discounted commission.
Just from that experience I am under the impression that an agent who is taking 6% (or splitting 6%) is taking advantage of his clients.
I’d say the situation where you are both selling and buying with the same agent is the only one where I’ve seen really good agents discount. 6% is/was market in the DC area, which is where I worked. Even when your agent discounts, they are still offering the other agent the full normal split (generally). So in your listing, the buyer’s agent would still get the full 3%. Shady agents won’t show your house if they see the buyer’s agent commission reduced.
Oops, sorry, I read too fast!! With your agent also rep’ing your buyer, I’d say that’s a atypical transaction. Our brokerage really discouraged that practice and we always passed off one end to a teammate. Sorry for responding before truly reading!!
Not true. I’ve bought and sold in the DC and Arlington markets and rates of 2-2.5% for each agent are really common. We listed our house with 2.5% to the buyers agent and had 6 offers over asking by our open house. Our selling agent (a full service and well respected agent) didn’t hesitate to reduce his commission since houses in our neighborhood typically were selling in 3-5 days. Paying a full 6% on a $1M home for just a few partial days of work is crazy.
I think it’s definitely worth meeting a few different people to get bids, but don’t discount the value of a known quantity. To me, it would be worth going with my agent that I know and like and trust, even if there is someone out there who could theoretically get me $10K more on my house. Also, ask your neighbors. In my neighborhood, almost everyone sells with one of three agents.
If you have a mortgage broker who does a lot of local deals ask them. They see which agents get the most deals and the best prices for their clients.
It is so important to make sure that the house and yard are clean and staged, that minor repairs are done, and that professional photos are posted online. A good real estate agent will be ready and willing to find contractors and manage them to make it all happen. The only thing you should have to do is move your stuff and write checks.
Agree completely. Good, professional photographs make a HUGE difference on a listing. Same with staging (if you want to/are capable). Our agent provided us prior listings, complete with pictures, time on the market, and what percentage the house closed compared to asking price. She also was generally nice to deal with and responsive. If you have any qualms about an agent’s responsiveness, move on.
I look for one, in both online research and via friends, who has sold a lot of houses in a) my immediate area and b) in my price range/house age/type – I want someone who knows how to SELL MY house for MY area. Personal recs are good, though you have to be careful and not end up with someone who is basically a buyer’s realtor. We used a great realtor who was a bit more of a buyer’s agent for a month, then she retired to spend time with her ailing husband, and her associates just didn’t care and didn’t communicate – but our contractor referred us to a guy who really understood our neighborhood and the showings skyrocketed.
This times a million.
There is probably a realtor (or more than one) who “farms” your neighborhood by walking it and leaving business cards and other materials, right? You want that person. You want the person who knows your neighborhood cold — knows the properties, the prices, the buyers.
Knowing the immediate area is invaluable. I’d look at the listings (or just walk around and look at the for-sale signs) in your neighborhood and start there. Off the top of my head, I can name the 3 Realtors/teams that do probably 90% of the business in my neighborhood and 2 others who pick up most of the rest. If I had to sell my house, I would start there. Definitely ask about what they do to prep a house for sale. There is a wide range of quality in staging/photos/landscaping work, and it makes a huge difference. I would also ask about the Realtor’s strategy — multiple open houses vs by appointment, pricing for multiple offers or on the high end of the range, etc and see if they sound reasonable to you.
Depending on where you live, an agent who is also a broker may be able to bundle costs and save you some money.
Try agentsdeal.com – they will help you to find qualified discount real estate agents for your selection and you can choose the best one among them.
Try hungryagents.com – they will ID agents in your area and let them bid on your business. Then you can meet with them to see if you respect them, and look up their reputations
I have the wicking variety of Skimmies and they don’t really seem to do any wicking, plus the thighs constantly roll up. Not impressed. Does anybody have any alternatives to the Skimmies that they like?
Same- I’ve sized up, and I’ve sized down, but they always roll up for me. Maybe it’s the shape of my thighs. What I wouldn’t give to just have a gap instead.
Good point, maybe the rolling is inevitable when your thighs touch.
It’s the wicking one that is the problem. I’d encourage you to try the original version. I accidentally bought a pair of the wicking material and I hated them so much I threw them out. Everything about them is different, and all in a bad way!
Wow, good to know! Thanks.
Agreed. The wicking one is awful. Mine creep down and constantly yanking them up under my dress is not a good look. The originals and the cool fabric are fine. I’m pretty short so I prefer the shorter inseam for both fabrics.
I have the problem of them rolling up from the bottom and down from the top, whether I size up or down, in the original, too. These just don’t work for me…
Gail the Goldfish
I also had problems with the shorter version of the regular ones rolling up, but love the longer ones (that I think are truly the original ones).
Agree. I tried the short ones and they roll up. The long ones are the bomb. I live in them all summer.
Glad to know that I don’t have to bother trying the wicking variety!
Funny, I love the wicking ones, and didn’t size up or down. The regular ones are too long, but the short version of the regular ones are too short, but the wicking ones are just right in length. I also find them to be smoother under skirts and dresses that might cling to the regulars. I’ve had the originals roll up at the legs, but never the wicking ones. And my thighs are substantial.
The wicking ones were constantly sliding down on me, like they were going to fall off. Maybe I could have gotten them 1 size smaller, but they were the same size as the regular (non-wicking) that don’t slide.
However, the wicking ones do work pretty well for me with a pair of unlined wool pants that otherwise itch (when combined with thigh-highs, only my knees left exposed and they don’t tend to itch). I also wear them with a different pair of pants that otherwise give me VPL no matter what cut of underwear I use.
I have the original ones and they don’t roll up, but they have kind of a matte texture which means that dresses ride up on them unless you wear a slip. Not very useful in the end.
I have a Soma “smoothing” short that I really like. It doesn’t squish you in like Spanx do, but I just wear it to prevent chafing, which it does beautifully. It stays in place, and the fabric is a silky feeling that clothing does not stick to like it does with the pair of Skimmies that I have.
Anyone know how long these are? I bought spanx (from the assets line) that cover the tummy and thighs but the bottom peaks out of my pencil skirt (knee-length) so I can’t wear them.
I’m wearing them right now. 7.5 in from hipbone to hem.
Assets by Sarah Blakely has a good short at Target. It’s a little expensive ($20), but it does wonders for my thighs and lifting my butt. Size down if you need serious shaping, size up if you just want modesty/bike shorts.
I also have the problem with them rolling up. I would not recommend these. I’ve tried every size from S to XL and they all have the same issue. Which is very disappointing because I like the feel of the fabric (and because my favorite line of Spanx was discontinued).
I have the originals in “nude” and black and love them!
I also have the originals in nude and black, and wear them constantly during hot New York summers. I tried the wicking variety and had the same problems as others with the legs rolling up, or the waist rolling down.
As for Kat’s question about underwear … I always wear underwear under tights, but not with these, since apart from preventing chafing, a major reason I love them is that you don’t have any annoying panty-lines.
Anyone have days where they are just ravenous? I feel like I could eat large pizza all by myself.
All. The. Time.
Yes! Especially when I eat a light dinner/no dinner the night before.
Yup. Sunday I ate breakfast…and second breakfast…and lunch…and dinner at 4…and second dinner at 6. I figure if my body is that hungry it means I’ve been killing it in my workouts and need to feed it is some extra calories of deliciousness.
At certain points during my cycle I am just RAVENOUS. It helps to eat more protein/veggies then (I just devoured an entire red pepper with hummus) and drink lots of water. I also am not usually a red meat person but I am all about lots of red meat at those times.
Forever 21 do little shorts which has are similar and super cheap.
To my surprise I’ve found that when I wear good hose I don’t need slipshorts at all, which is amazing (I need them over most tights to stop the tights falling down) – I wear m&s 7 denier.
I’m officially going on a trip to India! Planning is still in the early stages. My biggest concern right now is getting the time off work, which leads me to my question for you wise ladies: is it appropriate to ask for exceptions to my firm’s vacation policy?
I’m a first year transactional associate and will be in the middle of my second year by the time the trip rolls around (April 2017). I currently get 15 days of vacation per year and don’t expect that to change as second year. Associates are allowed to roll over 3 days from the previous year so long as we use them by the end of March. I’ve come up with the following asks, and am wondering whether they are appropriate. My biggest fear is coming off as out of touch or entitled – I definitely want to avoid that.
1) Roll over the three days and take them in April rather than the March deadline
2) Roll over two additional days so I have an extra week (and be allowed to use them in April, see #1)
3) Take unpaid time off (1-2 weeks) (non-law friends have suggested this one – is unpaid time off for vacation a thing for salaried lawyers at firms?)
TIA! I’m also open to any other ideas! My current plan is to implement some, one, or none of the ideas I listed above. I know I’m extremely lucky to have three full weeks and will have an amazing trip in that amount of time, but want to entertain the idea of going for longer.
Know your firm / group?
See what people have done for honeymoons (or with a 10-work-day time period).
Going away for 3 weeks as a second year (or ever) seems to be a bit much (outside of CWT’s sabaticals and maternity / FMLA leave).
I do 3 weeks every year. It really depends on your firm and the group you work with.
Thanks for your response. It raises another concern I forgot to mention in my original post: that taking all three weeks at once (let alone extending that) may be frowned upon.
If you’re concerned that taking three weeks at once might be frowned upon, then yes, you’re running the risk of coming off as out of touch and entitled even without asking for extra days. This trip sounds like something you probably should have floated with your manager(s) before finalizing.
Definitely know your office, but at all 3 firms I’ve worked, 2 consecutive is the maximum you can take without people raising eyebrows (and even 2 consecutive weeks are better received if it’s for a one-off like a honeymoon). I think taking 3 consecutive weeks, much less 4 or 5 using the strategies noted by the OP, as a 2nd year associate is likely to be frowned upon.
I don’t wish to rain on your parade, but is a three-week trip acceptable at your firm? There is a big difference between having three weeks worth of days and taking them all at once. The latter would not fly in my (super laid back in-house gig) – i have 18 days but if i announced that i was taking a three week trip, i may as well hold up a neon sign saying “My role here is unimportant and I don’t care about my career” because, rightly or wrongly, that would 100% be the perception.
The longest i’ve seen is 2 weeks and that inevitably is wedding/honeymoon.
Thanks all for your honest (and kind!) responses! It sounds like this is very a much a know my firm issue. That said, I appreciate all advice and anecdotes.
My firm actually prefers that associates take their vacation in big chunks of time – it’s easier to deal with staffing this way, much more difficult than a week here, a week there. I usually take one two week trip, then a week either at Thanksgiving or Christmas.
I couldn’t even take off more than a week when I got married and I was a public defender. Who would have handled my case load? NO ONE. That’s the answer. NO ONE.
Wow, there’s a lot of negativity in the earlier posts. I think 3 weeks is reasonable, depending on your firm and your group.
I don’t think it’s about the number of days you have. In Big Law I had 15 days, but three week vacations were absolutely unheard of (meaning, I literally, in the six years I was there, never heard or saw of anyone taking one), and in my group, two week vacations were really only acceptable for weddings and honeymoons. People did take “regular” two week vacations on occasion, but they always got a lot of grief about it, even years after the fact and developed a reputation. Honestly, I think you’re really pushing it to ask for two weeks off. If this is for a special occasion (like a good friend’s wedding or to visit a family member living in India or something), I think it’s worth asking for two weeks, but explain why it’s a special trip. Any more than two weeks and you’re going to be a firmwide legend. It’s suicidal to ask to take more than three weeks, even if you ask for it unpaid.
And I should add – I was at what is widely regarded as a “lifestyle firm” that definitely does not have a reputation as a sweatshop or anything like that.
Wow, so glad I didn’t go into law. “Suicidal” to take more than three weeks of potentially unpaid leave, but otherwise leave you’ve earned? That’s really unfortunate.
There is a difference between taking all your leave, and taking all your leave at once PLUS asking for additional unpaid time off, just so you can have a super long vacation. The latter is what I said was suicidal. Of course unpaid time off for family emergencies, medical issues, bar study or things like that is different. And it’s really not just law, I have a lot of friends in engineering and consulting who have told me two week vacations are frowned upon in their industries too. I would imagine that any industry that frowns upon two week vacations is not going to be ok with someone requesting a special unpaid week off so she can take a four week vacation.
Yeah, I’ve never worked in BigLaw and most of my offices have been pretty easygoing, but I’ve never heard of anyone taking that long off at once for vacation unless they were at the not-quite-retired-but-pretty-much-there stage.
This is obviously a very late reply, but since I’m here…
I’m an engineering consultant and honestly, if you give enough notice (and by that I mean 4-6 months or more) then it’s generally very easy to plan around a 2-3 week absence for anyone. That allows PMs to either plan for early deliveries to make sure you’re work is done in advance of your vacation or to get ahead of it all and not plan any milestones for that time period to begin with. It’s a poor firm that can’t handle a single missing employee, in my opinion.
But I’m in Canada, does that make a difference? I’m 8 years into my career and wouldn’t hesitate to plan a two week vacation. Here, 15 days annual vacation is standard for new hires and senior staff frequently have 20-25 days off in a year. Do they take it all? Probably not, but most of them have a regular ski week in the winter and a summer travelling/sailing holiday in the summer. Are they still responding to emails while they’re away? Yes, but that’s just the nature of the job.
I work in govt and I would seriously not approve three weeks vacation for anyone, let alone more that.
That’s really just a lot of time off all at once.
That unfairly punishes anyone with family abroad. There are at least six or seven people I know personally at my company who came to the United States a long time ago, but who have all their family in pretty far away countries (India, Russia, Bangladesh, China…). They work without taking three-day weekends or days off, EVER, so they can take longer vacations once a year and get their money’s worth on expensive plane tickets. You should really consider that when you say you “wouldn’t approve three weeks’ vacation for anyone” – what you’re really saying is that you don’t think their choice in how to spend their earned benefits aligns with what you think is best.
My family lives on another continent, 23 hours of flying (not including layovers) away, and for that reason I’m able to take 2 consecutive weeks of vacation every 18 months or so to visit them without raising eyebrows. But 3 weeks or more would still be a non-starter.
It’s so disruptive! It’s not so novel to have family overseas, but what I’m used to is that the working parent goes for a week and the nonworking parent / children stay longer (usually in the summer when school is out). I’ve not seen the working parent take 3 weeks.
In one parent’s workplace, a sizeable majority was first-generation or H1B and if they had all taken 3 weeks at once (or even 2), nothing would have ever gotten done.
I think everyone agrees that there should be more latitude when there is family (especially parents/siblings) abroad. The OP didn’t indicate that was the case. But also Big Law pays you a lot and knows that, and expects you to sometimes throw away money as a cost of working there, so telling people you need to maximize the cost of the plane ticket probably isn’t going to get you much sympathy. Big Law definitely pays you enough to let you buy 3 plane tickets to India per year.
Wait, you would seriously pay $4,000 more per year (or more) and fly for 72 hours to go three times instead of one and your bosses would just expect you to be cool with it? Are you actually serious?
If it’s crucial to you to see your family for three weeks per year, yes, you’re going to have to buy multiple plane tickets to India. Plenty of people see their families for only one or two weeks per year. It’s not that tragic. Personally, I would go try to go most years for two weeks at a time, one week of which was the week between Christmas and New Years which only sort of counts as taking time off because things are so dead (at least in litigation).
Just because your family lives abroad doesn’t mean you HAVE to visit for three or more weeks at a time. My parents live in the US and although I visit them more than once a year, I don’t spend a cumulative two weeks per year with them. I’m not even sure I spend a cumulative week with them.
Fair point, I have approved a month of leave for someone to travel to visit their family in a country that was very remote. That would be disruptive to be a yearly thing though.
That said, I am the child of immigrants from a country that is very far away. The kids and my mom (and then just the kids when my mom rejoined the workforce) would go to the home country for several weeks and my dad would go for 10 days or so at either the beginning or end.
I want to be clear though, I am talking about taking the leave all in one chunk. I am fine with people taking every day they are entitled too. We are just leanly staffed so if you are on a month vacation and someone else is on maternity leave and then another person has the flu for a couple days, it just really insane in terms of being able to handle the workload. And it’s not something that can easily sit in my type of work. (think advocate ad litem for kids in foster care or the like.) people having to wait a long time to receive legal assistance or not receiving adequate level of assistance can yield very bad outcomes.
Alanna of Trebond
Wow. I work in Biglaw, get 20 days, up to 25 days with rollover, and you can ABSOLUTELY take more than 2 weeks. Some groups prefer you to take 2 weeks instead of fewer.
Figure out what other people have done in your group. Even at my biglaw firm, groups are very different. We have 4 weeks (on the honour system, no rollover, no reduction in target…so really 0 days, but I digress) but it is not done to take more than 3 at one time, and 3 is really for a special holiday – honeymoon, visiting family overseas, etc. Yours might count as a special holiday given the distance, so three weeks might be fine, but not 4.
Hahahahahaha. Take the time you have, be grateful you can get away with that, don’t push it because this isn’t your honeymoon, you’re a second year, and it reads as out of touch, spoiled, and entitled.
Single people have just as much right to use their vacation in a chunk as married people? Wtf? You’re wrong?
No, they don’t. In reality land where the rest of us live, most firms tolerate a longer vacation for a honeymoon than just because. I’m not saying it is right, I am saying it is true, especially for a second year.
Yeah. Unfortunately large law firms basically give you a free pass for your honeymoon. At many places, it’s the only time in your life when it’s acceptable to take 2 or more weeks off. For many people, it’s also the only time work won’t bother them while they’re traveling. It is unfair, because not everyone gets married and some people get married more than once (although I think many partners don’t make that big a deal out of a second or greater marriage), but it’s an unfortunate truth about Big Law.
In my experience, law firm vacations are much more dependent on common practice than policy. I would talk to a trusted, more senior associate and explain that you are planning to travel to India for __ days, and would appreciate their advice on how to handle the request and what will/will not raise eyebrows.
This may be unwelcome news… but you may well hear that taking more than 5 days off is *not done*, regardless of the fact that you get 15 days per year. You may want to think about what the minimum number of days you’d be willing to take are, and if you willing to potentially take a reputational hit for going on a long vacation (it may be that you are).
I think it also depends on how much you’re using your days this year. If you want to go to India for three weeks next year, don’t use any of your days this year, or at most use a handful of days here and there for long weekends but don’t take a weeklong vacation. If you take three one-week vacations in your first year, and then you go to India for three weeks in your second year, you’re going to be “that associate that is always on vacation.” If you go more than 18 months without a real vacation, and then take a big vacation, people will be a lot more understanding. But just for perspective, I know a lot of senior associates who have not had a real vacation (meaning five consecutive days off at once) in more than five years, so don’t expect people to be super super understanding even if you forego all your days this year (not saying that’s right, but that’s the way it is).
I’m at a firm that doesn’t have an official vacation policy for attorneys, and I have to say that even here (or maybe especially in that kind of environment), it would be shocking for someone to take 3 weeks away. Esp. as a young associate. If someone did, I would probably be expecting them to turn in their resignation the day they returned, thereby taking the trip as a final peace out (grrr… why do people do that?). Are you returning home on this trip? If so, I would play that up. If this is just a long vacation, it’s probably going to raise more eyebrows than simply you going home to visit family that you haven’t seen in a long time that requires a long and expensive flight.
I agree with the other commenters. I’m in a large, regional firm, and I’ve never heard of any attorney taking 3 weeks off, even for a honeymoon. One of our partners took 2 weeks for her 50th birthday several years ago, and she said it was her first 2-week vacation since she started at the firm right out of law school.
I would think at my firm, 2 weeks would be acceptable IF you were returning “home” or visiting close family, especially if a special event was involved. YMMV, but taking fewer days the year before probably wouldn’t help at my firm.
I’m in biglaw and the only time we’ve had extended vacations (London / Australia) was where the person worked in our local office while visiting family (with family in tow) for 2 weeks or so. So not entirely a checking-out-for-two-weeks vacation, but absent mainly on weekends / travel days / day after.
I haven’t had 3 consecutive weeks of R&R except for in between jobs (and then scheduled deliberately) since I finished law school and I’m a partner now.
Echoing others’ advice that an attorney of any seniority, much less a 2nd year, going on a trip that is (1) longer than 5-7 business days, and (2) NOT your honeymoon, would have been highly atypical at my old Biglaw firm. An associate even asking to take a non-honeymoon 2-week vacation would have been regarded as having one foot out the door and attempting to use up vacation time prior to giving notice. Tread very, very carefully and inquire with senior associates, if you have any around that you trust, about practices at your firm.
*Noting that the above assumes you’re in America, not somewhere overseas where long vacations are more common (although the fact that you only receive 15 days’ vacation makes me think you are)
Cosign prior advice. At the three firms I’ve worked at, associates that took similar trips were either mentally on their way out, or were on their way out after they did something like this. Being in biglaw means that you generally don’t get to take two week vacations, let alone three. Don’t be surprised if you get pulled off of whatever matters you were on, and you don’t really ramp up afterwards (i.e. you get soft fired). This is an incredibly risky move. If you already have a job lined up (for 12+ months from now), go ahead.
I have rarely seen this much vacation taken. Even honeymoons tend to be two weeks plus bookeneded weekends, and partners snivel about that. The only time I saw someone take a whole month off was when an M&A associate had worked upward of 2000 hours by October, and she went to Africa to build an orphanage, so the partners would have looked like complete monsters if they didn’t let her go. But she “earned” it.
The only way this wouldn’t raise eyebrows, especially in this hiring climate, is if you had an absolutely killer year in 2016, and it’s frankly way too early to tell whether that’s the case.
As others have said, there is an incredibly huge gap between what you have allocated and what you should take. This trip is possibly at the expense of your “career” in biglaw. Beware. Even if others say, “Know your group” I can tell you that even when I worked in Europe this wasn’t done. So if you’re in the US….just no.
+1 I know someone who was given an unpaid ‘sabbatical’ to do something that was less altruistic than building an orphanage but more meaningful than just a long vacation. But he was a well-liked senior associate who had a reputation as super competent and hard-working, and the group was light on work when they let him do it. At the time, I thought “how awesome, he’s earned it!” However, less than a year later, he’s no longer at the firm. I’m not sure why he left or if it was voluntary, but I doubt it was pure coincidence.
The CWT sabatical is for something like 6th years (and for not entirely altruistic reasons — to keep senior people from having SILO practices). I think for a second year, it’s what you do b/w jobs.
Different firm, this wasn’t a formal sabbatical program, but just something that was requested by an individual and granted.
This is all so shocking – I took two week vacations every single year at NY biglaw, and I was there for 8 years and voluntarily left. A non-issue, was never mentioned to me by the partners once.
I agree with everyone here that this is a know your firm situation and that the “policy” likely doesn’t actually reflect what is acceptable. I can’t imagine a junior associate at my midlaw firm taking 3 weeks unless it was a wedding/honeymoon/family issue.
Other things to consider: will you be available by phone or internet while you’re there? How consistently? Will you be able to remotely access your files? How busy are you now? Are there other associates in your group that the partners can use when you’re gone? What are your firms slow times? (ie, hopefully April). The senior associates/partners you clear this trip with will be wondering a) who is going to do your 40 hours of work while you’re gone for 3 weeks and whether they’ll be able to get in touch with you if they need to. Be prepared with decent answers to these questions.
Please do not labor under the delusion that you can just hop off the grid for 3 weeks as a lawyer in a large law firm.
Bahahaha to 40 hours a week of work.
You get what I’m saying. 40 billable hours/week as a baseline. Or, in OP’s case, 120 total hours that are going, where exactly?
Also, firm’s*. Ugh, I miss the edit feature.
Haven’t taken any vacation since August 2014. :(
So leaving aside the optics because I agree with most of the previous posters, your only possible option is 3. The fact that you are considering asking for a complete policy change for your vacation makes me really question your judgement- I don’t think you have a realistic view of what would fly in your office at all. The idea of a second year asking for the vacation policy to be changed to accommodate a vacation is mind boggling to say the least.
I just realized option 2 is asking for 5 extra days (on top of 15). That is crazy crazy entitlement
This is a personal preference, but my standard for feeling guilt about time off is “do I save lives in my job?” The answer is no. If I’m the world’s best heart surgeon and patients will die while I am gone, I might be tempted to take short vacations only. If I’m one of 30 associates in my group filing motions and drafting memos for corporate merger cases, not so much. Never feel guilty about taking time that you’ve earned and try to avoid companies that will act like you’re indispensable until you’re not.
I think you’re making the other side’s point, though. You’re exactly right that juniors aren’t indispensable at all, so why wouldn’t her firm fire her and find someone who won’t take three week vacations, let alone ask for additional unpaid time off?
Because ideally they would value her presumably high performance, care about her growth and development, and allow her to use her vacation time as she sees fit…but it sounds like it might be the wrong industry for that.
Hahaha yeah no. That’s not Big Law. Juniors are disposable and if you’re not hungry enough for it, someone else will be.
This argument bothers me so. damn. much.
You know, that’s great, you do you. How old are you and how advanced in your career? I’d say it’s safe to say you’re either already advanced, in which case you get this leeway, or you’re a first or second year yourself (or not even working yet), in which case, I hope the real world is kind when it comes knocking you back to reality. Taking all your vacation is fine. It’s something that most people I know frankly don’t get to do. Doing it all at once and assuming that you’re going to continue to advance is laughable.
I’m five years into my career. I work at a company where people regularly take 2-3 weeks off, including for travel, and it’s not discouraged AT ALL. I have occasionally seen people taking 6-8 weeks trips after saving all their PTO for a once in a lifetime experience. I previously worked as a paralegal, which made me decide against law school. Firm life is not for me. I’ve found my current company much more welcoming and understanding about work-life balance – it’s very demanding when you’re here and people regularly work long hours, but it’s expected and encouraged that you will take your time off however you want. We also have really high rates of employee satisfaction (>90% according to the last annual poll).
I can imagine you do have high rates of employee satisfaction. I’d love to know what this unicorn employer is. As I’m certain that 99.9% of us don’t work for them. Or anyone like them.
It’s not really a unicorn organization – it has its problems and did worse on several other specific performance metrics. It’s just really good about time off.
Well that’s super awesome but I think you’re doing this your lawyer a disservice to the extent you’re encouraging her to behave as though she lived in your awesome vacation-friendly world. Which she quite plainly does not.
Ugh. This young lawyer.
It’s not a disservice. Change has to start somewhere. This is an absurd way to treat employees or as I prefer to call them, fellow humans. If somebody got fired or hit by a bus, the wheel would keep spinning. I assume the same could be said for somebody being gone for less then a month on vacation.
Taking an inappropriately long vacation because “change has to start somewhere” is the definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face. I agree with you that change would be wonderful, but one very junior person is not in a position to accomplish it. There are lot of unemployed and under-employed lawyers and many of them are very well-qualified. The only think that taking a stand like this is going to accomplish is getting you fired. Someone will gladly take your place and the firm will go on exactly as it has for a hundred or more years. Honestly, the best thing you can do to bring about positive change in a law firm or any other big organization is to put your head down, work your a$$ off, make partner, and then treat the people under you better than you were treated — and encourage the associates working for you to take vacations, like cbackson and some others said they do. Even better, make it all the way to management committee where maybe you can influence the culture of the whole firm, as opposed to just making the lives of your underlings better. That is how you change things, not by taking a month of vacation all at once in protest.
Yup. The wheel would keep spinning and the month-long vacation-taker would be out of a job.
Ok, and what happens to the deals she’s staffed on while she takes her three week vacation (or… what, four weeks with unpaid time off?)?? Does that work get shoved to partners? Other associates? Who steps up when she’s not around to handle a matter that comes up? What if it comes up on one of her cases? Maybe her practice won’t present these issues; I don’t know. But a 3 week absence certainly presents challenges for others in the way that a 1 week vacation might not.
I think the way biglaw treats its human capital is remarkably inhumane and truly beileve people should be able to take significant, restorative vacations. But the absence of one attorney for one week is simply a lot easier for a team of people to absorb than the absence of one attorney for three weeks.
I think it’s not just big law but transactional work vs. non transactional work (not in law here, but “big finance”), not to mention commission paid jobs or “associate” level jobs that report to commission-only “partners”, but I digress…
Yeah. I am a Biglaw partner. I am a huge fan of vacation. I typically take two substantial internal trips a year, as well as a ton of other travel. I strongly encourage my associates to take vacation, and I try my damnedest not to bother them while they’re on it. I am that person who will call you and say, “I noticed you haven’t taken a day off in six months and I’m concerned.”
Realistically, I wouldn’t approve a 3-week vacation for an associate. Because I try to minimize bothering people on vacation, I’d have to start taking that person off deals weeks (or maybe months?) in advance. We are absolutely staffed to accommodate a vacation of a week to 10 days. We’re not (and it’s not realistic to ask us to be) staffed to accommodate a three-week vacation. The amount of redundant staffing we’d have to do to handle that just wouldn’t be supportable, economically.
Any chance of moving it to January/the holidays? The weather is better than anyway and it might absorb some of the time.
This is not advisable if it’s transactional work…typically end of year is “get that deal done before it’s [next tax year].”
+1 to MJ. There are no December “holidays” in transactional because of year-end closings. Early January then involves a lot of post-closing cleanup, and occasionally a straggler closing that got hung up and missed December 31, but the parties are now all on the same page and want to push it through before someone changes their mind.
End of January/early February is often a lull though, so that’s when we tend to time our vacations. Never 3 weeks though, or even two weeks. The longest anyone has been out consecutively was 10 days for death of an immediately family member who lived far away. Do I think that sucks? Absolutely, but it’s sort of the deal we all know going into biglaw and even mid to small law (where there’s less coverage and clients aren’t used to red tape in their small businesses so they’re just as demanding on turnaround time). OP’s trip sounds like something she should’ve done as a bar trip, or should save for in between jobs.
I love to travel and have gone all over the world, so I sympathize with wanting to take extended, in-depth vacations, but you really don’t need more than two weeks off work to visit India. That’s 16 days with weekends, so even factoring in two days for travel each way, you have 12 days to see India. 12 days is plenty of time to explore a country. It might not be as long as you’d like and you might not get to see every single part of the country, but it is what it is. If you love it, you can go back.
I know of one and only one place that can’t really can’t be visited with two weeks: Antarctica. Maybe there are some others that I’m not aware of, but I *know* you can go to India from the US and have a wonderful trip and see a lot of the country with just two weeks off work.
Jelly - OP
Thank you for this. I wanted to figure out the maximum time I could take because, as you alluded, extended, in-depth vacations are amazing. But law school and college breaks are now a thing of the past, so it looks like this will be a two week trip. It’s great to know that two weeks will be enough to explore!
Thanks to everyone who responded, especially those who were polite. I talked to a senior associate here and it sounds like two week trips are fairly common (three week trips require “special approval” from HR). FWIW, I work in a mid-size lifestyle friendly boutique firm, spring is our slowest season, and I don’t plan to take anything longer than long weekends before this trip.
Anon at 5:01
Sounds like a great plan! I’m so glad it worked out, I think you’re very wise to limit it to two weeks, and it’s awesome to know that two week vacations are ok w/ your employer. While I think just about everywhere can be seen in two weeks, there are a lot of places that are really difficult if not almost impossible to do in 9 days. The flexibility to regularly do 2 weeks instead of 1 is hugely important, imo.
I’m late to the commenting party, and in a field that’s pretty far from law or finance, but I took a 3-week trip to an Asian country two years (and I was a grunt-level employee) ago to visit family. I went right around the winter holidays thru early January, which is traditionally our slowest season. The other reason I think my vacation was approved was because another department head had set precedence for this type of occasional long vacation, he goes on 3-week long trips back to India every couple of years to visit family.
I’m a second year in a Big Law firm with a 4 week vacation policy. No one takes that much at once! In fact, we need to ask the Administrative Partner for approval of more than 2 weeks off. She basically only approves it for wedding/honeymoon or family emergency. If you request for anything else, the rumors spread that the associate is commiting career suicide. Because it is. That doesn’t mean that we can’t use our vacation days – it means that we can’t use them all at once. I can’t imagine my small-ish non-transactional practice group being able to absorb me being gone for 2+ weeks at once. Even in larger groups, depending on the staffing of the matters you’re on, there may not be anyone but the partner or very senior associate to pick up the work.
OP- I would encourage you to look at what you have on your plate right now and see what your plan would be for who would do all the work starting today if you left tomorrow for 4 weeks. Now it may be that April is a slow time for your group but it can’t be that slow that an absense of 4 weeks would go unnoticed. Would your plan be not to take on any additional work in March so that you have less to pawn off in April? That’s dumb too – you would miss the billable hours for 2 months and would ruin your reputation by constantly saying No as a junior.
Erm, even in the most laid back jobs, 3 weeks off in April is going to come off as really out of touch. Except for maternity leave, it is exceptionally rare for people to take even 2 weeks off at once, and even that is only done around the Christmas holiday when things are pretty dull anyway. For a newer person, you would come off as clueless.
I know your office gives 3 weeks, but that usually doesn’t mean you should take them all at once. I can’t imagine too many bosses okaying that. Moreover, if your company can do without you for 3 weeks, there’s a good chance they’ll realize they don’t need you at all.
In late January I posted right after getting fired. I do not know if I have ever felt more hopeless, scared, or alone. In desperation, I posted here on the weekend. Commenters here were amazing. When I posted, I felt like an elephant was on my chest — I couldn’t even catch my breath. It’s been a difficult time, but I have two interviews coming up, and I am very grateful to all of you who were kind enough to offer sound advice and words of encouragement. Thank you!
Good luck, lady. You can do this!
You are not alone. Also recently laid off and looking. It’s tough, and I have been incredibly grateful for the advice from this community too. Good luck! It will get better for us!
Hugs! Good luck! I have been fired and laid off in the past 5 years and am now at my dream job that I never would have dreamed of then. You can do this!
my go to for anti-chafing (not worried about modesty):
— Body glide or Deodorant on the part of my thighs that touch.
Seriously, it works.
No under-shorts necessary.
Does it work all day, even days with lots of walking? My concern with this would be that it rubs off half way through the day and then I’m stuck with nothing for the rest of the day.
I’ve worn it all day in the sweltering NYC summer without a problem. Plus, the Body Glide tube is small enough to fit in a small purse, in case you need to reapply.
In the Pink
yes indeed. I’ve used it for slacks for really long flights … so no rubbing of the slack seams. Used it throughout my treks in Antarctica because of the same reason and wearing tons of layers of clothing. It’s great stuff. I sweat alot and have never had to reapply.
I do this too, and I keep a mini deodorant in my bag for touch-ups. It works really well.
Same. Keep extra in drawers for lunch time reapplication. It is the best.
Hive, any on the value of a non-business graduate degree from a prestigious university (think, [email protected]@rd’s policy school) versus an MBA from a not-as-prestigious-but-respectable (like top 40) school? DH and I have some life decisions to make.
Depends what you want to do.
Also depends on the degree.
Generally speaking I would NOT pursue a policy degree even at Harvard, if you don’t want to end up with a career in policy, think tanks, non profits etc. If you want a business career — banking, consulting, or operating company AND you have an idea of where you want to end up geographically and the industry you want — then it’s better to take an offer for the highest ranking b-school you can get into that your companies/industries of choice recruit at.
Agree–I’ve had a few friends get Kennedy, Fletcher or SAIS degrees, but their next job (if in business) has typically come from their pre-grad-school business experience. The skillsets you learn are just not comparable. Don’t believe the unicorn cases of “I went to Kennedy and got a job at Bain” because generally that kid had a resume that would have gotten them a job at Bain pre-Kennedy.
Honestly…study up and take the GMAT again. It’s a very learnable test. You can either nail the math or the verbal and get close to a 700, which is what you need to get into a higher-ranked school. And if your work experience is holding you back, work for a few more years or take another job. Don’t go to b-school for the sake of b-school–go for the doors it will open for you and target exactly what you want to do next. B-schools like more experience, so if you can show progression and broaden your skillset with your next move, do that instead of firing up a degree that’s price that _might_ get you where you want to go.
The GMAT score is not the issue (it’s 780) but DH’s background is in public sector. He basically does the same kind of work for his agency that a lot of gov agencies and nonprofits hire consultants, but he doesn’t have any business credentials. The idea is to get formal training and credentials in the area, but also to work for those consulting firms/network in that world.
That’s a great score. If he needs business credentials/skills, then I would go to business school. Highly recommend Montauk’s How to Get into a Top MBA Program wrt to how to craft his story. A lot of my b-school classmates did distance relationships to get their credential. You’re only away from your spouse/family for 8ish months two times, if you can summer near them.
Skimmies are awesome! I wore the wicking ones under my ball gown for my Late August in Oklahoma wedding. Not very secksy, but it was a move that enabled me to comfortably dance all night!
The modesty aspect
Why is full-coverage underwear not sufficient?
Leaving chafing aside for now: there are other ways to deal with it.
The modesty aspect
Sorry, this was not meant as a reply to lindsay e.
Not lindsay, but I would choose skimmies over underwear any day – I’m wide across the hip and with a full rear; I have never had a single pair of underwear that didn’t ride up the moment I started to move. I’ve tried everything from Target to La Perla and all that’s in between and a brief (or even bikini) style simply doesn’t work. So I either wear a Hanky Panky thong, or Skimmies.
Paging Senior Attorney and kc esq – Station Eleven was so good! Thanks for the recommendation.
I loved it, too, and so did my college-age son.
Yay! I just recommended it to my grad student son and I’m pretty sure he’s gonna love it, too!
Just downloaded it from the library to my kindle.
If you enjoyed that, you might want to try the Beautiful Ruins, similar “feel” though, not similar subject matter at all.
Does anyone have suggestions for a gift to give parents of two young kids? We can’t do babysitting because we live far away, and they have unlimited care anyway. Restaurant gift certificates also aren’t a great idea for this couple. I just honestly can’t think of anything–they just have such a different kid-centric lifestyle. TIA!
Show tickets? Theater, opera, circus…
A few ideas: Is there a local children’s museum where you could buy an annual pass for the family? Tickets to a local attraction (theme park for appropriate aged children)? Also, as parents of two little kids, you can never go wrong with a Target gift card.
Wine and a gift certificate to a specialty grocer for a nice dinner at home? Upgrade something in their house? A nicer coffee maker, burr grinder, espresso maker (I like coffee, so there’s a theme here…)?
Memberships to local zoos, aquariums, or museums?
Plated or Blue apron gift card? Big llbean tote bag along with new towels for the summer? Local membership passes would be great, I’d also really appreciate a gift card to a kid-gear store – you inevitably want to upgrade or buy something that didn’t quite make it onto your registry.
Or if they are very close friends – gift them a photoshoot with their wedding photographer, but for the baby? Huge hit anytime I’ve done it.
So what are kids wearing to concerts these days? I’m seeing Mumford and Sons this spring and want to treat myself to a fun new outfit. What would you stylish gals wearing?
Spandex skirts and low cut shirts in bright colors. With Via Spigas, natch.
I could also see the real Grandma embracing the hipster look for a concert, alas, I’m not as cool as the real Edna or Lula.
Ugh I want a pair of Galeas so badly, but all those slip-on styles look ridiculous on my size 11 feet.
Never change, Lula.
My ‘Fashion consultant’ (who keeps me away from mom jeans) has advised me that you can go in a few different directions:
Higher waisted flared jeans with a tucked-in top for a nice 70’s vibe
Floral print knit dresses with Doc Martins (think 1991 chic)
Black skinny jeans, ankle boots, vintage band t/printed tank/black tee depending on your feelings with a flannel shirt if it’s cold.
Please don’t wear a tshirt of the band you’re seeing. Don’t be that guy!
don’t have one- no worries!
Sorry, I am that guy (woman). Buying merch helps support the bands you love.
Jeans and a tshirt is typical for me, and most people, at rock shows. Or jeans and a cute casual top.
Oh I’m not against buying the merch. By all mean, buy merch! But don’t *wear* it at the show.
Buy anything from FreePeople and you’ll fit right in at Mumford and Sons. Have fun!
P.S. Love anything 1991 chic. Brilliant advice Clementine!
If I’m old enough to have worn it the first time around, does that mean I can’t again? Cause I totally rocked that look in the early to mid 90s.
I’ve tried the jockey shorts and have a love/hate relationship with them. They constantly roll down at the stomach and I can’t get them to stop. I saw something called bandelettes (http://www.bandelettes.com/) which are like thigh highs without the hose part, just the lace. Has anyone ever tried them? Any thoughts?
I’ve tried them. They *kind of * work. They stayed put, which I didn’t expect, and did reduce chafing if I otherwise didn’t wear anything, but they do get annoying. Like jockeys, it’s another imperfect relationship. But I do encourage you to try and see. I worked them into my rotation with my skimmies/similar.
I have a pair and I still have issues with them rolling. Maybe I’m not wearing them right? But they’re kind of eh in my book.
Was there a point in your retirement savings where you felt like you had “enough” — i.e. you still keep contributing but you feel “comfortable” that with just the amount you have compounding over x number of yrs, you’d be ok if you contributed nothing more. I’m not talking about the people who feel comfortable at 750k at age 35. I’m talking about — did you breathe a sigh of relief when you hit 50k or 250k. What’s that number for you — and how many yrs until retirement?
I’m not there, but there’s no such number to me, because if you retire, and there’s a dip in the market (say 2008 crash-like dip), ~20% or more of your account’s value could be wiped out in a matter of months. Given that could happen early in your retirement and you had been counting on that principal compounding, that’s a worst case scenario that could lead to you running out of money/outliving your funds. So the answer to this is NEVER. [ELLENCAPS!]An
And I say that as a mid-thirties single, no kids who has been saving since my first job out of college and has always lived in HCOL areas, with substantial grad school debt.
Honestly, I can’t imagine feeling ever that I had “enough.”
I agree. Team “Never.”
I’m also on Team Never in terms of don’t stop saving. But feeling reasonably comfortable? That actually just happened for me, when I closed on a house that I essentially purchased for my parents (I will visit on weekends). I paid cash, and the house is in my name/will be all mine upon my retirement. I will have a place to go that is paid off, and that feels huge even if I have to get a menial job or something to make ends meet.
I am single, 35, no real hope of a partner, around $300k in retirement savings/$550k total (not including house). Maybe I will retire in 10 years, because why I am working this hard when I have nobody in my life anyway?
I disagree. You are at a young age, and you DO have hope of a partner, as do I. Your partner could also work so that you can enjoy retirement together. So never give up hope of finding someone. That is something to look forward to!
35 is young!
No vision what so ever of my partner at 35… married at 41. Who knows what’s in your future?
I loathe skimmies. They feel like baggy granny panties to me. If I’m going to wear a short I want to feel held together and smooth, even if I’m not going for “shapewear” per se. I love the Spanx girlshort, Assets shorts, and I have a few pairs of under armor compression shorts that I’ll wear under dresses in a pinch.
I ordered a package (12) of Sexy Basics Womens Boyshorts Briefs from Amazon. They were a very in expensive foray into boyshorts for me. I do wear more dresses and skirts since wearing them. I also like that they are 85% cotton. So, no belly binding. I have problems with pantyhose rolling down and I’ve not had that problem with these.