Latham NY Forum

[Anonymous User]

LW associate here. Unfortunately 2 POC summers were no offered. It’s an unfortunate look but one of them had repeated incidents of blatant sexual harassment (and I heard other stories that weren’t reported) that led to them being let go during the summer.

The other one was a former pre-law summer who had spent three summers at LW including this past summer. To give the most blunt response, big law just isn’t for this person. I understand that numerous accommodations were made for them that escalated each year, despite several people calling for them not to receive return offers due to a combination of social interactions and work product. This person was at the point of effectively having their own tailored summer program separate from the rest of the SAs. None of the SAs that I spoke to after the fact were surprised at the outcome.

Think LW is coming out of this one with an underserved bad image, though maybe could’ve weeded these out better?

Former LW SA here.

I agree that the two NY SAs who were no-offered this year 10000% deserved it.
However, two things can be right.

What also happened was that, last summer, several POC across LW's offices in the U.S. turned down their 1L or 2L diversity fellowships due to their experiences with racism. I was one of them. Tons of us were Asian, Black, Latino/a, women, etc. and we were horrified by the shit we saw and personally experienced. We are *happily* at other firms now, and it's bonkers because we didn't even know how bad things were until we started seeing each other at different offer dinners for other firms.

Oh - and the one Black male partner at LW NY just left the firm.

I think it would be more helpful for everyone, including potential summer associates and even Latham, for you to cite specific things that happened rather than broadly gesturing and referencing things that you were “horrified to see” without specifics. If it was that horrifying, then I would personally gladly broadcast that to the world.

I’m at Latham and personally do care about these things but when people don’t come to us and tell us what they’re seeing, we are less effective. Even in exit interviews everyone paints a pretty face on the way out.

Also, was sad to see Jason go. Very very nice person, but the firm is just not promoting income partners to equity in capital markets right now given the state of the market and he found a firm that would offer him that path. I don’t think a single capital markets partner was even made globally this year IIRC.

Former LW SA again.

I’m not going to dox myself and broadcast specific aspects my experiences (and certainly not those of others) without feeling comfortable enough that they won’t be used against me or others. Plenty of people did that while I was at LW and got burned for it, and there are a small number of Diversity Scholars that it’s pretty easy to get doxxed. I am helpful in that I have already spoken to several people who’ve messaged me on various platforms to ask about how the firm was, and I’m honest with them and try to warn them. And then there are posts like these where I do the same.

Some people actually *did* go to associates or partners to share their experiences and/or make a report. Some tried to avoid reporting and it didn’t matter because of the mandatory reporting policy (hence, others reported on their behalf). Regardless, nothing made a difference. Incidents were completely ignored or shoved under the rug. “Investigations” amounted to nothing, and they rarely do they, because after all, this is Corporate America. We knew we would be putting our careers on the line, so we smiled and carried on, waited to get the hell out, and breathed a sigh of relief upon doing so.

There’s a reason why so many of us, despite being from low-income backgrounds, had no issue with giving up the $50,000 bonus/scholarship. The issues were *that* bad, and I don’t use the term “horrific” lightly.

As for partnership, a few in cap markets were promoted back in February, but very few in Nov. (maybe one overseas). Regardless, I wish Jason the best.

February promotions were counsel to partner promotions which is an entirely different track and frankly pretty black box. My impression from all the candid conversations I’ve had and feedback is that one bad apple spoiled the experience for many diverse candidates and gave advice that had no basis in reality, positioning themselves and others to fail. Wish you and others all the best at other firms but everything I have seen and been told points to mischaracterization of events (I caught one person in multiple lies related to an event where such complaints were made) and a misguided approach to the summer.

[LittleRedCorvette]

LW associate here. Unfortunately 2 POC summers were no offered. It’s an unfortunate look but one of them had repeated incidents of blatant sexual harassment (and I heard other stories that weren’t reported) that led to them being let go during the summer.

The other one was a former pre-law summer who had spent three summers at LW including this past summer. To give the most blunt response, big law just isn’t for this person. I understand that numerous accommodations were made for them that escalated each year, despite several people calling for them not to receive return offers due to a combination of social interactions and work product. This person was at the point of effectively having their own tailored summer program separate from the rest of the SAs. None of the SAs that I spoke to after the fact were surprised at the outcome.

Think LW is coming out of this one with an underserved bad image, though maybe could’ve weeded these out better?

Former LW SA here.

I agree that the two NY SAs who were no-offered this year 10000% deserved it.
However, two things can be right.

What also happened was that, last summer, several POC across LW's offices in the U.S. turned down their 1L or 2L diversity fellowships due to their experiences with racism. I was one of them. Tons of us were Asian, Black, Latino/a, women, etc. and we were horrified by the shit we saw and personally experienced. We are *happily* at other firms now, and it's bonkers because we didn't even know how bad things were until we started seeing each other at different offer dinners for other firms.

Oh - and the one Black male partner at LW NY just left the firm.

I think it would be more helpful for everyone, including potential summer associates and even Latham, for you to cite specific things that happened rather than broadly gesturing and referencing things that you were “horrified to see” without specifics. If it was that horrifying, then I would personally gladly broadcast that to the world.

I’m at Latham and personally do care about these things but when people don’t come to us and tell us what they’re seeing, we are less effective. Even in exit interviews everyone paints a pretty face on the way out.

Also, was sad to see Jason go. Very very nice person, but the firm is just not promoting income partners to equity in capital markets right now given the state of the market and he found a firm that would offer him that path. I don’t think a single capital markets partner was even made globally this year IIRC.

Former LW SA again.

I’m not going to dox myself and broadcast specific aspects my experiences (and certainly not those of others) without feeling comfortable enough that they won’t be used against me or others. Plenty of people did that while I was at LW and got burned for it, and there are a small number of Diversity Scholars that it’s pretty easy to get doxxed. I am helpful in that I have already spoken to several people who’ve messaged me on various platforms to ask about how the firm was, and I’m honest with them and try to warn them. And then there are posts like these where I do the same.

Some people actually *did* go to associates or partners to share their experiences and/or make a report. Some tried to avoid reporting and it didn’t matter because of the mandatory reporting policy (hence, others reported on their behalf). Regardless, nothing made a difference. Incidents were completely ignored or shoved under the rug. “Investigations” amounted to nothing, and they rarely do they, because after all, this is Corporate America. We knew we would be putting our careers on the line, so we smiled and carried on, waited to get the hell out, and breathed a sigh of relief upon doing so.

There’s a reason why so many of us, despite being from low-income backgrounds, had no issue with giving up the $50,000 bonus/scholarship. The issues were *that* bad, and I don’t use the term “horrific” lightly.

As for partnership, a few in cap markets were promoted back in February, but very few in Nov. (maybe one overseas). Regardless, I wish Jason the best.

February promotions were counsel to partner promotions which is an entirely different track and frankly pretty black box. My impression from all the candid conversations I’ve had and feedback is that one bad apple spoiled the experience for many diverse candidates and gave advice that had no basis in reality, positioning themselves and others to fail. Wish you and others all the best at other firms but everything I have seen and been told points to mischaracterization of events (I caught one person in multiple lies related to an event where such complaints were made) and a misguided approach to the summer.

I think LW NY decided they were too "uppity."

[Anonymous User]

can you give a more specific but also generalized example of the instances of discrimination you felt uncomfortable with? which offices besides NY did you see it?

Agreed that generalized examples would be helpful. It's easy to do this without identifying the summers. Some examples (from what I have seen at my V20) include (1) a diverse partner using a racial slur to describe another ethnic group, (2) a white partner constantly mixing up two female Asian associates on my team yet never mixing up the basically indistinguishable majority of white males on the same team, and (3) an excellent diverse candidate with a good shot at partnership leaving my group. I think there's a world of difference between each of these three things (the later not necessarily being attributable to racism), and if I were a prospective SA I would want to know where on the line Latham's conduct lies.

[Anonymous User]

LW associate here. Unfortunately 2 POC summers were no offered. It’s an unfortunate look but one of them had repeated incidents of blatant sexual harassment (and I heard other stories that weren’t reported) that led to them being let go during the summer.

The other one was a former pre-law summer who had spent three summers at LW including this past summer. To give the most blunt response, big law just isn’t for this person. I understand that numerous accommodations were made for them that escalated each year, despite several people calling for them not to receive return offers due to a combination of social interactions and work product. This person was at the point of effectively having their own tailored summer program separate from the rest of the SAs. None of the SAs that I spoke to after the fact were surprised at the outcome.

Think LW is coming out of this one with an underserved bad image, though maybe could’ve weeded these out better?

Former LW SA here.

I agree that the two NY SAs who were no-offered this year 10000% deserved it.
However, two things can be right.

What also happened was that, last summer, several POC across LW's offices in the U.S. turned down their 1L or 2L diversity fellowships due to their experiences with racism. I was one of them. Tons of us were Asian, Black, Latino/a, women, etc. and we were horrified by the shit we saw and personally experienced. We are *happily* at other firms now, and it's bonkers because we didn't even know how bad things were until we started seeing each other at different offer dinners for other firms.

Oh - and the one Black male partner at LW NY just left the firm.

I think it would be more helpful for everyone, including potential summer associates and even Latham, for you to cite specific things that happened rather than broadly gesturing and referencing things that you were “horrified to see” without specifics. If it was that horrifying, then I would personally gladly broadcast that to the world.

I’m at Latham and personally do care about these things but when people don’t come to us and tell us what they’re seeing, we are less effective. Even in exit interviews everyone paints a pretty face on the way out.

Also, was sad to see Jason go. Very very nice person, but the firm is just not promoting income partners to equity in capital markets right now given the state of the market and he found a firm that would offer him that path. I don’t think a single capital markets partner was even made globally this year IIRC.

Former LW SA again.

I’m not going to dox myself and broadcast specific aspects my experiences (and certainly not those of others) without feeling comfortable enough that they won’t be used against me or others. Plenty of people did that while I was at LW and got burned for it, and there are a small number of Diversity Scholars that it’s pretty easy to get doxxed. I am helpful in that I have already spoken to several people who’ve messaged me on various platforms to ask about how the firm was, and I’m honest with them and try to warn them. And then there are posts like these where I do the same.

Some people actually *did* go to associates or partners to share their experiences and/or make a report. Some tried to avoid reporting and it didn’t matter because of the mandatory reporting policy (hence, others reported on their behalf). Regardless, nothing made a difference. Incidents were completely ignored or shoved under the rug. “Investigations” amounted to nothing, and they rarely do they, because after all, this is Corporate America. We knew we would be putting our careers on the line, so we smiled and carried on, waited to get the hell out, and breathed a sigh of relief upon doing so.

There’s a reason why so many of us, despite being from low-income backgrounds, had no issue with giving up the $50,000 bonus/scholarship. The issues were *that* bad, and I don’t use the term “horrific” lightly.

As for partnership, a few in cap markets were promoted back in February, but very few in Nov. (maybe one overseas). Regardless, I wish Jason the best.

February promotions were counsel to partner promotions which is an entirely different track and frankly pretty black box. My impression from all the candid conversations I’ve had and feedback is that one bad apple spoiled the experience for many diverse candidates and gave advice that had no basis in reality, positioning themselves and others to fail. Wish you and others all the best at other firms but everything I have seen and been told points to mischaracterization of events (I caught one person in multiple lies related to an event where such complaints were made) and a misguided approach to the summer.

LW SA here again.

I know you probably mean well, but this isn’t it. I apologize if I didn’t clarify that a bunch of us *across offices* had pretty horrible, identity-based experiences. Like, everywhere from CA to NY, TX to DC, and then some. There wasn’t a single SA that spoiled the experience for us. We got the vibe that the ones who were ultimate cold/no-offered this year were a bit “off” and kinda cocky. Didn’t like them.

When I returned to my law school in the fall, someone who knew I was at LW approached me to chat about it. They said, “I heard all about the ‘flight’ — so sorry.” (I think he was referring to some kind of POC flight kind of thing where a ton of us upped and left at the same time). I was confused because at that point, I’d spoken to only two other people, and I barely knew this student. Then I reached out to other SAs from other LW offices and found out about their situations and was completely stunned. Like, stunned. I say all of this to ask that people stop trying to assume that some SA almost ruined it for everyone else. I had near-perfect reviews, made strong connections with a number of partners, and worked on high-profile matters. Same with almost all of the other SAs, except for the ones that got cold-offered/no-offered.

Again, I’m happy to share my own experiences in private with those who are considering joining LW so that they can make a more informed decision. Just email me (whyidy85@gmail dot com with your LinkedIn url to confirm you’re either doing 1L summer recruiting, pre-OCI, or OCI).

Not sharing with anyone else, sorry. And I’m avoiding saying much else publicly because a LW recruiting team member let it slip that they monitor these threads (and Reddit, and Fishbowl, etc.). On top of that, when I didn’t accept the return offer, they were pretty pushy about finding out where I was going/what I was doing afterward. Just weird energy.

[The Lsat Airbender]

I'm not saying this to pressure you into divulging more, anon—I don't have a horse in this race and I appreciate your concerns about privacy—but surely you understand that if you provide no details people are either going to fill them in with assumptions or rely on what they've heard elsewhere.

And I’m avoiding saying much else publicly because a LW recruiting team member let it slip that they monitor these threads (and Reddit, and Fishbowl, etc.). On top of that, when I didn’t accept the return offer, they were pretty pushy about finding out where I was going/what I was doing afterward. Just weird energy.

Recruiting is nosy not to be vindictive but to figure out how they can fix their retention problem. Retaining summers is their a KPI they can get promoted or fired for. Of course they follow what people are saying about the firm online; that's not a "slip". Of course they want to know what you're doing instead of taking a return offer (if a former SA going to DOJ honors or something then they can shrug and move on; if they're going to a rival firm then they can try and figure out what that other firm is doing right that LW isn't); that's not "weird energy".

[Anonymous User]

LW associate here. Unfortunately 2 POC summers were no offered. It’s an unfortunate look but one of them had repeated incidents of blatant sexual harassment (and I heard other stories that weren’t reported) that led to them being let go during the summer.

The other one was a former pre-law summer who had spent three summers at LW including this past summer. To give the most blunt response, big law just isn’t for this person. I understand that numerous accommodations were made for them that escalated each year, despite several people calling for them not to receive return offers due to a combination of social interactions and work product. This person was at the point of effectively having their own tailored summer program separate from the rest of the SAs. None of the SAs that I spoke to after the fact were surprised at the outcome.

Think LW is coming out of this one with an underserved bad image, though maybe could’ve weeded these out better?

Former LW SA here.

I agree that the two NY SAs who were no-offered this year 10000% deserved it.
However, two things can be right.

What also happened was that, last summer, several POC across LW's offices in the U.S. turned down their 1L or 2L diversity fellowships due to their experiences with racism. I was one of them. Tons of us were Asian, Black, Latino/a, women, etc. and we were horrified by the shit we saw and personally experienced. We are *happily* at other firms now, and it's bonkers because we didn't even know how bad things were until we started seeing each other at different offer dinners for other firms.

Oh - and the one Black male partner at LW NY just left the firm.

I think it would be more helpful for everyone, including potential summer associates and even Latham, for you to cite specific things that happened rather than broadly gesturing and referencing things that you were “horrified to see” without specifics. If it was that horrifying, then I would personally gladly broadcast that to the world.

I’m at Latham and personally do care about these things but when people don’t come to us and tell us what they’re seeing, we are less effective. Even in exit interviews everyone paints a pretty face on the way out.

Also, was sad to see Jason go. Very very nice person, but the firm is just not promoting income partners to equity in capital markets right now given the state of the market and he found a firm that would offer him that path. I don’t think a single capital markets partner was even made globally this year IIRC.

Former LW SA again.

I’m not going to dox myself and broadcast specific aspects my experiences (and certainly not those of others) without feeling comfortable enough that they won’t be used against me or others. Plenty of people did that while I was at LW and got burned for it, and there are a small number of Diversity Scholars that it’s pretty easy to get doxxed. I am helpful in that I have already spoken to several people who’ve messaged me on various platforms to ask about how the firm was, and I’m honest with them and try to warn them. And then there are posts like these where I do the same.

Some people actually *did* go to associates or partners to share their experiences and/or make a report. Some tried to avoid reporting and it didn’t matter because of the mandatory reporting policy (hence, others reported on their behalf). Regardless, nothing made a difference. Incidents were completely ignored or shoved under the rug. “Investigations” amounted to nothing, and they rarely do they, because after all, this is Corporate America. We knew we would be putting our careers on the line, so we smiled and carried on, waited to get the hell out, and breathed a sigh of relief upon doing so.

There’s a reason why so many of us, despite being from low-income backgrounds, had no issue with giving up the $50,000 bonus/scholarship. The issues were *that* bad, and I don’t use the term “horrific” lightly.

As for partnership, a few in cap markets were promoted back in February, but very few in Nov. (maybe one overseas). Regardless, I wish Jason the best.

February promotions were counsel to partner promotions which is an entirely different track and frankly pretty black box. My impression from all the candid conversations I’ve had and feedback is that one bad apple spoiled the experience for many diverse candidates and gave advice that had no basis in reality, positioning themselves and others to fail. Wish you and others all the best at other firms but everything I have seen and been told points to mischaracterization of events (I caught one person in multiple lies related to an event where such complaints were made) and a misguided approach to the summer.

I know you probably mean well, but this isn’t it.

Oh. Thanks for clarifying. I didn’t know there was “weird energy.”

[LittleRedCorvette]

I'm not saying this to pressure you into divulging more, anon—I don't have a horse in this race and I appreciate your concerns about privacy—but surely you understand that if you provide no details people are either going to fill them in with assumptions or rely on what they've heard elsewhere.

And I’m avoiding saying much else publicly because a LW recruiting team member let it slip that they monitor these threads (and Reddit, and Fishbowl, etc.). On top of that, when I didn’t accept the return offer, they were pretty pushy about finding out where I was going/what I was doing afterward. Just weird energy.

Recruiting is nosy not to be vindictive but to figure out how they can fix their retention problem. Retaining summers is their a KPI they can get promoted or fired for. Of course they follow what people are saying about the firm online; that's not a "slip". Of course they want to know what you're doing instead of taking a return offer (if a former SA going to DOJ honors or something then they can shrug and move on; if they're going to a rival firm then they can try and figure out what that other firm is doing right that LW isn't); that's not "weird energy".

I understand that last summer (or maybe the one before?) during their "summer academy" they (1) had the diverse SAs travel separately/earlier than the rest of the summers and (2) had several "diverse only" SA events at summer academy. I also understand at one of the "diverse only" SA events, the hosts asked a bunch of very strange questions, having people describe how they were disadvantaged and discriminated against.

I don't know all the details, but hearing through the grapevine, it sounded ridiculous. I also heard several SAs walked out of the event as it was that uncomfortable/strange.

[Anonymous User]

I have been considering a lateral move to Latham (hence why anon).

I understand these things can be subtle, but I'm still not following what makes Latham truly horrific, to use someone else's language. That diversity event sounds uncomfortable/cringe, but I'm not sure a misguided set of questions amounts to a toxically racist firm as a whole. Maybe I'm wrong, but the fact that the firm went out of their way to spend extra money/time to bring diverse summers together sounds like the intention is there, even if the implementation was off. Should they not have had the extra events in the first place? Or is this just a matter of tweaking the programming to be more welcoming/productive?

I get that the other events/interactions are personal and that there's a risk of doxing, but there has to be something generalizable that someone can say about them, right? It sounds like the firm didn't meet expectations in investigating, but we need to have a baseline on what they should have been investigating to gauge if those expectations were reasonable.

To be clear, I'm not looking for gossip - I just want to understand what the environment is like so that I can compare, say, to other firms like mine that I'm considering leaving. Every firm has some base level of bias (be it that one old racist partner or something more pervasive). That's not excusable, it's just a fact. So we can't gauge Latham's sins without knowing more. Below are some examples I posted earlier about my firm that might be useful for generalizing:

Some examples (from what I have seen at my V20) include (1) a diverse partner using a racial slur to describe another ethnic group, (2) a white partner constantly mixing up two female Asian associates on my team yet never mixing up the basically indistinguishable majority of white males on the same team, and (3) an excellent diverse candidate with a good shot at partnership leaving my group.

[Anonymous User]

Bumping because I remain interested. I think the fact that nobody can really say anything actually says a lot.

[Anonymous User]

Bumping because I remain interested. I think the fact that nobody can really say anything actually says a lot.

#believeallassociates

[Anonymous User]

Bumping because I remain interested. I think the fact that nobody can really say anything actually says a lot.

Believe what you want and do as you wish. People are trying to warn you within the realms of what they're comfortable disclosing (and you're not getting refutations but requests for more information from outsiders). If you want to take absence of evidence that meets your standards as evidence of absence please feel free.

[LittleRedCorvette]

Bumping because I remain interested. I think the fact that nobody can really say anything actually says a lot.

Believe what you want and do as you wish. People are trying to warn you within the realms of what they're comfortable disclosing (and you're not getting refutations but requests for more information from outsiders). If you want to take absence of evidence that meets your standards as evidence of absence please feel free.

It does seem interesting there aren't many (any?) LW defenders on here. If this was instead about KE, there's be 100 people defending/refuting the claims.

[The Lsat Airbender]

Bumping because I remain interested. I think the fact that nobody can really say anything actually says a lot.

Believe what you want and do as you wish. People are trying to warn you within the realms of what they're comfortable disclosing (and you're not getting refutations but requests for more information from outsiders). If you want to take absence of evidence that meets your standards as evidence of absence please feel free.

It does seem interesting there aren't many (any?) LW defenders on here. If this was instead about KE, there's be 100 people defending/refuting the claims.

What claims?

[LittleRedCorvette]

Bumping because I remain interested. I think the fact that nobody can really say anything actually says a lot.

Believe what you want and do as you wish. People are trying to warn you within the realms of what they're comfortable disclosing (and you're not getting refutations but requests for more information from outsiders). If you want to take absence of evidence that meets your standards as evidence of absence please feel free.

It does seem interesting there aren't many (any?) LW defenders on here. If this was instead about KE, there's be 100 people defending/refuting the claims.

What claims?

LW is extra racist?

[The Lsat Airbender]

What claims?

LW is extra racist?

Multiple people in this thread are controverting that claim, starting early on the first page. It's still quite plausible, to be sure, but idk what to make of there merely being a couple of people who bothered to "refute" something so vague and subjective.

[Anonymous User]

Yeah there's nothing to really refute when it's so vague. Those folks had bad interactions with folks at LW. Can't really say anything about it since that's an interaction that they had. It's one data point (though apparently a commonly held view according to the poster(s)?).

As another data point. I also received a diversity fellowship from LW and spent a few years at the firm before coming in house. Wasn't aware of any racism from any associates or partners at the firm and liked all the people I worked with. Sounds like our experiences varied.

[Anonymous User]

No one has refuted the “weird energy” allegation.

[Anonymous User]

I'm not saying this to pressure you into divulging more, anon—I don't have a horse in this race and I appreciate your concerns about privacy—but surely you understand that if you provide no details people are either going to fill them in with assumptions or rely on what they've heard elsewhere.

And I’m avoiding saying much else publicly because a LW recruiting team member let it slip that they monitor these threads (and Reddit, and Fishbowl, etc.). On top of that, when I didn’t accept the return offer, they were pretty pushy about finding out where I was going/what I was doing afterward. Just weird energy.

Recruiting is nosy not to be vindictive but to figure out how they can fix their retention problem. Retaining summers is their a KPI they can get promoted or fired for. Of course they follow what people are saying about the firm online; that's not a "slip". Of course they want to know what you're doing instead of taking a return offer (if a former SA going to DOJ honors or something then they can shrug and move on; if they're going to a rival firm then they can try and figure out what that other firm is doing right that LW isn't); that's not "weird energy".

LW SA here again.

When I say "let it slip" I mean that the recruiter said it, caught themselves, and when I said "huh?" they quickly switched the topic. So it seems like they didn't want people to know about it like that.

As for wanting to know how to fix a retention problem, that's what exit interviews are for. Plus, I'm almost certain I've come across posts on this site and other platforms that give feedback on how to improve the experiences of POC, LGBT+ people, and women at LW. On the contrary, this wasn't an exit interview. What I referred to involved multiple people at the firm (and then some) trying to find out where I was going. It's one thing to ask one time; but to ask several times when I'd already informed someone on the hiring committee that I was going to another firm was IMO excessive. They never asked me why I decided not to return. They didn't ask several others, either. Maybe they asked some, though.

Regarding the dinner with the trauma-porn questions: that happened, yes. I didn't even remember that happening until someone in this thread recalled hearing about that event. That event was nothing compared to the incidents that I alluded to in my first comment.

And I'm sure there were people who didn't go through what I'm referring to. After all, most people accepted the Diversity Scholarship offer. But a large chunk of us didn't, and we declined for very similar reasons. If the pool of Scholars weren't super small, I'd be comfortable divulging every last detail because I truly want better for those who are considering joining that firm (in general, though, I saw that laterals regardless of their race or gender had a rough time adjusting to LW because they're judged for not being homegrown). I feel like I've tried to be more open/accessible than most; I'm doing my best to provide a data point without screwing myself over in some way.

Is is possible that other firms have had incidents like the ones I've alluded to at LW? Yes - in fact, I'm certain of it. The difference, though, is that LW markets itself as a firm with an amazing culture (whereas firms like KE, for example, do not). I'm sure it has an amazing culture for a lot of folks - just not for many of those to whom they offered $50,000 scholarships.

[Anonymous User]

I'm not saying this to pressure you into divulging more, anon—I don't have a horse in this race and I appreciate your concerns about privacy—but surely you understand that if you provide no details people are either going to fill them in with assumptions or rely on what they've heard elsewhere.

And I’m avoiding saying much else publicly because a LW recruiting team member let it slip that they monitor these threads (and Reddit, and Fishbowl, etc.). On top of that, when I didn’t accept the return offer, they were pretty pushy about finding out where I was going/what I was doing afterward. Just weird energy.

Recruiting is nosy not to be vindictive but to figure out how they can fix their retention problem. Retaining summers is their a KPI they can get promoted or fired for. Of course they follow what people are saying about the firm online; that's not a "slip". Of course they want to know what you're doing instead of taking a return offer (if a former SA going to DOJ honors or something then they can shrug and move on; if they're going to a rival firm then they can try and figure out what that other firm is doing right that LW isn't); that's not "weird energy".

LW SA here again.

When I say "let it slip" I mean that the recruiter said it, caught themselves, and when I said "huh?" they quickly switched the topic. So it seems like they didn't want people to know about it like that.

As for wanting to know how to fix a retention problem, that's what exit interviews are for. Plus, I'm almost certain I've come across posts on this site and other platforms that give feedback on how to improve the experiences of POC, LGBT+ people, and women at LW. On the contrary, this wasn't an exit interview. What I referred to involved multiple people at the firm (and then some) trying to find out where I was going. It's one thing to ask one time; but to ask several times when I'd already informed someone on the hiring committee that I was going to another firm was IMO excessive. They never asked me why I decided not to return. They didn't ask several others, either. Maybe they asked some, though.

Regarding the dinner with the trauma-porn questions: that happened, yes. I didn't even remember that happening until someone in this thread recalled hearing about that event. That event was nothing compared to the incidents that I alluded to in my first comment.

And I'm sure there were people who didn't go through what I'm referring to. After all, most people accepted the Diversity Scholarship offer. But a large chunk of us didn't, and we declined for very similar reasons. If the pool of Scholars weren't super small, I'd be comfortable divulging every last detail because I truly want better for those who are considering joining that firm (in general, though, I saw that laterals regardless of their race or gender had a rough time adjusting to LW because they're judged for not being homegrown). I feel like I've tried to be more open/accessible than most; I'm doing my best to provide a data point without screwing myself over in some way.

Is is possible that other firms have had incidents like the ones I've alluded to at LW? Yes - in fact, I'm certain of it. The difference, though, is that LW markets itself as a firm with an amazing culture (whereas firms like KE, for example, do not). I'm sure it has an amazing culture for a lot of folks - just not for many of those to whom they offered $50,000 scholarships.

If you're going to continue to just "allude" to things and nothing more, I'm not sure what the point of posting is. We've asked you nicely to generalize multiple times, but you refuse. On the one hand, you identify yourself as one of a small group of DSs that declined and had an awkward interview thereafter, which I presume is dangerously close to doxing yourself. But on the other hand, after admitting that you and other DSs "declined for very similar reasons," you can't generalize to anything aside from unspecified racism for... fear of doxing. You have to see how we're having a hard time taking you seriously.

As I said, I want to believe you/understand (literally for my own benefit - as I said I'm considering lateraling), but we can't just take your anonymous word for it that Latham is pervasively racist.

[Anonymous User]

I'm not saying this to pressure you into divulging more, anon—I don't have a horse in this race and I appreciate your concerns about privacy—but surely you understand that if you provide no details people are either going to fill them in with assumptions or rely on what they've heard elsewhere.

And I’m avoiding saying much else publicly because a LW recruiting team member let it slip that they monitor these threads (and Reddit, and Fishbowl, etc.). On top of that, when I didn’t accept the return offer, they were pretty pushy about finding out where I was going/what I was doing afterward. Just weird energy.

Recruiting is nosy not to be vindictive but to figure out how they can fix their retention problem. Retaining summers is their a KPI they can get promoted or fired for. Of course they follow what people are saying about the firm online; that's not a "slip". Of course they want to know what you're doing instead of taking a return offer (if a former SA going to DOJ honors or something then they can shrug and move on; if they're going to a rival firm then they can try and figure out what that other firm is doing right that LW isn't); that's not "weird energy".

LW SA here again.

When I say "let it slip" I mean that the recruiter said it, caught themselves, and when I said "huh?" they quickly switched the topic. So it seems like they didn't want people to know about it like that.

As for wanting to know how to fix a retention problem, that's what exit interviews are for. Plus, I'm almost certain I've come across posts on this site and other platforms that give feedback on how to improve the experiences of POC, LGBT+ people, and women at LW. On the contrary, this wasn't an exit interview. What I referred to involved multiple people at the firm (and then some) trying to find out where I was going. It's one thing to ask one time; but to ask several times when I'd already informed someone on the hiring committee that I was going to another firm was IMO excessive. They never asked me why I decided not to return. They didn't ask several others, either. Maybe they asked some, though.

Regarding the dinner with the trauma-porn questions: that happened, yes. I didn't even remember that happening until someone in this thread recalled hearing about that event. That event was nothing compared to the incidents that I alluded to in my first comment.

And I'm sure there were people who didn't go through what I'm referring to. After all, most people accepted the Diversity Scholarship offer. But a large chunk of us didn't, and we declined for very similar reasons. If the pool of Scholars weren't super small, I'd be comfortable divulging every last detail because I truly want better for those who are considering joining that firm (in general, though, I saw that laterals regardless of their race or gender had a rough time adjusting to LW because they're judged for not being homegrown). I feel like I've tried to be more open/accessible than most; I'm doing my best to provide a data point without screwing myself over in some way.

Is is possible that other firms have had incidents like the ones I've alluded to at LW? Yes - in fact, I'm certain of it. The difference, though, is that LW markets itself as a firm with an amazing culture (whereas firms like KE, for example, do not). I'm sure it has an amazing culture for a lot of folks - just not for many of those to whom they offered $50,000 scholarships.

If you're going to continue to just "allude" to things and nothing more, I'm not sure what the point of posting is. We've asked you nicely to generalize multiple times, but you refuse. On the one hand, you identify yourself as one of a small group of DSs that declined and had an awkward interview thereafter, which I presume is dangerously close to doxing yourself. But on the other hand, after admitting that you and other DSs "declined for very similar reasons," you can't generalize to anything aside from unspecified racism for... fear of doxing. You have to see how we're having a hard time taking you seriously.

As I said, I want to believe you/understand (literally for my own benefit - as I said I'm considering lateraling), but we can't just take your anonymous word for it that Latham is pervasively racist.

LW SA here.

I wasn’t interviewed after declining. There was no interview anywhere (except for interviews that involved joining the firm). The firm’s attempts to find out where I was going were a series of phone calls/emails. Other happenings I mentioned were conversations or anecdotes from actual firm events.

I simply mentioned the term “exit interview” because I know that some places do this in order to gather info on why people leave firms. I was trying to draw a contrast (and it looks like I failed).

You’ve asked nicely for more specifics; I’ve also politely declined. I haven’t come close to doxxing myself, and I provided a data point — that was my goal. I wanted to do this because I know so many people who have been convinced to join a firm/practice group and were lied to for one reason or another, and they really suffered because of it. Some do it for financial gain, some do it to try and make an environment more tolerable, etc. It’s all sketchy without presenting multiple takes. Hell - a buddy of mine tried to recruit me around the same time the LW stuff was going on to join KE (but he didn’t say anything about the referral bonus he’d be collecting). I happened to know about the bonus and just laughed him off. Wouldn’t have known to do that without reading threads where former associates discussed this happening to them.

I also offered an email address for those who are recruiting who want to chat. If you get an offer from LW, I’d be totally down to speak with you. But to be clear — I don’t seek your validation or anything. This isn’t some test to find out how valid my claims are. I just offered a data point, and people are free to ignore it, refute it, or concur with it. Makes no difference to me.

[Anonymous User]

LW SA here.

I wasn’t interviewed after declining. There was no interview anywhere (except for interviews that involved joining the firm). The firm’s attempts to find out where I was going were a series of phone calls/emails. Other happenings I mentioned were conversations or anecdotes from actual firm events.

I simply mentioned the term “exit interview” because I know that some places do this in order to gather info on why people leave firms. I was trying to draw a contrast (and it looks like I failed).

You’ve asked nicely for more specifics; I’ve also politely declined. I haven’t come close to doxxing myself, and I provided a data point — that was my goal. I wanted to do this because I know so many people who have been convinced to join a firm/practice group and were lied to for one reason or another, and they really suffered because of it. Some do it for financial gain, some do it to try and make an environment more tolerable, etc. It’s all sketchy without presenting multiple takes. Hell - a buddy of mine tried to recruit me around the same time the LW stuff was going on to join KE (but he didn’t say anything about the referral bonus he’d be collecting). I happened to know about the bonus and just laughed him off. Wouldn’t have known to do that without reading threads where former associates discussed this happening to them.

I also offered an email address for those who are recruiting who want to chat. If you get an offer from LW, I’d be totally down to speak with you. But to be clear — I don’t seek your validation or anything. This isn’t some test to find out how valid my claims are. I just offered a data point, and people are free to ignore it, refute it, or concur with it. Makes no difference to me.

A generalized accusation of racism, pushing hard to find out where you're defecting to, and laterals not fitting in are hardly data points for your original thesis.

You make all this sound like a big conspiracy. It doesn't sound that way to me. Trying to recruit someone for a recruiting bonus isn't sketchy. Trying to find out if you got poached and from where isn't sketchy. As you admit this is standard practice in the legal industry (and wholly unrelated to the topic of this thread - Latham's racism). Maybe you think you're entitled to better, whether because of your race or something else. But I just see you being treated the same as everyone out there - a cog in the wheel for making money.

Anyway, if you want to think that Latham and everyone else is out to get you for your race or whatever other reason, be my guest, but if you can't identify a single thing that adds up to your thesis even at a general level then I hope you can understand why we have trouble taking any action on it.

I hope the next firm you join works out better for you.

[The Lsat Airbender]

When I say "let it slip" I mean that the recruiter said it, caught themselves, and when I said "huh?" they quickly switched the topic. So it seems like they didn't want people to know about it like that.

Well that's a funny story about one person's awkward moment, then, because everyone else in the industry is pretty open about reading things online / keeping up with gossip.

I guess we can render a verdict for the charge of "weird energy": GUILTY

[LittleRedCorvette]

When I say "let it slip" I mean that the recruiter said it, caught themselves, and when I said "huh?" they quickly switched the topic. So it seems like they didn't want people to know about it like that.

Well that's a funny story about one person's awkward moment, then, because everyone else in the industry is pretty open about reading things online / keeping up with gossip.

I guess we can render a verdict for the charge of "weird energy": GUILTY

TBH I'd be more worried if a biglaw firm didn't have weird energy.

[Anonymous User]

When I say "let it slip" I mean that the recruiter said it, caught themselves, and when I said "huh?" they quickly switched the topic. So it seems like they didn't want people to know about it like that.

Well that's a funny story about one person's awkward moment, then, because everyone else in the industry is pretty open about reading things online / keeping up with gossip.

I guess we can render a verdict for the charge of "weird energy": GUILTY

LW SA here.

I referenced that anecdote to point out that a LW recruiter could easily figure out who I am/who others are upon me providing more specific examples of discrimination at Latham (especially since some of this stuff was reported).

As a general note, I never trust people in recruiting/HR, no matter the opportunity. If you think they (including a few at LW) don’t do vindictive things…yeah. I’ll just shake my head and smirk on that one.

As for anon’s comment re: bonuses for poaching, I didn’t refer to that as sketchy behavior — I said that a friend of mine trying to get me to join KE by him blatantly lying about his own experience was sketchy. It isn’t abnormal; it’s very much the norm for such things to happen. And that’s why I’m grateful for online platforms like this one where users anon and otherwise provide data points that provide more comprehensive pictures (and, at times, confirms that people are lying). With respect to discrimination, I wanted to provide a datapoint and help those recruiting for the firm who are diverse to have as many data points as possible in the event that someone is misrepresenting things for their own gain.

LW struggles way more than many (if not most) of its peers to recruit and retain diverse talent, and I stand by my original point that there’s a reason why. Some particularly messed up situations point to that, and many diverse candidates can corroborate that. Simple.

This will be my last post on the matter, but all the best at LW (or wherever it is you log your hours).

[Anonymous User]

LW SA here.

I referenced that anecdote to point out that a LW recruiter could easily figure out who I am/who others are upon me providing more specific examples of discrimination at Latham (especially since some of this stuff was reported).

As a general note, I never trust people in recruiting/HR, no matter the opportunity. If you think they (including a few at LW) don’t do vindictive things…yeah. I’ll just shake my head and smirk on that one.

As for anon’s comment re: bonuses for poaching, I didn’t refer to that as sketchy behavior — I said that a friend of mine trying to get me to join KE by him blatantly lying about his own experience was sketchy. It isn’t abnormal; it’s very much the norm for such things to happen. And that’s why I’m grateful for online platforms like this one where users anon and otherwise provide data points that provide more comprehensive pictures (and, at times, confirms that people are lying). With respect to discrimination, I wanted to provide a datapoint and help those recruiting for the firm who are diverse to have as many data points as possible in the event that someone is misrepresenting things for their own gain.

LW struggles way more than many (if not most) of its peers to recruit and retain diverse talent, and I stand by my original point that there’s a reason why. Some particularly messed up situations point to that, and many diverse candidates can corroborate that. Simple.

This will be my last post on the matter, but all the best at LW (or wherever it is you log your hours).

Again, not a datapoint; just a vague accusation. And you certainly haven't offered data for the bolded. Here's to hoping one of these other folks can corroborate.