Struck out - cut my losses?

(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.
Anonymous User
Posts: 273183
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Struck out - cut my losses?

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 28, 2012 2:33 pm

somewhatwayward wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:The problem that law firms face and this whole industry is that it is impossible to hire according to economic realities when you hire more than two years in advance. How did it get this way in the first place? I know of no other industry working like that. Law schools should just curve the second year too, and then firms can respond better to the market. This might also allow them to drop wages in bad years...


Um, no. Even if you curved second year, which is still done anyway (people just work around it by avoiding curved classes), you can't standardize it like 1L bc people get to pick their classes, so people can still game the system. The problem is that there are too many law students for too few positions. When I post advice for people who have not gotten an offer yet, I always have pause because I know it means that if that person gets an offer, several others won't because there simply are not enough jobs. At the same time, I have much less sympathy than I used to because at this point, everyone should be aware of what they are getting into, period. Going to a TTT ITE without a full ride with no stips is financial suicide. These schools should be shuttering their doors simply because no one is willing to go there. Yet every year masses of students enroll. I'm not one of those people obsessed with personal responsibility but come on. /rant


My point is that it does not make sense in today's economy to hire two years in advance. Hiring two years in advance makes sense only in a bubble economy. If one of the reasons why law firm are so heavy on hiring post 1L is because that is the only time to compare students, then maybe curving (making it harder to game) 2L, will lead to these firms hiring at a later time in the process. This way they can better respond to economic realities.
There will probably be less no offers and deferment via that method, though probably the same amount of people will struck out. However, I think less profitable firms might have an easier time lowering salary without worrying that after 2L summer students will just jump boat to higher ranked/paying firm if economy turns around. This fear is what keeps wages at 160k even though everyone knows that Goodwin is not as profitable as Cravath. My basic idea is that there will also be more jobs if lower ranked firms could comfortably start people at 130, 145 etc. Depending on how they are doing.

User avatar
thelawyler
Posts: 902
Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:00 pm

Re: Struck out - cut my losses?

Postby thelawyler » Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:11 pm

Or firms can ignore overall GPA when they hire later and just look at your core 1L classes.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273183
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Struck out - cut my losses?

Postby Anonymous User » Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:39 am

somewhatwayward wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
The problem that law firms face and this whole industry is that it is impossible to hire according to economic realities when you hire more than two years in advance. How did it get this way in the first place? I know of no other industry working like that. Law schools should just curve the second year too, and then firms can respond better to the market. This might also allow them to drop wages in bad years...


Um, no. Even if you curved second year, which is still done anyway (people just work around it by avoiding curved classes), you can't standardize it like 1L bc people get to pick their classes, so people can still game the system. The problem is that there are too many law students for too few positions. When I post advice for people who have not gotten an offer yet, I always have pause because I know it means that if that person gets an offer, several others won't because there simply are not enough jobs. At the same time, I have much less sympathy than I used to because at this point, everyone should be aware of what they are getting into, period. Going to a TTT ITE without a full ride with no stips is financial suicide. These schools should be shuttering their doors simply because no one is willing to go there. Yet every year masses of students enroll. I'm not one of those people obsessed with personal responsibility but come on. /rant


My point is that it does not make sense in today's economy to hire two years in advance. Hiring two years in advance makes sense only in a bubble economy. If one of the reasons why law firm are so heavy on hiring post 1L is because that is the only time to compare students, then maybe curving (making it harder to game) 2L, will lead to these firms hiring at a later time in the process. This way they can better respond to economic realities.
There will probably be less no offers and deferment via that method, though probably the same amount of people will struck out. However, I think less profitable firms might have an easier time lowering salary without worrying that after 2L summer students will just jump boat to higher ranked/paying firm if economy turns around. This fear is what keeps wages at 160k even though everyone knows that Goodwin is not as profitable as Cravath. My basic idea is that there will also be more jobs if lower ranked firms could comfortably start people at 130, 145 etc. Depending on how they are doing.



Curving 2L as strictly as 1L is completely insane. People would literally kill themselves. You can't sustain the kind of 1L competition for more than a year.

The strict curving is stupid as it is. Why extend it?

User avatar
somewhatwayward
Posts: 1446
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:10 pm

Re: Struck out - cut my losses?

Postby somewhatwayward » Sat Sep 29, 2012 11:44 am

Anonymous User wrote:Curving 2L as strictly as 1L is completely insane. People would literally kill themselves. You can't sustain the kind of 1L competition for more than a year.

The strict curving is stupid as it is. Why extend it?


Nice use of anon. I actually agree with you. Somehow you screwed up the quoting mechansism making it look like I suggested we curve 2L classes like we do 1L classes, which is probably one of the worst suggestions one could make.

User avatar
hume85
Posts: 675
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:38 pm

Re: Struck out - cut my losses?

Postby hume85 » Sat Sep 29, 2012 12:29 pm

IAFG wrote:
Anonymous User wrote: Law schools should just curve the second year too, and then firms can respond better to the market. This might also allow them to drop wages in bad years...

How. Does. This. Follow.


I was thinking the same thing.

User avatar
hume85
Posts: 675
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2011 5:38 pm

Re: Struck out - cut my losses?

Postby hume85 » Sat Sep 29, 2012 12:32 pm

Anonymous User wrote:I know people look down on working in smaller towns but--- there are jobs here.

Just hired two new attorneys- one from T30 school and one from Tier 2 school. Both started at 55K with additional benefits of about 12K-15K (insurance, 401k, cle, etc.). Typical after 1 year employment - bump to $60,000 and $5,000 bonus. 2nd year- $65,000 and bonus of 10-15K depending on effort and production. 3rd year- you are starting to gear up for partnership so salary and bonus will fluctuate. Size of firm is 12 attorneys in small midwestern town of 40,000. Top 5 attorneys average 300K- 500K per year. The jobs are here. Agriculture is red-hot and probate, real estate and estate planning are extremely hot. I understand if you don't want to live in a smaller town BUT there are jobs here.


I would have no problem working in a small town, I love small towns. To be honest, the potential to make 300k to 500k in a small midwestern town of 40,000 sounds like a dream. I am applying to T10 schools for next fall. Where does your firm recruit? Would you hire someone born and raised in California that attended the University of Chicago, Michigan, or Northwestern?

User avatar
Richie Tenenbaum
Posts: 2162
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 2008 6:17 am

Re: Struck out - cut my losses?

Postby Richie Tenenbaum » Sat Sep 29, 2012 12:33 pm

somewhatwayward wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Curving 2L as strictly as 1L is completely insane. People would literally kill themselves. You can't sustain the kind of 1L competition for more than a year.

The strict curving is stupid as it is. Why extend it?


Nice use of anon. I actually agree with you. Somehow you screwed up the quoting mechansism making it look like I suggested we curve 2L classes like we do 1L classes, which is probably one of the worst suggestions one could make.


Many schools curve the majority of 2L and 3L classes the same as 1L. (At UT, all classes are on the same curve except for 1) seminar classes and 2) classes under 20 people.*) The stress level isn't insane at UT since it's pretty laid back to begin with (relatively speaking), and 2Ls and especially 3Ls just care a lot less about grades.

*There's a few another smaller categories for exceptions, but those are the two main ones.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273183
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Struck out - cut my losses?

Postby Anonymous User » Wed Oct 03, 2012 2:29 pm

somewhatwayward wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:
Curving 2L as strictly as 1L is completely insane. People would literally kill themselves. You can't sustain the kind of 1L competition for more than a year.

The strict curving is stupid as it is. Why extend it?



Nice use of anon. I actually agree with you. Somehow you screwed up the quoting mechansism making it look like I suggested we curve 2L classes like we do 1L classes, which is probably one of the worst suggestions one could make.



Many schools curve the majority of 2L and 3L classes the same as 1L. (At UT, all classes are on the same curve except for 1) seminar classes and 2) classes under 20 people.*) The stress level isn't insane at UT since it's pretty laid back to begin with (relatively speaking), and 2Ls and especially 3Ls just care a lot less about grades.

*There's a few another smaller categories for exceptions, but those are the two main ones.



At my school, after 1L there are 3 classes that are still strictly curved but the median grade is like 3 or 4 % higher. Then, for classes 10 and under and classes under 30 there are no grade distribution requirements and higher medians.


I'm taking my 3 remaining requirements this semester to get them out of the way, but yeah it's true that 2L/3L aren't really as obsessed with grades now and are a bit more chill which is definitely nice.

Still got our gunners though... It's horrendous.

I am so done with law school. I'm literally just planning ways to do as little as possible while meeting graduation credit requirements for the next 3 semesters after this one.

Ugh.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.