Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

(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.
anon168
Posts: 920
Joined: Mon Jul 02, 2012 10:36 pm

Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby anon168 » Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:10 am

Both said that law firm hiring was drastically down this year and that they have not seen it this bad in a long while. One said the market was "devastatingly bad" and the other said it was a "gruesome market".

Maybe just repeating what's obvious. But I thought I'd just throw it out there in case it's any consolation for those still looking.

One thing I should add. One CSO said she got the sentiment that firms overhired this year, which could mean lower offer rates or less hiring next year.

Good luck to everyone out there.
Last edited by anon168 on Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:41 am, edited 2 times in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273457
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:13 am

T6 student

I came scary close to striking out. This news doesn't surprise me.

LawIdiot86
Posts: 1159
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:21 pm

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby LawIdiot86 » Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:20 am

My T14 has considerably fewer firms posting on Simplicity or doing resume collects.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273457
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:22 am

TX is actually better this year, according to UT's CSO.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273457
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:23 am

Anonymous User wrote:T6 student

I came scary close to striking out. This news doesn't surprise me.

T6 on the verge of striking out here. Feels bad, man.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273457
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:24 am

anecdote alert, but all the people I have spoken to at my CCN, plus my sister and all her friends at her CCN, have reported everything from receiving a couple of offers to rolling in offers (one median guy had 15 CBs, many of which he cancelled after receiving a V5 offer). Obviously the CSOs have a better sense than I do and people with offers pipe up more, etc.
Last edited by Anonymous User on Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273457
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:27 am

It's so strange. Attorneys I've spoken to have said they think the legal market is picking up, yet it seems like my class is having an even harder time getting SA positions than the class before us (at my T30).

Anonymous User
Posts: 273457
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:36 am

Not surprising to me, at T30 and people are getting owned. (that shouldn't)

Anonymous User
Posts: 273457
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:45 am

It honestly seems like things are better than last year at my T30, but it's hard to know because people with offers generally talk quite a bit more.

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby IAFG » Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:50 am

Anonymous User wrote:anecdote alert, but all the people I have spoken to at my CCN, plus my sister and all her friends at her CCN, have reported everything from receiving a couple of offers to rolling in offers (one median guy had 15 CBs, many of which he cancelled after receiving a V5 offer). Obviously the CSOs have a better sense than I do and people with offers pipe up more, etc.

You seem to understand that your post adds nothing to the conversation, yet post it anyway. Huh.

User avatar
beachbum
Posts: 2766
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 9:35 pm

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby beachbum » Fri Sep 28, 2012 11:52 am

I don't know about "devastatingly bad," but things definitely seem down from last year.

Myself
Posts: 1372
Joined: Sat Jun 23, 2012 1:36 pm

.

Postby Myself » Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:10 pm

.
Last edited by Myself on Sun Nov 24, 2013 11:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273457
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:19 pm

Can add another CSO in the T20 that has said that this years numbers look to be regressing from the last few years.

They say law firms are starting to realize that the super-leveraged megafirm model only works when clients aren't watching the bills closely and pitching fits about having to pay for the time of junior associates who "don't know what they're doing." All of a sudden, up and out models aren't looking so profitable since the firms can't get away with charging stupid amounts of money for 1st and 2nd year time for tasks contract attorneys could be doing. Of course partners still need associates to work for them, but the focus seems to shifting more towards having a stable of well-trained midlevels, instead of having hoards of increasingly-unbillable-and-therefore-useless juniors.

My CSO seems to feel that it's great news for those who are getting firm jobs (a lot fewer will be forced out they project, since firms will be taking a hit on us for the first couple of years and it's only profitable if we stick around long enough to become marketable midlevels), and good news for the lateral hiring market, but bad news for everyone else because they don't see any real reason for firms to go back to the huge class sizes of the mid 00's

lawyerwannabe
Posts: 945
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2010 10:39 pm

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby lawyerwannabe » Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:22 pm

anon168 wrote:Both said that law firm hiring was drastically down this year and that they have not seen it this bad in a long while. One said the market was "devastatingly bad" and the other said it was a "gruesome market".

Maybe just repeating what's obvious. But I thought I'd just throw it out there in case it's any consolation for those still looking.

One thing I should add. One CSO said she got the sentiment that firms overhired this year, which could mean lower offer rates or less hiring next year.

Good luck to everyone out there.


How can the CSO say the market is bad and that the firms over hired at the same time? They are not economists.

LawIdiot86
Posts: 1159
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 5:21 pm

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby LawIdiot86 » Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:23 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Can add another CSO in the T20 that has said that this years numbers look to be regressing from the last few years.

They say law firms are starting to realize that the super-leveraged megafirm model only works when clients aren't watching the bills closely and pitching fits about having to pay for the time of junior associates who "don't know what they're doing." All of a sudden, up and out models aren't looking so profitable since the firms can't get away with charging stupid amounts of money for 1st and 2nd year time for tasks contract attorneys could be doing. Of course partners still need associates to work for them, but the focus seems to shifting more towards having a stable of well-trained midlevels, instead of having hoards of increasingly-unbillable-and-therefore-useless juniors.

My CSO seems to feel that it's great news for those who are getting firm jobs (a lot fewer will be forced out they project, since firms will be taking a hit on us for the first couple of years and it's only profitable if we stick around long enough to become marketable midlevels), and good news for the lateral hiring market, but bad news for everyone else because they don't see any real reason for firms to go back to the huge class sizes of the mid 00's


I would agree. I think firms are doing better in that they have more work and aren't laying people off, but only because they are getting more efficient through the use of contract and staff attorneys, not because the market is returning to its pre-ITE norm of super leverage with 160k associates. Great for the partners and few associates who get in the door, but long-term it's terrible for those seeking to pay for their student loans or who want interesting legal work at some point in their career.

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby IAFG » Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:25 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Can add another CSO in the T20 that has said that this years numbers look to be regressing from the last few years.

They say law firms are starting to realize that the super-leveraged megafirm model only works when clients aren't watching the bills closely and pitching fits about having to pay for the time of junior associates who "don't know what they're doing." All of a sudden, up and out models aren't looking so profitable since the firms can't get away with charging stupid amounts of money for 1st and 2nd year time for tasks contract attorneys could be doing. Of course partners still need associates to work for them, but the focus seems to shifting more towards having a stable of well-trained midlevels, instead of having hoards of increasingly-unbillable-and-therefore-useless juniors.

My CSO seems to feel that it's great news for those who are getting firm jobs (a lot fewer will be forced out they project, since firms will be taking a hit on us for the first couple of years and it's only profitable if we stick around long enough to become marketable midlevels), and good news for the lateral hiring market, but bad news for everyone else because they don't see any real reason for firms to go back to the huge class sizes of the mid 00's


Makes you wonder what kind of shitshow the midlevel market will be once we're there.

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

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby hume85 » Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:35 pm

anon168 wrote:Both said that law firm hiring was drastically down this year and that they have not seen it this bad in a long while. One said the market was "devastatingly bad" and the other said it was a "gruesome market".

Maybe just repeating what's obvious. But I thought I'd just throw it out there in case it's any consolation for those still looking.

One thing I should add. One CSO said she got the sentiment that firms overhired this year, which could mean lower offer rates or less hiring next year.

Good luck to everyone out there.


Worse than the outcomes for c/o 2011? If it is worse, is this structural, cyclical, or both?

User avatar
homestyle28
Posts: 2312
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:48 pm

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby homestyle28 » Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:47 pm

CSO walks into Whole Foods: "This market sucks!"

Right?

User avatar
clintonius
Posts: 1239
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 1:50 am

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby clintonius » Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:57 pm

homestyle28 wrote:CSO walks into Whole Foods: "This market sucks!"

Right?

CSOs try to avoid insulting businesses where they're hoping to place their graduates.

User avatar
sunynp
Posts: 1899
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 2:06 pm

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby sunynp » Fri Sep 28, 2012 12:59 pm

LawIdiot86 wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:Can add another CSO in the T20 that has said that this years numbers look to be regressing from the last few years.

They say law firms are starting to realize that the super-leveraged megafirm model only works when clients aren't watching the bills closely and pitching fits about having to pay for the time of junior associates who "don't know what they're doing." All of a sudden, up and out models aren't looking so profitable since the firms can't get away with charging stupid amounts of money for 1st and 2nd year time for tasks contract attorneys could be doing. Of course partners still need associates to work for them, but the focus seems to shifting more towards having a stable of well-trained midlevels, instead of having hoards of increasingly-unbillable-and-therefore-useless juniors.

My CSO seems to feel that it's great news for those who are getting firm jobs (a lot fewer will be forced out they project, since firms will be taking a hit on us for the first couple of years and it's only profitable if we stick around long enough to become marketable midlevels), and good news for the lateral hiring market, but bad news for everyone else because they don't see any real reason for firms to go back to the huge class sizes of the mid 00's


I would agree. I think firms are doing better in that they have more work and aren't laying people off, but only because they are getting more efficient through the use of contract and staff attorneys, not because the market is returning to its pre-ITE norm of super leverage with 160k associates. Great for the partners and few associates who get in the door, but long-term it's terrible for those seeking to pay for their student loans or who want interesting legal work at some point in their career.



1. Some firms have been laying people off. It is just stealth layoffs that aren't publicized like the massive layoffs.

2. Don't underestimate the effect of technology. The need for new associates has dropped because the work can be done by computer. It isn't just because clients won't pay the bill. It is also because people aren't needed to do the work.

3. Firms will do whatever they need to cut expenses. Just because a class is smaller it doesn't follow that people are safe. Firms have been projected to have a worse end of the year this year than last year. Read the citi reports. They've been posted before.

4. Maybe the lack of spring bonuses was a harbinger of hiring for this upcoming summer class. By spring last years summer class was set. Maybe projecting hiring based on last summer was using faulty data.

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

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby somewhatwayward » Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:06 pm

So what does all this mean for the firms that are actively hiring 3Ls? Assuming that vast swaths of their SA classes did not decline their offers, which seems unlikely in this economy, why are they hiring? I am curious specifically about Cravath/Skadden/W&C...is work picking back up for them? I know these firms have lots of people clerking, but most of those people will be coming back. Plus, the people who are finishing up their clerkships now and next fall will be coming back, so why hire 3Ls?

User avatar
BruceWayne
Posts: 2032
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:36 pm

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby BruceWayne » Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:08 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Can add another CSO in the T20 that has said that this years numbers look to be regressing from the last few years.

They say law firms are starting to realize that the super-leveraged megafirm model only works when clients aren't watching the bills closely and pitching fits about having to pay for the time of junior associates who "don't know what they're doing." All of a sudden, up and out models aren't looking so profitable since the firms can't get away with charging stupid amounts of money for 1st and 2nd year time for tasks contract attorneys could be doing. Of course partners still need associates to work for them, but the focus seems to shifting more towards having a stable of well-trained midlevels, instead of having hoards of increasingly-unbillable-and-therefore-useless juniors.

My CSO seems to feel that it's great news for those who are getting firm jobs (a lot fewer will be forced out they project, since firms will be taking a hit on us for the first couple of years and it's only profitable if we stick around long enough to become marketable midlevels), and good news for the lateral hiring market, but bad news for everyone else because they don't see any real reason for firms to go back to the huge class sizes of the mid 00's


This is EXACTLY what's going on. Honestly, the days of being able to count on a top school getting you biglaw on name alone are OVER.

User avatar
IAFG
Posts: 6665
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 1:26 pm

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby IAFG » Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:19 pm

somewhatwayward wrote:So what does all this mean for the firms that are actively hiring 3Ls? Assuming that vast swaths of their SA classes did not decline their offers, which seems unlikely in this economy, why are they hiring? I am curious specifically about Cravath/Skadden/W&C...is work picking back up for them? I know these firms have lots of people clerking, but most of those people will be coming back. Plus, the people who are finishing up their clerkships now and next fall will be coming back, so why hire 3Ls?

It could mean they're busier than they predicted when they did hiring. It could mean they lose their summers to other firms or PI or clerkships. Maybe their clerks don't consistently come back (again, head out instead to other firms or PI). At any rate, it's not my impression these firms are taking a large number of people. I would guess though that if you added together every 3L opening, you'd have a very underwhelming number.

Anonymous User
Posts: 273457
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:49 pm

Thanks for this OP, it does make me feel a little bit better actually. Close to striking out myself.

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

Re: Spoke with CSOs at two different T14 (one at a T6)

Postby somewhatwayward » Fri Sep 28, 2012 1:54 pm

IAFG wrote:
somewhatwayward wrote:So what does all this mean for the firms that are actively hiring 3Ls? Assuming that vast swaths of their SA classes did not decline their offers, which seems unlikely in this economy, why are they hiring? I am curious specifically about Cravath/Skadden/W&C...is work picking back up for them? I know these firms have lots of people clerking, but most of those people will be coming back. Plus, the people who are finishing up their clerkships now and next fall will be coming back, so why hire 3Ls?

It could mean they're busier than they predicted when they did hiring. It could mean they lose their summers to other firms or PI or clerkships. Maybe their clerks don't consistently come back (again, head out instead to other firms or PI). At any rate, it's not my impression these firms are taking a large number of people. I would guess though that if you added together every 3L opening, you'd have a very underwhelming number.


I don't know about W&C, but someone I talked to had CBs with Cravath and Skadden, and the recruiting people at both told him that they are looking to take on a decent number of people (he said one told him they were "actively hiring" but I can't remember which). He didn't know how many that means, but it sounds to me like more than a couple, maybe ten? It is true that if each were taking on ten more, it is only twenty more people, but if business was down for them, you'd think they'd be conservative and not out looking for more people.




Return to “Legal Employment”

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.