I’m currently a tax attorney (transactional, not controversy) at a v100. I’m considering applying for D.C. clerkships because I’m trying to move up and haven’t really been as successful. Conventional wisdom on here seems to be to get a clerkship if you want to get a better job.
I really don’t want to do controversy or any litigation, but I’m wondering if a 150k+ paycut for a year or two would be worth it.
Would a clerkship guarantee me a position at a larger firm? My firm does a lot of middle market work and I’m looking for more complex work.
Obviously getting the clerkship is another issue, but if I were to be able to, would it make sense?
Is a federal clerkship with it in this situation? 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.
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
-
RedPurpleBlue
- Posts: 569
- Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2016 9:41 pm
Re: Is a federal clerkship with it in this situation?
I don't think it'd make much sense. If you're at a V100, just try to lateral in NY/DC. Go talk to some recruiters.
-
QContinuum
- Posts: 3594
- Joined: Mon Aug 07, 2017 9:52 am
Re: Is a federal clerkship with it in this situation?
No, clerkships only help for lit. If you've been focusing on transactional work, and want to continue focusing on transactional work, a clerkship is very unlikely to help, and may even hurt (because folks will question whether you actually want to switch to lit).
Far better, as RedPurpleBlue points out, to try lateraling instead.
Far better, as RedPurpleBlue points out, to try lateraling instead.
-
Anonymous User
- Posts: 428468
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:32 am
Re: Is a federal clerkship with it in this situation?
What if I’m not able to lateral up? Would it still not make any sense to do a clerkship?QContinuum wrote:No, clerkships only help for lit. If you've been focusing on transactional work, and want to continue focusing on transactional work, a clerkship is very unlikely to help, and may even hurt (because folks will question whether you actually want to switch to lit).
Far better, as RedPurpleBlue points out, to try lateraling instead.
-
lavarman84
- Posts: 8504
- Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 5:01 pm
Re: Is a federal clerkship with it in this situation?
No. You don't want to do litigation. It's not going to make you more valuable to transactional tax departments. If you want to do a clerkship, that's fine. But from the perspective of it helping you advance in your practice area, I don't see any real benefits. I'm not saying there's no chance it helps you lateral up, but I am saying that it's unlikely.Anonymous User wrote:What if I’m not able to lateral up? Would it still not make any sense to do a clerkship?QContinuum wrote:No, clerkships only help for lit. If you've been focusing on transactional work, and want to continue focusing on transactional work, a clerkship is very unlikely to help, and may even hurt (because folks will question whether you actually want to switch to lit).
Far better, as RedPurpleBlue points out, to try lateraling instead.
Want to continue reading?
Register now to search topics and post comments!
Absolutely FREE!
Already a member? Login
