Firms with notoriously poor QOL

(On Campus Interviews, Summer Associate positions, Firm Reviews, Tips, ...)
Forum rules
Anonymous Posting

Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

Failure to follow these rules will get you outed, warned, or banned.
Nynaeve
Posts: 43
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2012 11:08 am

Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Nynaeve » Fri Aug 31, 2012 8:33 am

Can we compile a list of these firms for the 2L's?

Cadwalader NY, Schulte NY, and Kaye Scholer NY immediately come to mind.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 8:39 am

V100

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 8:40 am

Cleary Gottlieb NY, Shearman & Sterling NY, Skadden LA

User avatar
Old Gregg
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Old Gregg » Fri Aug 31, 2012 8:41 am

V1-15.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 8:49 am


Snape
Posts: 233
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 1:51 pm

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Snape » Fri Aug 31, 2012 11:48 am

Kirkland Chicago has a pretty bad rep for work-life balance. I know one associate who claims to not have had a day off in his first 2 years...I know many people who really don't like life at KE Chicago.

Machine Spirit
Posts: 172
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 7:36 pm

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Machine Spirit » Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:22 pm

Nynaeve wrote:Can we compile a list of these firms for the 2L's?

Cadwalader NY, Schulte NY, and Kaye Scholer NY immediately come to mind.


Uh...I've heard literally the exact opposite about this one. I mean, they're all going to be V100 NY firms to an extent, but from the associates/summers I know who are actually there, I've heard the exact opposite.

The other two (Cadwalader and Schulte) immediately came to mind. Dechert and White & Case as well.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 12:27 pm

Quinn, O'Melveny

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:23 pm

A lot of my CBs, regardless of V ranking, did not do well on that AmLaw list. Confirmation that I am a terrible interviewer?

Also, why does Schulte get a bad rep? Are the complaints similar to those about Cadwalader?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:29 pm

Machine Spirit wrote:
Nynaeve wrote:Can we compile a list of these firms for the 2L's?

Cadwalader NY, Schulte NY, and Kaye Scholer NY immediately come to mind.


Uh...I've heard literally the exact opposite about this one. I mean, they're all going to be V100 NY firms to an extent, but from the associates/summers I know who are actually there, I've heard the exact opposite.

The other two (Cadwalader and Schulte) immediately came to mind. Dechert and White & Case as well.


For real? Because every associate I know there has the shittiest QOL of any of my friends in BigLaw. 9am to 2-3am for literally months on end and the fucking partners don't appreciate nothing.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:39 pm

lowenstein sandler, linklaters NY, clifford chance NY

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:41 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Cleary Gottlieb NY, Shearman & Sterling NY, Skadden LA


Why these?

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:42 pm

Anonymous User wrote:A lot of my CBs, regardless of V ranking, did not do well on that AmLaw list. Confirmation that I am a terrible interviewer?

Also, why does Schulte get a bad rep? Are the complaints similar to those about Cadwalader?


The people at Schulte seem to be awful, perhaps that's why.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:45 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:A lot of my CBs, regardless of V ranking, did not do well on that AmLaw list. Confirmation that I am a terrible interviewer?

Also, why does Schulte get a bad rep? Are the complaints similar to those about Cadwalader?


The people at Schulte seem to be awful, perhaps that's why.


maybe I should go for a second trip... I really liked all the people I met.

User avatar
kwais
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby kwais » Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:45 pm

Machine Spirit wrote:
Nynaeve wrote:Can we compile a list of these firms for the 2L's?

Cadwalader NY, Schulte NY, and Kaye Scholer NY immediately come to mind.


Uh...I've heard literally the exact opposite about this one. I mean, they're all going to be V100 NY firms to an extent, but from the associates/summers I know who are actually there, I've heard the exact opposite.

The other two (Cadwalader and Schulte) immediately came to mind. Dechert and White & Case as well.


+1
Heard this too. Supposedly KS has gone to great lengths to change things since their well-publicized poor handling of recession times.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:51 pm

As a midlevel at one of the firms near the bottom of the Amlaw rankings, I would take them with a big grain of salt. I really like my firm and my job. Most of my fellow associates are happy and morale is quite good.

A big problem with the rankings is the (usually) low response rate and the close spread between firms. A small handful of malcontents can tank a firm's ranking.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:52 pm

Snape wrote:Kirkland Chicago has a pretty bad rep for work-life balance. I know one associate who claims to not have had a day off in his first 2 years...I know many people who really don't like life at KE Chicago.


Any V10 is going to have poor QOL, to the extent any particular K&E associate has it worse even than that, it's almost always because of failure to manage workload under the free market system. Unfortunately, many associates don't know that you're free to say no to work, and a lot of associates take way too much on.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 1:58 pm

kwais wrote:
Machine Spirit wrote:
Nynaeve wrote:Can we compile a list of these firms for the 2L's?

Cadwalader NY, Schulte NY, and Kaye Scholer NY immediately come to mind.


Uh...I've heard literally the exact opposite about this one. I mean, they're all going to be V100 NY firms to an extent, but from the associates/summers I know who are actually there, I've heard the exact opposite.

The other two (Cadwalader and Schulte) immediately came to mind. Dechert and White & Case as well.


+1
Heard this too. Supposedly KS has gone to great lengths to change things since their well-publicized poor handling of recession times.


I was at KS last summer and most of the associates seemed pretty upbeat, and everyone seems to be really friendly with each other. However, I'd guess that there are some miserable people and they just chose not to interact much with the SA's. I'd also bet there's a big difference in the opinions of the people who came in during the last few years (laterals and from the SA program) and those that have been around for a while (minus those on the recruiting/events committees).

The long hours don't shock me, but that's BigLaw for you across the board.

User avatar
Old Gregg
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Old Gregg » Fri Aug 31, 2012 2:02 pm

IMO, there's no such thing as an NY big firm with good QOL. If the firm has the work, they will work you just a hard as they work associates at Cleary.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273254
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Aug 31, 2012 2:11 pm

every experience i have had thus far with Shearman has been wonderful. wondering why they are on this list.

User avatar
kwais
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby kwais » Fri Aug 31, 2012 2:14 pm

Fresh Prince wrote:IMO, there's no such thing as an NY big firm with good QOL. If the firm has the work, they will work you just a hard as they work associates at Cleary.


have talked to many laterals, formerly at V10s, now at lower ranked firms who say that every day of their life is different since they left Skadden or Cravath or whatever. Not saying anyone is leaving at 5 and is under no stress, but this "they are all the same" meme seems made up by V10ers who want to think that there was no downside to choosing their firm

User avatar
RVP11
Posts: 2774
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 6:32 pm

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby RVP11 » Fri Aug 31, 2012 2:27 pm

kwais wrote:
Fresh Prince wrote:IMO, there's no such thing as an NY big firm with good QOL. If the firm has the work, they will work you just a hard as they work associates at Cleary.


have talked to many laterals, formerly at V10s, now at lower ranked firms who say that every day of their life is different since they left Skadden or Cravath or whatever. Not saying anyone is leaving at 5 and is under no stress, but this "they are all the same" meme seems made up by V10ers who want to think that there was no downside to choosing their firm


I think the point is that if you're going to work for a big NYC firm, you've basically already made your decision that work-life balance/QOL/whatever you want to call it/etc. is not your highest priority, so you'd have to be an idiot to choose Kaye Scholer or something similar over V10.

User avatar
Old Gregg
Posts: 5413
Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2011 1:26 pm

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby Old Gregg » Fri Aug 31, 2012 2:30 pm

kwais wrote:
Fresh Prince wrote:IMO, there's no such thing as an NY big firm with good QOL. If the firm has the work, they will work you just a hard as they work associates at Cleary.


have talked to many laterals, formerly at V10s, now at lower ranked firms who say that every day of their life is different since they left Skadden or Cravath or whatever. Not saying anyone is leaving at 5 and is under no stress, but this "they are all the same" meme seems made up by V10ers who want to think that there was no downside to choosing their firm


Hidden insult aside, this is interesting to read. My question is, and I mean no offense to those you spoke to, how much of that is a function of the quantity of work a firm has? My point above was that if a firm, no matter low ranked, has the work to make each associate bill 2700 hours, they'll mak them do that. Is their lifestyle different because they is less work, or genuinely lower expectations from the firm itself?

Note: I am talking about only NY firms.

User avatar
kwais
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby kwais » Fri Aug 31, 2012 2:30 pm

RVP11 wrote:
kwais wrote:
Fresh Prince wrote:IMO, there's no such thing as an NY big firm with good QOL. If the firm has the work, they will work you just a hard as they work associates at Cleary.


have talked to many laterals, formerly at V10s, now at lower ranked firms who say that every day of their life is different since they left Skadden or Cravath or whatever. Not saying anyone is leaving at 5 and is under no stress, but this "they are all the same" meme seems made up by V10ers who want to think that there was no downside to choosing their firm


I think the point is that if you're going to work for a big NYC firm, you've basically already made your decision that work-life balance/QOL/whatever you want to call it/etc. is not your highest priority, so you'd have to be an idiot to choose Kaye Scholer or something similar over V10.


mostly agree, but I imagine that small differences in culture and hours can feel huge when you are in the middle of it all. But the idea that these considerations are likely outweighed by career building issues is credited.

User avatar
kwais
Posts: 1683
Joined: Tue May 11, 2010 12:28 pm

Re: Firms with notoriously poor QOL

Postby kwais » Fri Aug 31, 2012 2:33 pm

Fresh Prince wrote:
kwais wrote:
Fresh Prince wrote:IMO, there's no such thing as an NY big firm with good QOL. If the firm has the work, they will work you just a hard as they work associates at Cleary.


have talked to many laterals, formerly at V10s, now at lower ranked firms who say that every day of their life is different since they left Skadden or Cravath or whatever. Not saying anyone is leaving at 5 and is under no stress, but this "they are all the same" meme seems made up by V10ers who want to think that there was no downside to choosing their firm


Hidden insult aside, this is interesting to read. My question is, and I mean no offense to those you spoke to, how much of that is a function of the quantity of work a firm has? My point above was that if a firm, no matter low ranked, has the work to make each associate bill 2700 hours, they'll mak them do that. Is their lifestyle different because they is less work, or genuinely lower expectations from the firm itself?

Note: I am talking about only NY firms.


not entirely sure, however, I suspect, from what I was told, that some places that have plenty of work still want to cultivate a certain culture for the sake of attracting and retaining a certain type of talent. I don't think that is entirely unfathomable and when we step back from the biglaw mentality, it makes all the sense in the world that you will lose some excellent people if you burn them out




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.