Poll: Is CA v. NY big law hours/QOL difference overstated?

(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.

Do you really work MANY more hours in NY big law?

1. YES! NY is WAY more hours!
10
63%
2. NO! Biglaw is Biglaw - the differences are overstated...
6
38%
 
Total votes: 16

Anonymous User
Posts: 273395
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Poll: Is CA v. NY big law hours/QOL difference overstated?

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:39 pm

Of course I am aware: 1. few are in a position to comment on both from the inside, 2. this probably varies A LOT by firm

...But since so many of my friends and I are making Bay Area/So Cal vs. NY big law decisions in the next week or two I thought Id see if there was a consensus on TLS.

Comments are especially desired from those who have worked in both markets (knowing that such accounts are probably purely anecdotal.)

Anonymous User
Posts: 273395
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Poll: Is CA v. NY big law hours/QOL difference overstated?

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:58 pm

A Latham (LA) associate told me that at least 1/3 of the junior associates bill 2200-2400, but those are the people who want to stay there long-term. People who decided they are just there for a few years only try to meet their billable hour target (1900).

But I also heard the UK firms in NY have less billable hr req. I know Linklaters' is 1800.

User avatar
Arbiter213
Posts: 2249
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 10:16 pm

Re: Poll: Is CA v. NY big law hours/QOL difference overstated?

Postby Arbiter213 » Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:23 pm

Anonymous User wrote:A Latham (LA) associate told me that at least 1/3 of the junior associates bill 2200-2400, but those are the people who want to stay there long-term. People who decided they are just there for a few years only try to meet their billable hour target (1900).

But I also heard the UK firms in NY have less billable hr req. I know Linklaters' is 1800.


The people I met at Freshfields (NY) all billed in the 2300-2400 range.

User avatar
ph14
Posts: 3225
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: Poll: Is CA v. NY big law hours/QOL difference overstated?

Postby ph14 » Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:24 pm

Why isn't there an option that NY has longer hours, on average, with more of a face time requirement?

User avatar
bk1
Posts: 18422
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 7:06 pm

Re: Poll: Is CA v. NY big law hours/QOL difference overstated?

Postby bk1 » Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:29 pm

ph14 wrote:Why isn't there an option that NY has longer hours, on average, with more of a face time requirement?


This sounds about right.

To be clear: requirements don't necessarily have any correlation to actual hours worked.

Regardless of hours worked, the work cultures are different. CA firms don't have associates staying late as often as NY firms do. It's just part of the culture to stay at work late in NY that doesn't exist as much in CA. That doesn't mean CA associates work less hours, instead they often work from home. That being said, I think on average CA firms tend to be better than NY. But of course that isn't always true. Quinn/Latham/etc are considered brutal.

I don't think you can make a blanket statement and then apply it to your situation. It really depends on the firms you are picking between.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273395
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Poll: Is CA v. NY big law hours/QOL difference overstated?

Postby Anonymous User » Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:38 pm

I had a CA callback and one of the associates I interviewed with worked in the main NY office of the firm and he kept going on about how much he regretted not just starting at the CA office. Not only were the associates in his year more experienced than he was, but apparently the lifestyle was significantly better. Of course this could have just been a sales pitch so take it with a grain of salt.

crit_racer
Posts: 756
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 12:15 pm

Re: Poll: Is CA v. NY big law hours/QOL difference overstated?

Postby crit_racer » Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:45 pm

ph14 wrote:Why isn't there an option that NY has longer hours, on average, with more of a face time requirement?


Because hyperbole, generalization, and over-simplification is the TLS way.

User avatar
ph14
Posts: 3225
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2011 11:15 pm

Re: Poll: Is CA v. NY big law hours/QOL difference overstated?

Postby ph14 » Thu Sep 13, 2012 8:52 pm

crit_racer wrote:
ph14 wrote:Why isn't there an option that NY has longer hours, on average, with more of a face time requirement?


Because hyperbole, generalization, and over-simplification is the TLS way.


Credited.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.