Senior Professional Women - please help sanity check decision (Legal/Tech/Pharma)

[lawyer1991NCL]

I got some great advice on MN recently about going remote as an in-house lawyer before having children. Well, I’m back with a curve ball needing more advice please…

The advert for a Legal role at a software company encouraged women to apply even if they didn’t meet every single requirement, as men apply for jobs they’re unqualified for all the time. (The tone was not to undersell yourself!) It really resonated with me. The process moved quickly from application to offer, I accepted the role for mid-£80ks and I’m winding down my current job.

The day I applied, I also saw another remote Legal role at a fast-growing online healthcare company. The role was an unusually good match for my experience, but the salary was around £120k.

I assumed they would want someone with a much more traditional City firm background, so I didn’t think I really stood a chance. But, inspired by the first advert, I applied on a complete whim.

Many weeks later, I’ve just been offered it… to say I’m in shock is would be an understatement.

So now I’ve got a choice to make. Both roles are fully remote, both have a Head of Legal above me, and the higher-paid role has a larger legal team. It also doesn’t seem any more intense than the kind of work I’ve already been doing for years. The salary appears to reflect the company’s huge financial growth and it being a big money industry.

Am I missing something?

The job sounds great, but I don’t want to be blinded by the money. I also don’t want imposter syndrome to decide for me. I’d really appreciate peer guidance from women in my field or with similar salary brackets, as I don’t have that in my personal circle and I’m feeling a bit clueless on the right decision.

Why would you not go for more money? Do you have management experience - is it something you’re interested in getting?

@Puppalicious- I’m currently in a senior team role, neither of these options are. There’s no people to manage and neither are C-level or Senior management.

I think my dad planted the seed that money isn’t everything and seemed to ask me for more rationale than that when I called him to tell him about it. He always earned well as an FD at SMEs, but looking back he definitely favoured roles (not charities or anything) he could make more impact in and stay for 20 years rather than which had the biggest salary he could have got.

Do you know anything about the work culture at them? Nothing could persuade me to take 50% more if the expected working hours were significantly higher. But you haven't said that is necessarily the expectation.

I’d see if you can get a chat with a peer at each about the work style / culture.

Some organisations expect to buy access to your every waking moment. Some have respect for work / non work boundaries.

Go for the one that has some.

Tech roles salaries and job titles are wild so it wouldn’t surprise me for a tech role, slightly more surprising for a legal team role (which presumably is well defined - are the two roles actually the same?)
Is the higher paying role in a PE backed company? They often pay a bit more because PE is pretty hard driving and can be quite ruthless. There’s also the very real possibility of being jobless once they sell and the new owners want their people in.
Industry does also play a role in salary though and as you say, online pharma has exploded in the UK since WLIs came to market so there is pots of money washing round.
I’d say go for it, be mindful of the tax cliff edge and load your pension.
Congrats!

Both roles are legal counsel titles, just different industries. Neither are HOD positions and both seem to be more “typical” in-house legal roles which can be long hours but that’s just the industry I chose.

The Tech company is software sales. Hours are 9-6 but I’ve been warned that US clients will need later meetings with me and sales, but that I won’t be expected to start at 9am the next day if I’ve been on a 7pm call. The HOD is very technically great and I think I’d learn a lot and be kept more tabs on, have targets from etc which I don’t mind in all honesty, it’s good professionally to be pushed like that.

The pharmacy one is more “we want to expand into this country, manage the legal aspects with external in-country specialists. Review existing contracts we have with suppliers and tighten them” eg more typical in-house counsel work. I suspect Pharma hours/setup will be more like my current role where I entirely manage my own time - the senior team want to go live by X date, make it happen. I’ve done both styles during my career - I might find the tech one take a minute to get back into but it’s not bad per se.

The tech company is VC funded whereas the Pharma one is funded by the parent co. Where I am now is PE backed tech and I’m leaving for job security for the reasons you’ve mentioned. I’m currently sole counsel and on £70K, so to say this unexpected pivot has left me speechless is an understatement. I appreciate the congrats - I can’t really tell anyone but my parents and husband about the details as it’s distasteful to other family/friends circumstances.

No, but based on conversations so far I think the tech company (its software sales) will be longer hours and firmer expectations. They have a lot of US clients and I’ve already been warned about late calls, but that I won’t be expected to start at 9am sharp if that’s the case.

I’m aware that wanting to start a family it would be insane to start working huge hours and take a board position for example as I want to enjoy motherhood. This is where I’m slightly perplexed and waiting for the punchline - this role doesn’t appear to be that way? It’s effectively helping them role out into new countries (managing external counsel) and assessing what’s currently in place, taking co sec work off the HOD and things like that.

Is it a US company? US working expectations seem to be very different to UK.

That’s great advice - I’m not sure how I would do that?

The tech company seems really young, modern and fun but I’ve seen the HOD for sales post joking linked in posts about his sales team sat on the floor of a pub at 8pm with their laptop “closing deals” and that was a mid level sales team member. So yes, they seem very nice and chirpy but they put the work in.

The pharma company hired two other lawyers earlier this year (regulatory and data protection) so I might see if I can speak to them…

Are they both selling something that you have no ethical concerns about?

The Pharma company aren’t owned by a US company. The tech sales company are UK owned but have US presence and 60% US clients.

Not personally, no.

I don’t want to give too many identifying details, but I have a close relative who is a young child who is severely disabled and they benefit greatly from access to cutting edge Pharma, so it’s perhaps a unique perspective I have that others might not.

The company doesn't price normal people out of access to medication or profit off pain if that’s the question. Hard to explain it fully without fully explaining!

If you are considering a baby, you probably need to think about how you will keep your earnings under £100k to ensure you get some government funded childcare, unless your partner makes too much to qualify. That isn't to say that you should take a lower paid job as you can put more in a pension, but it does make working crazy hours (if that's what they do) less attractive.

Ask them.

If they’re keen they’ll set you up a chat.

also, you mentioned wanting to have a child. Mat pay and future attitude to flexible working might be very different between the two.

I’d go for pharma one. Better hours, less PE owners being mental (I also have experience) and more money. Are there bonuses as well as salary?

I’d go for pharma one. Better hours, less PE owners being mental (I also have experience) and more money. Are there bonuses as well as salary?

Go for the money