Firms to avoid Forum
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 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.
-
- Posts: 428114
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
It's been a long day lol. Embarrassing typo. But I'd still be curious if all their summers had to do corp
-
- Posts: 428114
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
I heard the opposite. I heard tons of people naturally gravitated to corporate in this summer class, and they'd love for more people to do lit.Anonymous User wrote:Is it true that Kirkland made all their summers in NY do corporate? If so, that might be a reason to avoid, if you want to do litigation
- bearsfan23
- Posts: 1754
- Joined: Tue Apr 16, 2013 11:19 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
I mean, plenty of firms let Summers rotate between Lit and Corp practices. If you're unsure whether you want to do lit or corp its definitely something to consider.rpupkin wrote:Sounds draconian. The next thing you know, KE is going to make all its litigation summers do lit.Anonymous User wrote:Is it true that Kirkland made all their corporate summers in NY do corporate? If so, that might be a reason to avoid, if you want to do litigation
- 84651846190
- Posts: 2198
- Joined: Thu Sep 13, 2012 7:06 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
I don't know why any of them would want to do litigation anyway.Anonymous User wrote:Is it true that Kirkland made all their summers in NY do corporate? If so, that might be a reason to avoid, if you want to do litigation
- JamMasterJ
- Posts: 6649
- Joined: Sat Jan 29, 2011 7:17 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
They posted on NYU's list serve looking to hire corporate specific summers, so maybe something got muddled from "They hired summers for corporate that they only gave corporate work to all summer and are ostensibly giving corporate offers to at the end."
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428114
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
KE Summer here again. Um I know from speaking with associates in both Chicago/NY offices that our NY office has a lot of laterals coming in because they're really growing the corporate group pretty aggressively. And the firm has been poaching equity partners from other firms in various offices based on the firm-wide announcements we get. Seems like our office in Chicago generally has the pick of litter of associate laterals from other markets that want to re-locate into Chicago, but i'm not sure if there are consistently a lot of them.Anonymous User wrote:I was the previous poster, thanks so much. That's really helpful.Anonymous User wrote:I'm summering with KE (so take this with appropriate grain of salt, i'm sure there are associates/partners around here that can provide better commentary). This is for the Chicago office btw so i dunno how much of this translates to our NY office. I'm working with both corporate and restructuring so happy to answer specific questions about both to the extent that i can. For now I can say that restructuring is extremely busy. Corporate seems busy too but the group is just so much bigger that i'm sure that there's probably a wider range.Anonymous User wrote:NYC summer here curious about maybe 3L OCI.
Can anyone speak to Kirkland, in particular its M&A and restructuring practices? I've heard mixed things, particularly with how the free market thing plays in and how the non-equity partner thing affects the firm's culture. Can anyone speak to this?
I remember interviewing with V5 firms and they were all so eager to point out how the free market meant you'd be fighting for work etc...From what I've seen it doesn't look like that's the case if you're not gunning for share partner. There's so much work that it's probably more accurate to say you're fighting off work. But there does seem to be a club of baller share partners (especially in corporate) that you need to have in your corner if you want to make share partner yourself eventually, so if that's your goal then i could see it being competitive to get on their deals and win their favor.
I'm not sure how the non-equity partner thing affects the firm's culture. It seems like they're basically senior associates that run the deals and manage the juniors/mid-levels while the equity partners go bring in business. I'm guessing they start tipping towards more senior partner roles as they build their own client base.
Two follow-up questions. Do many people lateral into Kirkland? And in their free-market system, if you successfully solicit a partner for work, are you on board for the rest of that deal? Is there any chance that he might switch you out and take on another associate?
I'd be coming from a firm with fairly set deal teams so am just curious.
I can't give you a definite answer on the staffing question as I am only a summer...but I'm sure there might be a situation (at any firm) where an associate is so terrible or there is some other problem so that they need to be switched out..but from speaking with the associates/partners here it seems like the associates generally do good enough work so that it's not a problem. There are definitely cases where there is so much work that they add another associate or something like that, but i haven't heard of associates working in fear that they'll be switched out at any moment.
The nature of private equity is that there are a ton of smaller deals with smaller deal teams as opposed to the massive all-hands-on-deck public M&A deals in NYC. (You can see this from looking at the league tables, KE does so many more deals but the total value of the deals is similar to firms doing a third of KE's deal count). Most associates seem to be on multiple deals at a time. You could love working with Partner A, who might have 5 live deals, and you're on 2 of them. But if one of them slows down for some reason, you might have to go and work on one of Partner B's deals, and so on...And yes our corporate group is big, but once associates start specializing within corporate then it looks like they're working with a smaller universe of partners (e.g. capital markets, debt finance). At the end of the day it sounds like the associates end up working with pretty much all the partners in their group at some point given the need to maintain steady hours in the face of volatile deals.
Just to share my thoughts on KE's free market obsession generally (cuz it was certainly a hot topic when i was going through OCI): The sense i've gotten here is that they give you the space to pursue what you want. You get to pick who you work for and are allowed/expected to turn down work, so it seems like a good set up for the associates who are just looking to bill their 2000 hours, do decent work, generate a ton of revenue for the firm, collect bonus/salary, and move on after 2-3 years. It also seems like they'll give as much opportunity to the hungrier ones who want to advance through the ranks. At institutional wall street firms, almost everyone just assumes from day 1 that they're going to leave and that partnership is off the table. Here it seems like--either because of the personalities the firm attracts or the smaller summer classes or because the firm encourages a certain level of entrepreneurial-ism--more associates want to/think they can make partner, so it sounds like there's a different type of striverism compared to the large wall street firms (based on talking to friends who are summering there). I have summer classmates who came into the summer with the stated goal of working on deals with specific rainmakers because they wanted to cultivate that relationship early (wtf). The ones who come here to pursue partnership and the ones who plan on being here for a few years are going to experience very different Kirklands. I think the former group might create the shark-tanky atmosphere that other firms were so eager to point out when i was going through OCI, and I definitely sense a little of it when i talk to more gunnery junior partners or senior associates, but it's not because everyone here is out for blood. It's because some people really want to chase partnership and the firm is willing to create an environment that lets them go for it as opposed to the "only 1 out of 120 of you will maybe make partner, so you might as well bond and be nice to each other on the way out" culture that's common at a lot of other firms.
I've heard that a huge chunk of our NY class is corporate, but that's because those people chose to be corporate and the firm is more than happy to have them since they can't get enough people to handle all the work.Anonymous User wrote:I heard the opposite. I heard tons of people naturally gravitated to corporate in this summer class, and they'd love for more people to do lit.Anonymous User wrote:Is it true that Kirkland made all their summers in NY do corporate? If so, that might be a reason to avoid, if you want to do litigation
Last edited by Anonymous User on Tue Jul 07, 2015 12:41 am, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 893
- Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 4:23 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
To be fair, the summer associate experience is nothing like practicing. No matter how much people say it, it doesnt seem to stick. You can't get an idea of what its like to work there in the summer, especially if youre at a wine and dine summer associste program. You definitely cant get a feel for firm management, particularly across offices. In short, id be careful not to confuse what youd like (a 2000 hour year ) from what actually happens at a place like Kirkland (2400-2700). This is especially trie for associates in the firm's home office.Anonymous User wrote:KE Summer here again. Um I know from speaking with associates in both Chicago/NY offices that our NY office has a lot of laterals coming in because they're really growing the corporate group pretty aggressively. And the firm has been poaching equity partners from other firms in various offices based on the firm-wide announcements we get. Seems like our office in Chicago generally has the pick of litter of associate laterals from other markets that want to re-locate into Chicago, but i'm not sure if there are consistently a lot of them.Anonymous User wrote:I was the previous poster, thanks so much. That's really helpful.Anonymous User wrote:I'm summering with KE (so take this with appropriate grain of salt, i'm sure there are associates/partners around here that can provide better commentary). This is for the Chicago office btw so i dunno how much of this translates to our NY office. I'm working with both corporate and restructuring so happy to answer specific questions about both to the extent that i can. For now I can say that restructuring is extremely busy. Corporate seems busy too but the group is just so much bigger that i'm sure that there's probably a wider range.Anonymous User wrote:NYC summer here curious about maybe 3L OCI.
Can anyone speak to Kirkland, in particular its M&A and restructuring practices? I've heard mixed things, particularly with how the free market thing plays in and how the non-equity partner thing affects the firm's culture. Can anyone speak to this?
I remember interviewing with V5 firms and they were all so eager to point out how the free market meant you'd be fighting for work etc...From what I've seen it doesn't look like that's the case if you're not gunning for share partner. There's so much work that it's probably more accurate to say you're fighting off work. But there does seem to be a club of baller share partners (especially in corporate) that you need to have in your corner if you want to make share partner yourself eventually, so if that's your goal then i could see it being competitive to get on their deals and win their favor.
I'm not sure how the non-equity partner thing affects the firm's culture. It seems like they're basically senior associates that run the deals and manage the juniors/mid-levels while the equity partners go bring in business. I'm guessing they start tipping towards more senior partner roles as they build their own client base.
Two follow-up questions. Do many people lateral into Kirkland? And in their free-market system, if you successfully solicit a partner for work, are you on board for the rest of that deal? Is there any chance that he might switch you out and take on another associate?
I'd be coming from a firm with fairly set deal teams so am just curious.
I can't give you a definite answer on the staffing question as I am only a summer...but I'm sure there might be a situation (at any firm) where an associate is so terrible or there is some other problem so that they need to be switched out..but from speaking with the associates/partners here it seems like the associates generally do good enough work so that it's not a problem. There are definitely cases where there is so much work that they add another associate or something like that, but i haven't heard of associates working in fear that they'll be switched out at any moment.
Thefree marketopen assignment system--at least here in Chicago--doesn't seem like the uber shark tank that I heard about when i was going through recruiting. The nature of private equity is that there are a ton of smaller deals with smaller deal teams as opposed to the massive all-hands-on-deck public M&A deals in NYC. Most associates seem to be on multiple deals at a time. You could love working with Partner A, who might have 5 live deals, and you're on 2 of them. But if one of them slows down for some reason, you might have to go and work on one of Partner B's deals, and so on...And yes our corporate group is big (i think biggest in the city). But once associates start specializing within corporate then they're working with a smaller universe of partners. At the end of the day it sounds like the associates end up working with pretty much all the partners in their group at some point given the need to maintain steady hours in the face of volatile deals life-cycles.
The sense i've gotten here is that they give you the space to pursue what you want. You get to pick who you work for and are allowed/expected to turn down work, so it seems like a good set up for the associates who are just looking to bill their 2000 hours, do decent work, generate a ton of revenue for the firm, collect bonus/salary, and move on after 2-3 years. It also seems like they'll give as much opportunity to the hungrier ones who want to advance through the ranks. At institutional wall street law firms, almost everyone just assumes from day 1 that they're going to leave and that partnership is off the table. Here it seems like--either because of the personalities the firm attracts or the smaller summer classes or because the firm encourages a certain level of entrepreneurial-ism--more associates want to/think they can make partner, so it sounds like there's a different type of striverism compared to the large wall street firms (based on talking to friends who are summering there). I have summer classmates who came into the summer with the stated goal of working on deals with specific rainmakers because they wanted to cultivate that relationship early.
I've heard that a huge chunk of our NY class is corporate, but that's because those people chose to be corporate and the firm is more than happy to have them since they can't get enough people to handle all the work.Anonymous User wrote:I heard the opposite. I heard tons of people naturally gravitated to corporate in this summer class, and they'd love for more people to do lit.Anonymous User wrote:Is it true that Kirkland made all their summers in NY do corporate? If so, that might be a reason to avoid, if you want to do litigation
The truth is, as a junior associate, you dont get to choose to do only 2000 hours. You take what you get, even in a free market sustem. You cant just tell a partner that you're on the 2000 billabke hour route and ease up. (Also 2000 billables is brutal, dont underestimate what the entails)
(Compounding this, there is enormous pressure to accept work given to you early on. While you could theoretically turn down work, its tough to do so when you're just starting out)
Your summer at a cushy SA program isnt indicative of much of anything. You'll get a solid job out of it and a killer summer, though. (Thats way more than most can say)
(If you're wondering , I'm basing this off three friends who work or worked for kirkland, though not in chicago)
-
- Posts: 428114
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Yup totally willing to concede that. Just reporting on what they tell me/what I've tried to observe while i've been here. Ultimately i think rising 2L's (or 3L's thinking about switching) should talk to as many people as possible re KE's free market system...although i guess at a certain point you just have to decide for yourself whether you wanna take the plunge or not.mr.hands wrote: To be fair, the summer associate experience is nothing like practicing. No matter how much people say it, it doesnt seem to stick. You can't get an idea of what its like to work there in the summer, especially if youre at a wine and dine summer associste program. You definitely cant get a feel for firm management, particularly across offices. In short, id be careful not to confuse what youd like (a 2000 hour year ) from what actually happens at a place like Kirkland (2400-2700). This is especially trie for associates in the firm's home office.
The truth is, as a junior associate, you dont get to choose to do only 2000 hours. You take what you get, even in a free market sustem. You cant just tell a partner that you're on the 2000 billabke hour route and ease up. (Also 2000 billables is brutal, dont underestimate what the entails)
(Compounding this, there is enormous pressure to accept work given to you early on. While you could theoretically turn down work, its tough to do so when you're just starting out)
Your summer at a cushy SA program isnt indicative of much of anything. You'll get a solid job out of it and a killer summer, though. (Thats way more than most can say)
- trebekismyhero
- Posts: 1095
- Joined: Fri May 22, 2015 5:26 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
I have friends at KE Chicago that are associates. Lol at good place to be to just do 2000 hours. They're all working non-stop. With that said, good place to be to get a nice bonus and leave after a couple yearsmr.hands wrote:To be fair, the summer associate experience is nothing like practicing. No matter how much people say it, it doesnt seem to stick. You can't get an idea of what its like to work there in the summer, especially if youre at a wine and dine summer associste program. You definitely cant get a feel for firm management, particularly across offices. In short, id be careful not to confuse what youd like (a 2000 hour year ) from what actually happens at a place like Kirkland (2400-2700). This is especially trie for associates in the firm's home office.Anonymous User wrote:KE Summer here again. Um I know from speaking with associates in both Chicago/NY offices that our NY office has a lot of laterals coming in because they're really growing the corporate group pretty aggressively. And the firm has been poaching equity partners from other firms in various offices based on the firm-wide announcements we get. Seems like our office in Chicago generally has the pick of litter of associate laterals from other markets that want to re-locate into Chicago, but i'm not sure if there are consistently a lot of them.Anonymous User wrote:I was the previous poster, thanks so much. That's really helpful.Anonymous User wrote:I'm summering with KE (so take this with appropriate grain of salt, i'm sure there are associates/partners around here that can provide better commentary). This is for the Chicago office btw so i dunno how much of this translates to our NY office. I'm working with both corporate and restructuring so happy to answer specific questions about both to the extent that i can. For now I can say that restructuring is extremely busy. Corporate seems busy too but the group is just so much bigger that i'm sure that there's probably a wider range.Anonymous User wrote:NYC summer here curious about maybe 3L OCI.
Can anyone speak to Kirkland, in particular its M&A and restructuring practices? I've heard mixed things, particularly with how the free market thing plays in and how the non-equity partner thing affects the firm's culture. Can anyone speak to this?
I remember interviewing with V5 firms and they were all so eager to point out how the free market meant you'd be fighting for work etc...From what I've seen it doesn't look like that's the case if you're not gunning for share partner. There's so much work that it's probably more accurate to say you're fighting off work. But there does seem to be a club of baller share partners (especially in corporate) that you need to have in your corner if you want to make share partner yourself eventually, so if that's your goal then i could see it being competitive to get on their deals and win their favor.
I'm not sure how the non-equity partner thing affects the firm's culture. It seems like they're basically senior associates that run the deals and manage the juniors/mid-levels while the equity partners go bring in business. I'm guessing they start tipping towards more senior partner roles as they build their own client base.
Two follow-up questions. Do many people lateral into Kirkland? And in their free-market system, if you successfully solicit a partner for work, are you on board for the rest of that deal? Is there any chance that he might switch you out and take on another associate?
I'd be coming from a firm with fairly set deal teams so am just curious.
I can't give you a definite answer on the staffing question as I am only a summer...but I'm sure there might be a situation (at any firm) where an associate is so terrible or there is some other problem so that they need to be switched out..but from speaking with the associates/partners here it seems like the associates generally do good enough work so that it's not a problem. There are definitely cases where there is so much work that they add another associate or something like that, but i haven't heard of associates working in fear that they'll be switched out at any moment.
Thefree marketopen assignment system--at least here in Chicago--doesn't seem like the uber shark tank that I heard about when i was going through recruiting. The nature of private equity is that there are a ton of smaller deals with smaller deal teams as opposed to the massive all-hands-on-deck public M&A deals in NYC. Most associates seem to be on multiple deals at a time. You could love working with Partner A, who might have 5 live deals, and you're on 2 of them. But if one of them slows down for some reason, you might have to go and work on one of Partner B's deals, and so on...And yes our corporate group is big (i think biggest in the city). But once associates start specializing within corporate then they're working with a smaller universe of partners. At the end of the day it sounds like the associates end up working with pretty much all the partners in their group at some point given the need to maintain steady hours in the face of volatile deals life-cycles.
The sense i've gotten here is that they give you the space to pursue what you want. You get to pick who you work for and are allowed/expected to turn down work, so it seems like a good set up for the associates who are just looking to bill their 2000 hours, do decent work, generate a ton of revenue for the firm, collect bonus/salary, and move on after 2-3 years. It also seems like they'll give as much opportunity to the hungrier ones who want to advance through the ranks. At institutional wall street law firms, almost everyone just assumes from day 1 that they're going to leave and that partnership is off the table. Here it seems like--either because of the personalities the firm attracts or the smaller summer classes or because the firm encourages a certain level of entrepreneurial-ism--more associates want to/think they can make partner, so it sounds like there's a different type of striverism compared to the large wall street firms (based on talking to friends who are summering there). I have summer classmates who came into the summer with the stated goal of working on deals with specific rainmakers because they wanted to cultivate that relationship early.
I've heard that a huge chunk of our NY class is corporate, but that's because those people chose to be corporate and the firm is more than happy to have them since they can't get enough people to handle all the work.Anonymous User wrote:I heard the opposite. I heard tons of people naturally gravitated to corporate in this summer class, and they'd love for more people to do lit.Anonymous User wrote:Is it true that Kirkland made all their summers in NY do corporate? If so, that might be a reason to avoid, if you want to do litigation
The truth is, as a junior associate, you dont get to choose to do only 2000 hours. You take what you get, even in a free market sustem. You cant just tell a partner that you're on the 2000 billabke hour route and ease up. (Also 2000 billables is brutal, dont underestimate what the entails)
(Compounding this, there is enormous pressure to accept work given to you early on. While you could theoretically turn down work, its tough to do so when you're just starting out)
Your summer at a cushy SA program isnt indicative of much of anything. You'll get a solid job out of it and a killer summer, though. (Thats way more than most can say)
(If you're wondering , I'm basing this off three friends who work or worked for kirkland, though not in chicago)
-
- Posts: 428114
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Although I disclaim that I'm a summer, I wouldn't completely discount the idea that a summer can get any idea of what it's like to work at a firm. However, I will say it's possible with a real, affirmative effort to really see how the work affects attorneys you'll eventually be working with. I think the key is spending a lot of time with them outside of the office and official firm events.
I work at a shop that does a lot of PE work too, and also has a "free market" assignment system. Even at our shop, 2000 hours seems way too low to be realistic. They're always busy in the office, always fielding calls and emails at every event (organized and impromptu), they'll tell you who they're working for at the same time, what they're doing, and why one of the others care that they are swamped with no time, show you how much they've billed, etc. I can see what time a particular person made an entry into a doc system on a deal we're working on.
Sure, I won't know how it actually "feels" to work 2000/2200/2400 hours until I actually start full time, but it's just facetious to say I have no idea how unpredictable or hectic one's schedule can get when you get a chance to observe them at all hours of the day.
TL;DR: Even though one may not be able to tell how it feels to work at firm X, one can get a decent idea of what practice at firm X entails from an objective perspective.
Anyways, poster above is correct that PE is hectic, especially at a firm with free market assignment, and in virtually any practice, there's not really such thing as billing at or ahead of pace, and coasting until you reach your target.
I work at a shop that does a lot of PE work too, and also has a "free market" assignment system. Even at our shop, 2000 hours seems way too low to be realistic. They're always busy in the office, always fielding calls and emails at every event (organized and impromptu), they'll tell you who they're working for at the same time, what they're doing, and why one of the others care that they are swamped with no time, show you how much they've billed, etc. I can see what time a particular person made an entry into a doc system on a deal we're working on.
Sure, I won't know how it actually "feels" to work 2000/2200/2400 hours until I actually start full time, but it's just facetious to say I have no idea how unpredictable or hectic one's schedule can get when you get a chance to observe them at all hours of the day.
TL;DR: Even though one may not be able to tell how it feels to work at firm X, one can get a decent idea of what practice at firm X entails from an objective perspective.
Anyways, poster above is correct that PE is hectic, especially at a firm with free market assignment, and in virtually any practice, there's not really such thing as billing at or ahead of pace, and coasting until you reach your target.
- rpupkin
- Posts: 5653
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
Dude, you cracked the code! We associates try to hide the truth from the SAs during the summer. But all it takes is one ambitious upstart--a guy who makes "a real, affirmative effort"--to foil our plans. Curses, we almost got away with it!Anonymous User wrote:Although I disclaim that I'm a summer, I wouldn't completely discount the idea that a summer can get any idea of what it's like to work at a firm. However, I will say it's possible with a real, affirmative effort to really see how the work affects attorneys you'll eventually be working with. I think the key is spending a lot of time with them outside of the office and official firm events.
- Desert Fox
- Posts: 18283
- Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2014 4:34 pm
DFTHREAD
fobstory.jpeg
Last edited by Desert Fox on Sat Jan 27, 2018 4:25 am, edited 2 times in total.
- DELG
- Posts: 3021
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 7:15 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
The hours are absolutely not the worst part. But everything that sucks, you have precious little control over. No matter which firm you go to. I know people at "chill" firms getting gaped daily, and people at sweatshoppy firms who haven't broken 1k hours yet this year. I know people at "nice" firms working for raging pricks, and people at yell-y firms working for saints. It's very, very hard to control.Desert Fox wrote: And a lot of people even say the hours aren't even one of the worst parts of biglaw.
Register now!
Resources to assist law school applicants, students & graduates.
It's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
- rpupkin
- Posts: 5653
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
I actually disagree about that. For me, the hours are the worst part. I don't mind the work; I just wish there was less of it.DELG wrote:The hours are absolutely not the worst part.Desert Fox wrote: And a lot of people even say the hours aren't even one of the worst parts of biglaw.
- DELG
- Posts: 3021
- Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 7:15 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
Then you haven't seen an actual "the worst part." Count your blessings.rpupkin wrote:I actually disagree about that. For me, the hours are the worst part. I don't mind the work; I just wish there was less of it.DELG wrote:The hours are absolutely not the worst part.Desert Fox wrote: And a lot of people even say the hours aren't even one of the worst parts of biglaw.
- rpupkin
- Posts: 5653
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
I don't know. I've been in it three years. But I've also gone out of my way to avoid working with toxic partners/senior associates.DELG wrote:Then you haven't seen an actual "the worst part." Count your blessings.rpupkin wrote:I actually disagree about that. For me, the hours are the worst part. I don't mind the work; I just wish there was less of it.DELG wrote:The hours are absolutely not the worst part.Desert Fox wrote: And a lot of people even say the hours aren't even one of the worst parts of biglaw.
In any event, I would put up with a daily dose of sadism/mismanagement/passive-aggressiveness if I could go home at 6 every night and have my weekends to myself.
- twenty 8
- Posts: 330
- Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 12:45 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
Among many other things that could be considered unpleasant this would not seem to be one of them, until you have deal with sharing your so-called secretary with a partner. Anyone here facing that not so lovely situation? Trying to get an assist on the simplest request is beyond agonizing.
Get unlimited access to all forums and topics
Register now!
I'm pretty sure I told you it's FREE...
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428114
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
When people say Jones Day pays below market salary/bonuses, how much below market are we talking? Like a 3rd year lockstep would be 185k + 50k DPW bonus. So JD would have to pay 235k, given they spread bonus pay throughout the year, to match market. So how much less do people report that a 2k-2.2k biller would get from JD? I can't imagine it would be too much below market, at least for the corp associates, where the lateral market is pretty strong. OTOH, the fact that bonuses are figured into yearly salary probably severely discourages lateralling,
- rpupkin
- Posts: 5653
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 10:32 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
At least as of a few years ago, Jones Day did not increase base salaries at market lockstep. So it wasn't just the bonuses that were below market. That may have changed, though.Anonymous User wrote:When people say Jones Day pays below market salary/bonuses, how much below market are we talking? Like a 3rd year lockstep would be 185k + 50k DPW bonus. So JD would have to pay 235k, given they spread bonus pay throughout the year, to match market. So how much less do people report that a 2k-2.2k biller would get from JD? I can't imagine it would be too much below market, at least for the corp associates, where the lateral market is pretty strong. OTOH, the fact that bonuses are figured into yearly salary probably severely discourages lateralling,
-
- Posts: 428114
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Associate here. From my knowledge/experience:
Morgan Lewis
Cadwalader
Stroock
Shearman Sterling
Morgan Lewis
Cadwalader
Stroock
Shearman Sterling
-
- Posts: 428114
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Related to this, some lower-ranked firms that purport to pay lockstep use different techniques to secretly suppress salaries, especially for senior associates. Some that I'm familiar with:rpupkin wrote:At least as of a few years ago, Jones Day did not increase base salaries at market lockstep. So it wasn't just the bonuses that were below market. That may have changed, though.Anonymous User wrote:When people say Jones Day pays below market salary/bonuses, how much below market are we talking? Like a 3rd year lockstep would be 185k + 50k DPW bonus. So JD would have to pay 235k, given they spread bonus pay throughout the year, to match market. So how much less do people report that a 2k-2.2k biller would get from JD? I can't imagine it would be too much below market, at least for the corp associates, where the lateral market is pretty strong. OTOH, the fact that bonuses are figured into yearly salary probably severely discourages lateralling,
- Lower-than-lockstep raises (this was typical at a lot of firms in the worst years of the recession)
- Denial of raises to associates who bill under 1900-2000 hours
- Denial of raises to associates who fail to hit a certain revenue target (at my firm, senior associates need to bring in revenue equal to approximately triple their salary to get a raise. Not a big deal for most associates but some get screwed if their partner never sends the bill or the client negotiates a ridiculously low rate)
- Paying associates who bill under 1900-2000 hours at the "part time" rate (when I interviewed several years ago, first years at Wiley Rein who didn't hit a certain target would be paid the part-time rate of $125k instead of $160k, though I imagine this has changed)
Communicate now with those who not only know what a legal education is, but can offer you worthy advice and commentary as you complete the three most educational, yet challenging years of your law related post graduate life.
Register now, it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login
-
- Posts: 428114
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Some more prestigious firms also won't advance class years for associates who miss hours (Sidley)- Denial of raises to associates who bill under 1900-2000 hours
-
- Posts: 428114
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
Isn't their minimum for that 1800 with 2k making you bonus eligible? 1800 is p. low
-
- Posts: 428114
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Firms to avoid
(Anon from above). Interesting to note. From my observation these policies can be unfairly harmful to women who go on maternity leave. I know of at least two women at my firm who didn't get raises the years they went on maternity leave. The firm of course gives 4 months' credit towards hours, but unsurprisingly their hours dwindled as they approached their due date and started to transition their projects to others, and it took them a few weeks to get a full workload again after returning, so they still ended up under 2000.Anonymous User wrote:Some more prestigious firms also won't advance class years for associates who miss hours (Sidley)- Denial of raises to associates who bill under 1900-2000 hours
-
- Posts: 776
- Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 10:23 pm
Re: Firms to avoid
can you elaborate? have only heard nice thingsAnonymous User wrote:Associate here. From my knowledge/experience:
Shearman Sterling
Seriously? What are you waiting for?
Now there's a charge.
Just kidding ... it's still FREE!
Already a member? Login