Paul Hastings

(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: 327380
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Paul Hastings

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 23, 2016 11:49 am

Anonymous User wrote:PH increased their summer program from 65 to 100 in 2016 and gave offers to everybody. It is unlikely they hired 100 all stars, so I would bet that they have changed their approach, after getting caught making recessionary no offers after most firms stopped, to being shamed into giving out 100 % offers. Stuff like ATL and even TLS can make a difference if firms are worried they won't get any 2Ls to come to their firm. That stuff is more public these days. Regardless, the no offer concerns there seem to be largely in the past.


65 --> 100 is not an insignificant increase. Why did they go up so much? Surely that is a promising sign?

Anonymous User
Posts: 327380
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Paul Hastings

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 23, 2016 11:53 am

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:PH increased their summer program from 65 to 100 in 2016 and gave offers to everybody. It is unlikely they hired 100 all stars, so I would bet that they have changed their approach, after getting caught making recessionary no offers after most firms stopped, to being shamed into giving out 100 % offers. Stuff like ATL and even TLS can make a difference if firms are worried they won't get any 2Ls to come to their firm. That stuff is more public these days. Regardless, the no offer concerns there seem to be largely in the past.


65 --> 100 is not an insignificant increase. Why did they go up so much? Surely that is a promising sign?

Strong financial year in 2015. Desire to expand across all practice areas. May or may not be good... if the economy goes to shit in the next couple years they'll probably lay a lot of people off.

User avatar
kennethellenparcell

Bronze
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 1:02 am

Re: Paul Hastings

Postby kennethellenparcell » Fri Sep 23, 2016 12:11 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
kennethellenparcell wrote:
You make it sound like PH has been no-offering people all the time


Quite a straw man you got going here. The previous poster actually said they only no-offered a handful of summers


kennethellenparcell wrote:
which is just not true.


Look, all of us going through OCI at the time saw the amount of no-offers on NALP. So what, NALP was lying? Just a part of the industry's continuing efforts to not recognize Paul Hastings as the legal powerhouse it is, right??


kennethellenparcell wrote:
In fact, I think I likely would have ended up in one of those giant summer classes in NYC


Wow. It's one thing to like your firm. It's another thing to pat yourself on the back for turning down a Skadden/S&C/Paul Weiss for the likes of Paul Hastings. PH is just as much a sweatshop as the rest of those firms, AND no-offers summer associates. It's a great firm, sure, but don't make it seem like you pulled off some genius career move by going to PH instead of white & case or something


kennethellenparcell wrote:
I'm just trying to convey to people in a general sense that a non-100% offer rate really does not mean that YOU are at risk of not receiving an offer if you put in the effort and work.


in my summer associate class, there was one summer who was no-offered. He was a hard worker and attended every event. His only sin was that he was just an all-around awkward guy. It was bullshit.



ETA: To the poster above, I''m sorry you had to go through that dude. Good to hear you landed on your feet - and, seriously, fuck PH for leaving you in the dark like that


Jesus. I'm not trying to say that everyone should come to PH or even to shill for my firm AT ALL. I don't care if people think of it as a powerhouse or not, all I was trying to say is that the summer is an audition for a job, and sometimes people just don't make the cut - which means that a 100% offer rate firm isn't a criteria I would have placed much emphasis on in retrospect. I am very sorry to the above poster about the no-offer and I have friends who got no-offered at firms too. It really does suck. That's probably the first time I've heard about someone getting no-offered who didn't screw up in some big way over the summer, but I don't pretend to know everyone's experiences.

User avatar
unlicensedpotato

Silver
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 12:16 pm

Re: Paul Hastings

Postby unlicensedpotato » Fri Sep 23, 2016 12:18 pm

kennethellenparcell wrote:
Jesus. I'm not trying to say that everyone should come to PH or even to shill for my firm AT ALL. I don't care if people think of it as a powerhouse or not, all I was trying to say is that the summer is an audition for a job, and sometimes people just don't make the cut - which means that a 100% offer rate firm isn't a criteria I would have placed much emphasis on in retrospect. I am very sorry to the above poster about the no-offer and I have friends who got no-offered at firms too. It really does suck. That's probably the first time I've heard about someone getting no-offered who didn't screw up in some big way over the summer, but I don't pretend to know everyone's experiences.


You sound utterly clueless. When not protected by the 100% offer rate, people get screwed for no reason all the time. At least with a cold offer you can shop around easily. And yes, 100% offer firms still lay off associates. But way more people have been no offered than have been "lathamed"

To UK person -- yes, you're right, in a hypothetical world where other law firms viewed this as an SA offer. In reality, US firms view the SA offer as an associate offer, and you not starting as an associate is the equivalent of being fired in their eyes.

User avatar
kennethellenparcell

Bronze
Posts: 498
Joined: Fri Oct 29, 2010 1:02 am

Re: Paul Hastings

Postby kennethellenparcell » Fri Sep 23, 2016 12:39 pm

unlicensedpotato wrote:
kennethellenparcell wrote:
Jesus. I'm not trying to say that everyone should come to PH or even to shill for my firm AT ALL. I don't care if people think of it as a powerhouse or not, all I was trying to say is that the summer is an audition for a job, and sometimes people just don't make the cut - which means that a 100% offer rate firm isn't a criteria I would have placed much emphasis on in retrospect. I am very sorry to the above poster about the no-offer and I have friends who got no-offered at firms too. It really does suck. That's probably the first time I've heard about someone getting no-offered who didn't screw up in some big way over the summer, but I don't pretend to know everyone's experiences.


You sound utterly clueless. When not protected by the 100% offer rate, people get screwed for no reason all the time. At least with a cold offer you can shop around easily. And yes, 100% offer firms still lay off associates. But way more people have been no offered than have been "lathamed"

To UK person -- yes, you're right, in a hypothetical world where other law firms viewed this as an SA offer. In reality, US firms view the SA offer as an associate offer, and you not starting as an associate is the equivalent of being fired in their eyes.


I am curious if you know what happens behind the scenes in recruiting at all. I think once you see that and you start talking to other attorneys who do recruiting and are on recruiting committees, you'd probably see that no-offers are usually not given for no reason (unless there's some sort of financial issue with the firm). Again, what I'm really trying to convey to people is that unless there are other issues with the firm, don't rely too much on the 100% offer rate and other criteria are more important (like the strength of the practice area, the people you're working with). Giving more weight to those criteria will ensure longevity in the tough atmosphere of big law. It's already a tough place to be, and the 100% offer rate isn't going to be that much of a help in ensuring that you can stick it out for 3+ years to go in-house.

At the first firm I summered at, it previously had a 100% offer rate. During our summer, they ended up no-offering someone. The summer can be a nerve-wracking experience so I spent a lot of time agonizing about no offer rates for my 2L summer, so I have given this issue a lot of thought. I'm really just trying to put out some general advice to people who are also thinking about how much weight they should give to a non-100% offer rate. TLS usually encourages people to take the safe route to things - take the 100% offer rate firm! Retake the LSAT! One size fits all advice rarely ever does anyone that much good and I've been steered wrong by these boards before. Therefore, I just want to make sure that this perspective is out there for people's consideration. It's fine if you disagree with me, but please don't call me clueless.

User avatar
unlicensedpotato

Silver
Posts: 527
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 12:16 pm

Re: Paul Hastings

Postby unlicensedpotato » Fri Sep 23, 2016 12:47 pm

kennethellenparcell wrote:
I am curious if you know what happens behind the scenes in recruiting at all. I think once you see that and you start talking to other attorneys who do recruiting and are on recruiting committees, you'd probably see that no-offers are usually not given for no reason (unless there's some sort of financial issue with the firm). Again, what I'm really trying to convey to people is that unless there are other issues with the firm, don't rely too much on the 100% offer rate and other criteria are more important (like the strength of the practice area, the people you're working with). Giving more weight to those criteria will ensure longevity in the tough atmosphere of big law. It's already a tough place to be, and the 100% offer rate isn't going to be that much of a help in ensuring that you can stick it out for 3+ years to go in-house.

At the first firm I summered at, it previously had a 100% offer rate. During our summer, they ended up no-offering someone. The summer can be a nerve-wracking experience so I spent a lot of time agonizing about no offer rates for my 2L summer, so I have given this issue a lot of thought. I'm really just trying to put out some general advice to people who are also thinking about how much weight they should give to a non-100% offer rate. TLS usually encourages people to take the safe route to things - take the 100% offer rate firm! Retake the LSAT! One size fits all advice rarely ever does anyone that much good and I've been steered wrong by these boards before. Therefore, I just want to make sure that this perspective is out there for people's consideration. It's fine if you disagree with me, but please don't call me clueless.


Clueless comment was based entirely on you saying that this was the first time you've heard of someone getting no offered without a major screwup. Apologies if it was rude. ETA: This may just be a result of seeing different markets. In TX, some firms will no offer 25% of SAs (or more). There's no way all those people "screwed up." If you're just talking about dinging 1-2 people a year in a big class, that is not as significant. The problem I'm criticizing is firms taking on enough SAs that they *know* that they can't hire all of them even if they all had a good summer.

Yes, I'm aware of and involved in with recruiting. I think your caveat of "unless there's some sort of financial issue with the firm" is quite large. Also, one part that makes it really unfair is the fact that a firm and attorneys will consistently tell a person that they're doing great, rather than provide constructive feedback to help the person improve, and then no-offer them. People who don't know better take these reviews/comments at their word and assume everything is great.
Last edited by unlicensedpotato on Fri Sep 23, 2016 1:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

delusional

Silver
Posts: 1201
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 7:57 pm

Re: Paul Hastings

Postby delusional » Fri Sep 23, 2016 12:55 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Ok, this post is caveated by the fact I am in the UK market, and was, until recently job searching in London.

With that being said, I really don't see the issue with no offering students? The summer associate position is not a job offer, else it would be an associate offer. Why do you think they run these programs? It is entirely to vet candidates for associate positions and, in agreeance with a the PH poster above, I do believe some firms are too scared of their 100% offer rate which in recent times becomes so publicised. I would be willing to bet when SA roles were first offered (and things like ATL and NALP not so prevalent) no firms were achieving 100% as SA roles are there to vet candidates.

I mentioned I was in the UK market because the summer associate classes in law firms there (even in the US offices of law firms) take on far more summer associates than they need and the summer is a vetting and competitive process. Surely, that is precisely what the summer is for? For example, Cleary in London take on 48 summers for just 15 full time places. My firm (also a US outpost) took on around 20 summers for 4 full time places.

Granted, in the UK these "summers" last for 2-3 weeks and so students can line up a couple or several if they are savvy about it and even, as I did, summer again the following year if you weren't successful first time round (and with numbers like the above, it is not surprising many are not).

So my 2 cents I guess is I don't understand the big issue with 100% offer rates. SA positions are there to vet you and although I understand in the US job market summer positions are more a "one bite of the apple" thing the ratio of those BigLaw firms take as SAs vs the full-time associates they (project they'll) need is a lot more favourable in the US.
It sounds like your point is that in a different system, different rules apply. In the US, you only get one bite at the apple, and it is your 2L summer. You usually can only work for one firm over that summer. Dealing with a no-offer is extremely challenging - aside from needing to double down and find another job when no one is recruiting you anymore and big firms aren't hiring, it is demeaning and humiliating to be in that position. There have been sagas that played out on TLS in which no-offers were life-changing. The way things ought to work, or the way things work in a different system, do not make choosing a firm that no-offers a good bet.

Anonymous User
Posts: 327380
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Paul Hastings

Postby Anonymous User » Fri Sep 23, 2016 1:08 pm

Everyone who was no offered in my office has 200% deserved it for being a weird asshole. But the past two years they even offered them, so I think it's safe.

Someone will say "but why don't other firms have problems with unlikeble assholes?" They do and just don't care. Take a poll of your 1L section. I bet there are 5-10 huge assholes who were in it. SRZ hires sexual harassers to keep their 100%.

The firm hasn't done financial based no offers since 2009. Not that it wouldn't hesitate to do them if the firm was in trouble. But so would peer firms. And they did in 2009. But PH hasn't had a bad year since then.

delusional

Silver
Posts: 1201
Joined: Thu Jul 15, 2010 7:57 pm

Re: Paul Hastings

Postby delusional » Fri Sep 23, 2016 1:54 pm

Anonymous User wrote:Everyone who was no offered in my office has 200% deserved it for being a weird asshole. But the past two years they even offered them, so I think it's safe.

Someone will say "but why don't other firms have problems with unlikeble assholes?" They do and just don't care. Take a poll of your 1L section. I bet there are 5-10 huge assholes who were in it. SRZ hires sexual harassers to keep their 100%.

The firm hasn't done financial based no offers since 2009. Not that it wouldn't hesitate to do them if the firm was in trouble. But so would peer firms. And they did in 2009. But PH hasn't had a bad year since then.
Weird assholes don't necessarily deserve to be no-offered. And your comment about 1L Sections implies that you think no-offers are appropriate with a fair bit of regularity.

Anonymous User
Posts: 327380
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Paul Hastings

Postby Anonymous User » Mon Sep 26, 2016 1:51 pm

Anonymous User wrote:PH increased their summer program from 65 to 100 in 2016 and gave offers to everybody. It is unlikely they hired 100 all stars, so I would bet that they have changed their approach, after getting caught making recessionary no offers after most firms stopped, to being shamed into giving out 100 % offers. Stuff like ATL and even TLS can make a difference if firms are worried they won't get any 2Ls to come to their firm. That stuff is more public these days. Regardless, the no offer concerns there seem to be largely in the past.


Thanks for the information - any way you could share how you know that PH gave 100% offers in 2016?

Anonymous User
Posts: 327380
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am

Re: Paul Hastings

Postby Anonymous User » Tue Sep 27, 2016 1:31 pm

Anonymous User wrote:
Anonymous User wrote:PH increased their summer program from 65 to 100 in 2016 and gave offers to everybody. It is unlikely they hired 100 all stars, so I would bet that they have changed their approach, after getting caught making recessionary no offers after most firms stopped, to being shamed into giving out 100 % offers. Stuff like ATL and even TLS can make a difference if firms are worried they won't get any 2Ls to come to their firm. That stuff is more public these days. Regardless, the no offer concerns there seem to be largely in the past.


Thanks for the information - any way you could share how you know that PH gave 100% offers in 2016?


Can confirm 100% offer rate in NY for largest summer class in years. I was one of the summers, all offered on last day.



Return to “Legal Employment�

Who is online

The online users are hidden on this forum.