Help on What to Say Forum

[Anonymous User]

Incoming associate to V10 lit firm.

Long story short, I worked at a V25 lit firm for a year, then clerked for a year, took a few years off, then took another clerkship, and am coming back to a firm as like c/o 2018.

Feel like this is way above where I should be. Clerking isn't the same as practicing law by any means, nor does one year of doing doc review make me a mid/senior associate. Needless to say, I'm struggling on what to do. I don't want to come in with expectations that I can run the show like a mid/senior, but the firm is paying me 2018 levels. I'd feel much more comfortable at a second year position/spot.

How should I frame this to the firm? What should I say? Ideally I'd tell them, "look, i think 2018 is too high" but what's the professional way to say this?

[emc91]

Not sure how vault ranking matters here

[nealric]

Don't say anything. There is no point in talking down expectations coming in. A pay cut isn't going to change their expectations.

Sounds like a bit of imposter syndrome to me.

[Anonymous User]

OP here.

I'm just worried they are going to expect a lot more than I know how to do. For example, while I've drafted opinions, I've never drafted a brief, nor filed one for that matter. Never lead a production, or managed a discovery team. I feel very unprepared. More akin to a junior than a senior/mid. Don't you think it would be better to start off as such?

[Anonymous User]

OP here.

I'm just worried they are going to expect a lot more than I know how to do. For example, while I've drafted opinions, I've never drafted a brief, nor filed one for that matter. Never lead a production, or managed a discovery team. I feel very unprepared. More akin to a junior than a senior/mid. Don't you think it would be better to start off as such?

It doesn't matter whether the firm pays you less or bills you out as a second year - people on your team will see c/o 20XX with two clerkships and expect you to perform accordingly.

Don't worry, though - you can absolutely catch up quickly and approximate your class year with some good mentors and careful thought. When you start, find someone your year or a couple above, cozy up, let them know you're feeling behind/inexperienced, and rely on them for advice on how to approach literally every new assignment. They will give you all the context/strategy you need. Better if it's a slew of people so you don't bother one too much.

It's not a perfect parallel, but I did this as a first year and was repeatedly told I was operating as a midlevel or better. A partner would say "can you do X?" and I'd say "absolutely" knowing full well I had no idea what X even meant. Then I'd go to my one of mentors, asked some insightful questions to piece apart how they would approach the task AND what the partner would be expecting, implemented that as best I could, and it worked out swimmingly. No reason you can't do the same trying to operate at your level.

With that said, you will face some cases where someone asks you directly about something know nothing about. As long as you seem on top of other things, there's absolutely no shame in saying "candidly, I've actually never done that, but I would be happy to look into it - do you have any initial thoughts that I can work with?" Keep a positive can-do attitude and folks will be more than understanding. What you don't want to do is rely on your discomfort/lack of experience as an excuse to disclaim responsibility.

Finally, don't short shrift your experience. You've presumably read hundreds of briefs and seen the result of scores of discovery disputes/motions. In that regard, you're way ahead of your peers who have only seen the ones they worked on directly. Leverage that as good litigation judgment, and people will excuse any little thing you may not know how to do yet. Again, emphasis on "yet" - if you approach everything thinking you can and will learn everything you missed out on, then I'm sure you will.

[Anonymous User]

Curious what you took time off to do (not that it matters).

Litigation is funny this way. It's very common for people to come in as senior (or even partner) with extensive government experience but little to no private practice. If you have multiple clerkships you're obviously smart and have relevant litigation experience. Getting used to process will be an adjustment.

Put another way, it's not like 3 years of doc review would have made you a better litigator.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. I took a year/two off for family matters. I just wonder, like, if I come in c/o 2019 and I more likely to get pushed out sooner vs. coming in as a junior and working my way up through the classes? I’m still kind of skeptical of accepting outright this 2019 designation. Feels like my runway might be shorter. Correct me if I’m wrong.

[kaiser]

The firm wouldn't have offered you the role as a c/o 2018 associate if they didn't think you could genuinely do it. I totally understand that high expectations can be daunting, and can make you feel like a phony. But if they think you are capable of doing it, then you should believe it too, as difficult as that may be.

If you truly, 100% don't feel ready or comfortable taking on the challenge, then the only real option is to decline the role and find a different job. The worst thing you could possibly do is to outright tell the firm that you aren't confident that you can rise to the challenge, and would prefer to come in at a lower class year.

Honestly, having been through the junior and mid-level years myself, I don't think the gap is as wide as you are making it out to be. Just soak up as much information as you can and you will bridge the gap sooner than you think.

[nealric]

OP here.

I'm just worried they are going to expect a lot more than I know how to do. For example, while I've drafted opinions, I've never drafted a brief, nor filed one for that matter. Never lead a production, or managed a discovery team. I feel very unprepared. More akin to a junior than a senior/mid. Don't you think it would be better to start off as such?

To the extent they expect too much, taking a class year hit like that isn't going to temper expectations (especially if you are working with a new person). If Partner X says, "I need a mid level associate to help with Case Y" nobody is going to give them a speech says "Anon can work on this, but treat them with kid gloves because they are "really" a 2nd year associate." No, they just going to say "Anon can work on this." Partner X may briefly look you up and see that you are class of 2018. That's it. The only time they would likely notice is for partnership discussion, and you are far enough away from that such that it shouldn't matter much.

Another thing to keep in mind is that the person who hired you is undoubtedly aware of your bio and experience to date. Telling them "I'm not really a 5th year" is just going to come off as a statement that you aren't confident in your abilities. That's not going to help your case.

Finally, keep in mind that even people who were at firms for the full 5 years may not be ahead of you on substance. There are certainly associates who do little other than manage discovery and draft non-substantive motions for their first few years. As a clerk, you've likely had good opportunity to engage on substantive issues.

[Anonymous User]

This is truly a gift. Skip the grunt work and delegate tasks you don’t know how to do and then review and do what you can with advice of peers.

[Anonymous User]

Apologies on (sort of) hijacking this thread, but how does this relate to other people coming in above their class year. I am coming in as a third year next year after clerking for two years and while I have learned how to write better in both my clerkships I do worry that I will lack the practical expertise of other third years.

[Anonymous User]

I have a question for the OP: I am going through similar circumstance (i.e. a year/ish off before interviewing again), did you get a grilling about why you took time off? What about getting the interviews, did you struggle to get traction or were firms generally ok so long as your credentials were good?

[Anonymous User]

Apologies on (sort of) hijacking this thread, but how does this relate to other people coming in above their class year. I am coming in as a third year next year after clerking for two years and while I have learned how to write better in both my clerkships I do worry that I will lack the practical expertise of other third years.

It's exactly the same advice. Nobody is going to look at your profile online and see (if the firm even lists it) that you're getting paid/billed out as a third year and expect more of you. Likewise, nobody is going to see your two clerkships and expect less. They will see c/o 2021 and assume you're a second year with second year capabilities. Do as others ITT have suggested, you should find some mentors that can help get you up to speed quickly.

The one caveat is that sometimes those with substantial clerking experience are given more responsibility on brief writing earlier on. I think that responsibility is warranted - you have read way more briefs than your average second/third year. Anybody with a half a brain can cobble together the facts that support an argument. What makes a great brief writer is experience/judgment in how to communicate that to a judge.

[Anonymous User]

This is truly a gift. Skip the grunt work and delegate tasks you don’t know how to do and then review and do what you can with advice of peers.

This is what my friends told me when I lateraled into biglaw as a fourth year after 3.5 years doing nothing in compliance. Four years later, I'm a senior associate and get rave reviews.

There were some stupid things I was clueless on (document management systems, timekeeping, awful forte templates) but I had an amazing associate buddy who did some handholding on administrative tasks and I figured out those things within a month or two.