NLJ 250 Placement for C/O 2012 Forum

[09042014]

Kirkland: NU 17, UChi 9

Is that typical?

Pretty sure Kirkland just made a big donation to Northwestern. So they probably like that school a lot (and its students with that previous work experience).

And vice versa, northwestern students really like kirkland. NW students have a reputation for choosing KE chicago over V5 in NYC.

Chicago firms appear to treat NW and U of C students about equal.

[star fox]

Kirkland: NU 17, UChi 9

Is that typical?

Pretty sure Kirkland just made a big donation to Northwestern. So they probably like that school a lot (and its students with that previous work experience).

And vice versa, northwestern students really like kirkland. NW students have a reputation for choosing KE chicago over V5 in NYC.

Chicago firms appear to treat NW and U of C students about equal.

Agreed. And Michigan who is another Midwest school that's actually ranked higher than NU in the US News Ranking barely gets a dent in Chicago.

[Helmholtz]

When you land a (SA) firm that pays BL $$, does their rank matter? Is it significant that they have +300 attorneys or 50? In case it does matter, please expound. Thx.

Rank? Are you serious? So, you're asking if the size of the firm matters? No. Assuming you receive more than one SA offer, what matters is the following in order: offer rate for SA's, yearly retention rate for hired associates, billable hour requirements for hired associates, benefits for hired associates (including bar stipends), associate/partner ratio, anything else of value to you (i.e. whether pro bono hours are counted as billable hours).

+1. As long as we're talking about roughly V100 firms. Within the V100 I wouldn't think your exit options would be drastically different (maybe for the top 10 firms they might be slightly better). If anyone believes otherwise, I would love to see some actual evidence.

From what I've seen, there is a hell of a lot of difference in exit options between an associate from Wachtell, Cravath, SullCrom, DPW, etc than an associate from Schulte, Stroock, Hughes Hubbard, Pillsbury, DLA Piper, etc. It would be extremely difficult to show actual evidence, however.

Also, I agree that Chambers is more reliable when it comes to specific practice areas, but how many people are dead set on a particular practice area before they even begin their summer associate jobs? A lot of incoming SAs don't even have the corporate versus litigation decision decided. I've got a job lined up in a group that I never thought I would join. Even after the first couple years of law school—never thought I would really like this type of work. (And I didn't much care for the type of work that I thought I would really enjoy.)

[JO 14]

From what I've seen, there is a hell of a lot of difference in exit options. . .

I have read a lot about exiting. When I look at the history of the lawyers at my SA firm, most who have been there for 5-7 years are partners. Is it just wrong/naive to think of your [SA] firm as potentially a “forever here” place?

Aside from the possibility of being fired, disappointed with your movement up the food chain or $, why does one enter a firm with exiting being a high priority? I am not taking issue with having an exit strategy, just trying to better understand.

[Lasers]

When you land a (SA) firm that pays BL $$, does their rank matter? Is it significant that they have +300 attorneys or 50? In case it does matter, please expound. Thx.

Rank? Are you serious? So, you're asking if the size of the firm matters? No. Assuming you receive more than one SA offer, what matters is the following in order: offer rate for SA's, yearly retention rate for hired associates, billable hour requirements for hired associates, benefits for hired associates (including bar stipends), associate/partner ratio, anything else of value to you (i.e. whether pro bono hours are counted as billable hours).

+1. As long as we're talking about roughly V100 firms. Within the V100 I wouldn't think your exit options would be drastically different (maybe for the top 10 firms they might be slightly better). If anyone believes otherwise, I would love to see some actual evidence.

From what I've seen, there is a hell of a lot of difference in exit options between an associate from Wachtell, Cravath, SullCrom, DPW, etc than an associate from Schulte, Stroock, Hughes Hubbard, Pillsbury, DLA Piper, etc. It would be extremely difficult to show actual evidence, however.

Also, I agree that Chambers is more reliable when it comes to specific practice areas, but how many people are dead set on a particular practice area before they even begin their summer associate jobs? A lot of incoming SAs don't even have the corporate versus litigation decision decided. I've got a job lined up in a group that I never thought I would join. Even after the first couple years of law school—never thought I would really like this type of work. (And I didn't much care for the type of work that I thought I would really enjoy.)

i don't doubt that associates from the most elite firms have better exit options than most other biglaw associates. however, besides that, i don't think there is a tangible difference between the vast majority of biglaw firms and what exit options are available.

[JamesDean1955]

I'm curious to know how the whole "getting pushed out" thing works for associates. Are you basically just shunned by everyone in the office? Even so, how bad/influential could that be when you are looking at a $160k+ salary? I've never actually seen this happen (I work in a non-attorney position obviously, and I've only seen people get fired (rare) or leave on their own accord).

Also, I'm curious as to how hard it would be for associates who get pushed out (not fired) or decide to leave to simply move to another biglaw firm (not midsize) and retain their seniority/payscale.

If you're good at what you do and you work at least as hard as everyone else, I don't understand why firms would prefer hiring and training new first years and paying them $160k rather than keeping experienced associates at $170k, $180k, $190k (whatever it is). Obviously, there's not enough room for most people to make partner, but I would think a lot of people would simply be content and happy to stay on as senior associates (assuming you like the lifestyle). The difference in billable rates shouldn't be extraordinarily different.

[SaintsTheMetal]

I'm curious to know how the whole "getting pushed out" thing works for associates. Are you basically just shunned by everyone in the office? Even so, how bad/influential could that be when you are looking at a $160k+ salary? I've never actually seen this happen (I work in a non-attorney position obviously, and I've only seen people get fired (rare) or leave on their own accord).

Also, I'm curious as to how hard it would be for associates who get pushed out (not fired) or decide to leave to simply move to another biglaw firm (not midsize) and retain their seniority/payscale.

If you're good at what you do and you work at least as hard as everyone else, I don't understand why firms would prefer hiring and training new first years and paying them $160k rather than keeping experienced associates at $170k, $180k, $190k (whatever it is). Obviously, there's not enough room for most people to make partner, but I would think a lot of people would simply be content and happy to stay on as senior associates (assuming you like the lifestyle). The difference in billable rates shouldn't be extraordinarily different.

Read some of the current associate threads in the employment forum. When they want to push you out, you will probably know ahead of time as they stop staffing you on projects and fail to hit your billable requirements or they only put you on bad projects for you setting you up to fail.

They do this because attrition is built into the Biglaw model.. large 1st year classes slowly whittled down to just the best

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=193519

[JamesDean1955]

I'm curious to know how the whole "getting pushed out" thing works for associates. Are you basically just shunned by everyone in the office? Even so, how bad/influential could that be when you are looking at a $160k+ salary? I've never actually seen this happen (I work in a non-attorney position obviously, and I've only seen people get fired (rare) or leave on their own accord).

Also, I'm curious as to how hard it would be for associates who get pushed out (not fired) or decide to leave to simply move to another biglaw firm (not midsize) and retain their seniority/payscale.

If you're good at what you do and you work at least as hard as everyone else, I don't understand why firms would prefer hiring and training new first years and paying them $160k rather than keeping experienced associates at $170k, $180k, $190k (whatever it is). Obviously, there's not enough room for most people to make partner, but I would think a lot of people would simply be content and happy to stay on as senior associates (assuming you like the lifestyle). The difference in billable rates shouldn't be extraordinarily different.

Read some of the current associate threads in the employment forum. When they want to push you out, you will probably know ahead of time as they stop staffing you on projects and fail to hit your billable requirements or they only put you on bad projects for you setting you up to fail.

They do this because attrition is built into the Biglaw model.. large 1st year classes slowly whittled down to just the best

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=193519

Gotcha, thanks. This isn't something that someone working in a supporting role at a biglaw firm is in a position to see, and people certainly don't like to talk about it, so I was just curious.

[09042014]

I'm only repeating second hand info, but one way is they just straight up tell you that you have 3 months to find a new job. Usually the warning sign is a bad end of year review.

So if you get that warning you just immediately start looking.

I'm sure someone who actually knows what they are taking about can set this straight.

[Helmholtz]

i don't doubt that associates from the most elite firms have better exit options than most other biglaw associates. however, besides that, i don't think there is a tangible difference between the vast majority of biglaw firms and what exit options are available.

I agree. If we define "biglaw" as firms in the top 250, you probably don't see any difference in exit options between an associate from a top-100-most-prestigious firm and an associate from a top-250-most-prestigious firm. If there is a difference, it certainly doesn't compare to the significant difference between having a top-10-most-prestigious firm on your resume as compared to a top-100-prestigious firm. That being said, I don't think there are any hard and fast rules. Some associates coming from Jones Day NY or White & Case NY are going to have better exit options than some associates from Cravath or SullCrom.

[JCougar]

I don't know about other schools, but WUSTL's c/o 2012 ABA stats are out.

http://law.wustl.edu/career_services/pages.aspx?id=9620

The NALP survey says 49 graduates in NLJ 250 firms. The ABA has 69 associates in firms of 100+ attorneys. Then NLJ 250 firms have 160+ lawyers. I doubt there's an additional 20 students in firms sized 100-160, so there might be a reason the NLJ 250 survey undercounts the numbers to a somewhat significant degree.

The difference is 16.3% reported by the NLJ 250 survey compared to the ABA measure, which ends up being 23%. It's far from a fantastic outcome, but I'm curious as to whether other schools show similar margins. Anyone have access to that data?

[09042014]

I don't know about other schools, but WUSTL's c/o 2012 ABA stats are out.

http://law.wustl.edu/career_services/pages.aspx?id=9620

The NALP survey says 49 graduates in NLJ 250 firms. The ABA has 69 associates in firms of 100+ attorneys. Then NLJ 250 firms have 160+ lawyers. I doubt there's an additional 20 students in firms sized 100-160, so there might be a reason the NLJ 250 survey undercounts the numbers to a somewhat significant degree.

The difference is 16.3% reported by the NLJ 250 survey compared to the ABA measure, which ends up being 23%. It's far from a fantastic outcome, but I'm curious as to whether other schools show similar margins. Anyone have access to that data?

NLJ250 undercounts some firms who don't report. So it's probably a mix of that, and a mix of 100-160 firms (of which there are at least 100 firms like that, probably more).

[rad lulz]

I don't know about other schools, but WUSTL's c/o 2012 ABA stats are out.

http://law.wustl.edu/career_services/pages.aspx?id=9620

The NALP survey says 49 graduates in NLJ 250 firms. The ABA has 69 associates in firms of 100+ attorneys. Then NLJ 250 firms have 160+ lawyers. I doubt there's an additional 20 students in firms sized 100-160, so there might be a reason the NLJ 250 survey undercounts the numbers to a somewhat significant degree.

The difference is 16.3% reported by the NLJ 250 survey compared to the ABA measure, which ends up being 23%. It's far from a fantastic outcome, but I'm curious as to whether other schools show similar margins. Anyone have access to that data?

NLJ250 undercounts some firms who don't report. So it's probably a mix of that, and a mix of 100-160 firms (of which there are at least 100 firms like that, probably more).

Probably more. NLJ350 cuts off at a lil over 100 I think.

[JCougar]

There's really not a lot of names I recognize from OCI at NLJ 250-350 firms. The only St. Louis firm in that area is Lewis Rice, which was exactly at #250 last year. I don't see Lewis Rice on our pie chart from 2012, so it might have dropped to #255 or something. But at most, they would hire one or two associates anyway.

Even if you take just the people at firms of 250+, there's 56 people there total (the NLJ report says 49 total), and that's well above the 160 attorney cutoff for NLJ 250. And between 250 and 160 attorneys, there is Armstrong Teasdale, Ice Miller, Sites Harbison, Greensfielder, and a number of others I recognize and that I know people going to such firms. There's got to be at least another 5-6 people here, for a total of over 60 going to the NLJ 250.

I'm starting to really wonder how accurate the NLJ 250 rankings are. I always knew that a few firms didn't respond, but there seems to be a non-negligible number of people left out.

[romothesavior]

There's really not a lot of names I recognize from OCI at NLJ 250-350 firms. The only St. Louis firm in that area is Lewis Rice, which was exactly at #250 last year. I don't see Lewis Rice on our pie chart from 2012, so it might have dropped to #255 or something. But at most, they would hire one or two associates anyway.

Even if you take just the people at firms of 250+, there's 56 people there total (the NLJ report says 49 total), and that's well above the 160 attorney cutoff for NLJ 250. And between 250 and 160 attorneys, there is Armstrong Teasdale, Ice Miller, Sites Harbison, Greensfielder, and a number of others I recognize and that I know people going to such firms. There's got to be at least another 5-6 people here, for a total of over 60 going to the NLJ 250.

I'm starting to really wonder how accurate the NLJ 250 rankings are. I always knew that a few firms didn't respond, but there seems to be a non-negligible number of people left out.

I agree. I always knew there were some holes in the data but from what I've heard this year, they're really not even close. Still a decent metric for comparing schools, but with the more thorough ABA reporting and with LST packaging the data for us, there's really not much value in the NLJ 250 data anymore.

[hume85]

Does anyone know when the ABA numbers for 2012 come out?

[Tiago Splitter]

Does anyone know when the ABA numbers for 2012 come out?

Some schools have already put them on their websites. Otherwise,

Status date is 2/15. Reporting deadline to the ABA is 3/15. The numbers should trickle out at schools between now and then, and then the ABA will release all of the data a few weeks after 3/15. LST will immediately take the data to populate the new edition of the Score Reports.

[shntn]

Does anyone know when the ABA numbers for 2012 come out?

Some schools have already put them on their websites. Otherwise,

Status date is 2/15. Reporting deadline to the ABA is 3/15. The numbers should trickle out at schools between now and then, and then the ABA will release all of the data a few weeks after 3/15. LST will immediately take the data to populate the new edition of the Score Reports.

Just in time to maybe be of use.

[rad lulz]

There's really not a lot of names I recognize from OCI at NLJ 250-350 firms. The only St. Louis firm in that area is Lewis Rice, which was exactly at #250 last year. I don't see Lewis Rice on our pie chart from 2012, so it might have dropped to #255 or something. But at most, they would hire one or two associates anyway.

Even if you take just the people at firms of 250+, there's 56 people there total (the NLJ report says 49 total), and that's well above the 160 attorney cutoff for NLJ 250. And between 250 and 160 attorneys, there is Armstrong Teasdale, Ice Miller, Sites Harbison, Greensfielder, and a number of others I recognize and that I know people going to such firms. There's got to be at least another 5-6 people here, for a total of over 60 going to the NLJ 250.

I'm starting to really wonder how accurate the NLJ 250 rankings are. I always knew that a few firms didn't respond, but there seems to be a non-negligible number of people left out.

I agree. I always knew there were some holes in the data but from what I've heard this year, they're really not even close. Still a decent metric for comparing schools, but with the more thorough ABA reporting and with LST packaging the data for us, there's really not much value in the NLJ 250 data anymore.

I think I said something similar early in the thread. This used to be very anticipated and very useful because it was the only data untainted by law deans. Now? Eh.

[hume85]

Does anyone know when the ABA numbers for 2012 come out?

Some schools have already put them on their websites. Otherwise,

Status date is 2/15. Reporting deadline to the ABA is 3/15. The numbers should trickle out at schools between now and then, and then the ABA will release all of the data a few weeks after 3/15. LST will immediately take the data to populate the new edition of the Score Reports.

Thank you

[JCougar]

The other thing I can think of is that it's possible some people actually working at these NLJ 250 firms were hired as staff attorneys, and not associates. So in that sense, the NLJ numbers would tend to be more accurate. I don't personally know of anyone that is doing this here, but it could be possible.

[09042014]

The other thing I can think of is that it's possible some people actually working at these NLJ 250 firms were hired as staff attorneys, and not associates. So in that sense, the NLJ numbers would tend to be more accurate. I don't personally know of anyone that is doing this here, but it could be possible.

If you look at the NLJ data, there is some pretty clearly underreporting going on.

Assuming some of the 101-250 are in non NLJ 250, we are looking at maybe 20-30% underreporting by NLJ 250. Probably varies by school.

[Rahviveh]

Aren't paralegals also counted in the ABA stats?

[star fox]

I'm curious to know how the whole "getting pushed out" thing works for associates. Are you basically just shunned by everyone in the office? Even so, how bad/influential could that be when you are looking at a $160k+ salary? I've never actually seen this happen (I work in a non-attorney position obviously, and I've only seen people get fired (rare) or leave on their own accord).

Also, I'm curious as to how hard it would be for associates who get pushed out (not fired) or decide to leave to simply move to another biglaw firm (not midsize) and retain their seniority/payscale.

If you're good at what you do and you work at least as hard as everyone else, I don't understand why firms would prefer hiring and training new first years and paying them $160k rather than keeping experienced associates at $170k, $180k, $190k (whatever it is). Obviously, there's not enough room for most people to make partner, but I would think a lot of people would simply be content and happy to stay on as senior associates (assuming you like the lifestyle). The difference in billable rates shouldn't be extraordinarily different.

Read some of the current associate threads in the employment forum. When they want to push you out, you will probably know ahead of time as they stop staffing you on projects and fail to hit your billable requirements or they only put you on bad projects for you setting you up to fail.

They do this because attrition is built into the Biglaw model.. large 1st year classes slowly whittled down to just the best

http://www.top-law-schools.com/forums/v ... 3&t=193519

I talked to one lawyer I know who works at a big firm about this. He basically said that for the first two or three years it's very unlikely you get fired. You're not expected to know much or make any sort of big impact as a Junior. He says a lot of people leave after the first few years when they get their debt paid down considerably, start a family, get tired of the ridiculous hours, etc. Typically if someone's leaving on their own they've secured their next employment beforehand. Someone's only likely to get fired early on if they really screw up badly in a way that is detrimental to the firm as a whole. Sure, after about 8-10 years if you're not doing much as an Associate and it's blatantly obvious you won't be partner you'll get pushed out. But you'll get a heads up and some time to look for a new job.

All of this depends on the legal economy of course. If all of a sudden your firm's profits sink and there are massive layoffs it becomes that much more difficult to find your next employment with the whole other swarms of recently laid off lawyers in the same position as you. I'm sure if you joined the over-saturated big law world in 04 when times were good and then all of a sudden in 08 the economy crashes and you found yourself unemployed, it's probably been rough.

[JCougar]

Aren't paralegals also counted in the ABA stats?

That wouldn't fall into the JD Required category.